It is all about people remembering novel things as better than they actually are.
No no, really; neither of the op's presented simple answers is complete enough for a question that's so complex.
People don't squeeze into these tiny labeled bins.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
First MMO is like a guy's first car. It holds a special place in your heart. I'll always think that NWN is the greatest MMO ever, but if I really think hard about it, it was a really crappy game compared to some today lol.
It's just like my 69 GTO Judge. In it's day, it was the greatest car ever made. Put it up against today's sports cars, it can't hold a candle to a 2013 Shelby GT500. It has like 2/3 the horsepower, none of the control, and no safety features except for a seatbelt XD
Paraphrased the OP's question so you might understand it a bit better without getting into motives
If the op had left it like that, without the additional value judgements attached...the answer is purely subjective, yes?
Personally, I'd note that "golden age" games were sufficient to entertain me during the "golden age", yet I don't play them currently.
"Golden Age" itself, I guess, is a bit of a value judgement. :shrug:
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
First MMO is like a guy's first car. It holds a special place in your heart. I'll always think that NWN is the greatest MMO ever, but if I really think hard about it, it was a really crappy game compared to some today lol.
It's just like my 69 GTO Judge. In it's day, it was the greatest car ever made. Put it up against today's sports cars, it can't hold a candle to a 2013 Shelby GT500. It has like 2/3 the horsepower, none of the control, and no safety features except for a seatbelt XD
We're not talking about first MMOs.
I did not like EverQuest, and didn't play it much at all, but I can still see the values of its game design. I see the good and the bad.
We're talking about MMOs from a period, not whichever one we played first. The golden age MMOs, about 1997-2003.
And yes, they were without a doubt better. Less polish? To be sure. But really, if the only thing you can claim about a game is that its animations are smoother... that just speaks to the budget. Any studio with a budget could have made those nice animations. But not every studio can come up with good innovative features. Polish means just about nothing when the game underneath it is garbage.
How is hypothesizing about someone's motives for liking something not subjective?
What?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I think modern MMOs are much better games than old ones. I am a veteran and i started when i played Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to MMOs. Then UO beta, then EQ for a year.
I fully embrace the current trend. Better gameplay. Better matching features. Better combat. Instances. Phasing. LFD/LFR. No more harsh penalty and boring time sink. Games need to be fun, and friendly to any schedule.
I think modern MMOs are much better games than old ones. I am a veteran and i started when i played Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to MMOs. Then UO beta, then EQ for a year.
I fully embrace the current trend. Better gameplay. Better matching features. Better combat. Instances. Phasing. LFD/LFR. No more harsh penalty and boring time sink. Games need to be fun, and friendly to any schedule.
Seems to me that you don't like the MM part of MMO.
Its unarguable that modern MMOs are just flat out worse at being MMOs. They're better at being singleplayer games, but awful at making virtual persistent social worlds (which is what the term meant when it was coined).
Everything is arguable...particularly quality judgements like "worse".
I wish that I could bang a gavel and declare what MMOs should be.
Don't think anyone would take it very seriously though.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Everything is arguable...particularly quality arguments like "worse".
I wish that I could bang a gavel and declare what MMOs should be.
Don't think anyone would take it very seriously though.
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
Because...you said so, right?
You might have an easier time promoting a point of view, if you didn't write so much as indisputable declaratives.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
Because...you said so, right?
You might have an easier time promoting a point of view, if you didn't write so much as indisputable declaratives.
Because of the very logic and definition of the words... are you just trolling?
Two first person shooters.
One lets the player use guns. The other doesn't. Which is better at being a shooter?
Two multiplayer games. One let's you play with other people. The other does not. Which is better at being a multiplayer game?
You will never replicate the feeling of your first mmo.
And nostalgia is a hell of thing.
I barely played Ultima Online, and it was not my first MMO. Same with EQ, or AC, or SWG.
My first MMO was DAoC. Yet I still think all these games were great, despite WHEN I played them. The only one I'd be nostalgic over is DAoC.
Thats becuase, daoc pretty much was the pinical of mmorpgs today. (in an attempt to draw in wow crowds and do cool stuff they pretty much kiled the game, its fetterd gameplay and experince is still online today, but its a shell of its former self).
Originally posted by spikers14
Originally posted by Garvon3 ...
Then I guess you never played Lineage or EQ1 and progressed to end game.
Edit: Sure, you could play those games casually. Get your face wiped in open world pvp, watch your guild pass you up, and never raid. Awesome fun!
Most friendly open world pvp game ever, far more than wow or ac pretty much anygame. All you did is group with with the / a zerg or pick people off yourself. I group/ guild/ solo/ etc played daoc all were 100% viable.
And never raid? Seeing as raids had no population cap they normally took a ton of people along.. dragon raids at time restricted people but its was uncommon. So basiclly you didn't play these games to max level or never attempted to /tell anyone, these games did require you put effort out no insta queues and /free loot. But you could do it all casually.
I would also like to point out daoc had some bas aspects, it needed thempark questing (which should be bad exp compared to group exp / tradional means), it needed a better UI (thought at its release it had by far the best ui in mmos), it needed better means to level crafting (though the crafted items were the best in any mmo to date), TOA was awful for the game (the raids were fine, the scrolls should have never been in the game, and the strength of artis was far to high, they should have been marginal upgrades for min/maxers, as si equip largely was). Task dungeons were awful, been ok to have them if they were 20% easier and 40% less exp. I remember everything that was bad about daoc.. its camera was funky. But i also remmeber its gameplay experince was the best in mmorpgs to date. (And this wasn't my first mmorpg).
Note wow did some awsome things, TBC was amazing for a group/raider (i saw most of what i liked in it in toa raids also mind you but in daoc they were just rough and crude.. mind you better than vanilla wow raids). And i loved leveling classes in wow.. if they let me today by character slots for wow @ $10 a pop id buy 3-4 and i don't even play it anymore.. but i would.
In another thread just a few min.s ago ipost how im sick of being given one experince and path to the top , it was a TSW thread. Their quest can be super detialed.. i couldn't giva . I want to be able to experolore and grow my character from that, kill, craft, research, heal, etc. I want to do it in groups, solo, raids, w/e i want FREEDOM in my mmo not some prescripted event for 95% of my games experince. GW2 is at least giving us the illusion otherwise, but after 6+ characters you'll see it also...
Myabe people do not understand this i have well over 20 daoc character that i got to at least 40+ (most of them pre toa [this means [it took a long time]) and many more 30+. The game was fun just to play (to me) , i played it a lot with or without friends as you always had a reason to make new friends (didn't have to but it rewarded you then and their) And even awful players, that could cast a heal, a power buff, spam 1 1 1 1 1 on a back guy were better than no guy there (save dungeons becuase of aggro and respaw.. but then you taught them about it becuase you really wanted that buff/ w/e). [similar for eq, etc.]. And if i was level 20 and wanted exp i had 50-60 places do do that in .. sure were they in the same area .. withina few areas, but each time i leveled i did it different (with all of those character.. all of them).
This is just a wall of text now.. but this isn't no rose-colored anything the mmos i have played for mutiple years i did so because they were great. Do i want new experinces sure, do i feel like the experinces i had are hard to find in these old games for sure dev. changed things to make the game seem more attractive, while sub numbers drop, the math is easy... and wow is lucky as most mmos have been trash following it.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
Because...you said so, right?
You might have an easier time promoting a point of view, if you didn't write so much as indisputable declaratives.
Because of the very logic and definition of the words... are you just trolling?
Two first person shooters.
One lets the player use guns. The other doesn't. Which is better at being a shooter?
Two multiplayer games. One let's you play with other people. The other does not. Which is better at being a multiplayer game?
This guys is correct in this line of thought. He didn't say a better game be specifically addressed the "MM" aprt of MMOs, thus games that are mpore massive and have more people playing together in REGULAR gameplay (actually playing together) would be better at the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER aspect. You could argue this but its definatly true at face value.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I do miss the old style open vast area's to explore and experience. now a days everything seems smaller and less intriguing. Also back then mmo's populations were lower. Now a days if your game has less then 11mil players its considered a failure and flamed to death.
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
Because...you said so, right?
You might have an easier time promoting a point of view, if you didn't write so much as indisputable declaratives.
Because of the very logic and definition of the words... are you just trolling?
Two first person shooters.
One lets the player use guns. The other doesn't. Which is better at being a shooter?
Two multiplayer games. One let's you play with other people. The other does not. Which is better at being a multiplayer game?
Of course you see this, and what you first described, as identical. Reduction to the absurd.
I'm right, you're wrong, so there. Neener. Neener neener. (responding in kind)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I think modern MMOs are much better games than old ones. I am a veteran and i started when i played Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to MMOs. Then UO beta, then EQ for a year.
I fully embrace the current trend. Better gameplay. Better matching features. Better combat. Instances. Phasing. LFD/LFR. No more harsh penalty and boring time sink. Games need to be fun, and friendly to any schedule.
Well it is opposite for me.
1 .Matching features - I guess you mean like matchmaking for arena fights? Well that's something that is alien and whole arena fights is not something I look for in mmorpg.
2. Better gameplay - argueably. Better combat mechanics? Possibly. Lower open world fights challange lower enjoyment from it those mechanics below enjoyment from older mmorpg's fights.
Non-combat gameplay = much worse.
3. Instances - too much instances nowadays. Worse experience.
4. Phasing - significantly decrease experience and feel like single player experience. Not what I look in mmorpg. That's next minus.
5. LFD / LFR - auto-teleport and auto-grouping features - kill social aspect, kill one server = separate world features, kill ostracism that allow to keep douchebags and trolls in check thus making experience worse, kill immersion.
6. Death penalty - corpse runs were bad I agree. There were some other good DP though. Practiaclly no death penalty nowadays is making death meaningless, disallows interesitng game mechanics, remove thrill and sense of danger. Throiwng baby with bath water.
7. Time sinks - LOL seriously? There are as many time sinks now as before. They are just in diffrent form. Farming intances for medallions? Daily quests? Just to name two most common ones.
==============
Simply there are diffrent kind of players who prefer diffrent things and some groups of players are neglected.
That's precisely why you see all those topics. Because some players want diffrent KIND of games / mmorpg's that ones on the market and they want them relatively well financed & made. Not old or overambitious forever early beta state like DFO / MO and many more.
Who doesn't enjoy a time they were 10 years younger?
While there are many reaons given in this thread, a lot of which i agree with, i think this is the one that most answers the question.
Me! I was much younger back in high school (before calculators existed) and I sure don't have any nostalgia over that period of my life, I hated those days back then and still do today.
The nostalgia card gets dropped too often, we damn well remember what was both good and bad about early MMORPG's and one thing we're sure of is that what we enjoyed about the older titles is largely missing from today's 'games', regardless what improvements they made.
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
It's not just mmo's. People have a tendency to remember the past glowingly in all areas.
Some people lament the 50s as being a golden age of American culture, yet, not so much if you ask African Americans for example.
People glorify the Renaissance and even Middle Ages to a certain extent, yet, those were arguably the worst conditions to live in for the majority of the people in human history.
And with mmo's people have forgotten a lot of the tedium and weirdness of the early years.
No one remembers going days without a group with no way to progress without one.
No one remembers spending 8+ hours in a raid, finally getting to the boss you need, which you've waited 3 months for your turn in the rotation, and then a competing guild trains you and takes the kill while you start the laborious process of corpse retrieval. "Ok rogues and necros - time to drag each of the 175 people out of the depths of the dungeon while we wait here naked"
No one remembers how frustrating a corpse run lasting 3 hours past the 8 hour raid you'd been on was
No one remembers having to constantly window out to look up quests which literally had no possible way of solving within the game itself. Talk about immersion breaking.
No one remembers joining a game 3 months after release and finding the lower zones completely empty with no mechanic possible to level yourself.
No one remembers the good ol' days had spectacular titles like, Dark and Light and Auto Assault. And other travesties to gaming kind.
I'm not saying that there weren't benefits from some of the earlier 'lack' of features. But we always forget what the flip side of the coin looked like.
I'm also not saying that the present has it completely right either.
What I am saying is that I hope for the future more than I lament the past.
___________________________________
And just to comment.
Anyone ever notice Guild Wars wasn't really about guilds warring with each other. Yeah yeah, it was there, but it wasn't how most people played it. Probably the same for the mistitled upcoming GW2. I know the lore involves warring guilds, but c'mon you'd think that name would indicate a gameplay even more revolutionary than they are attempting - i.e. a game built around guild vs. guild combat.
And anyone ever notice that in Everquest you were hardly ever questing? The major route to max involved 95% sitting in one place with a monk or bard pulling you mobs. Quests were important and in some ways necessary, but it wasn't like you were for EVER QUESTing. I thought Neverquest would have been a more accurate title - or Evergrind.
"I'm so disappointed with today's MMOs. Why can't they release something like those in the golden age of MMOs like UO?" and many others like this.
I just started playing MMORPGs two years ago so I'm definitely not a veteran in the genre. I'm just wondering, are those games in the "golden age" really that great or are these people just intoxicated by the feeling of nostalgia, and/or the good feeling provided by their very first MMO experience which can never be replicated no matter what developers do?
I didn't play the "Golden Age" MMORPGs. I grew up with some old CRPGs. Some of those are now 10 years, 20 years or 25 years old. Among those are not only games for PCs, but for various home computers as well.
These games are very inferior when it comes to visuals, sound and controls. A few games managed to implement a user interface which is still today very usable and functional. But ... but every game has some pros in regards to game mechanics (e.g. round based combat / isometric perspective). There is even a 25 year old CRPG which had aging implemented. You couldn't simply go and farm experience until you could easily beat the game (or one of its sequels). If you did you ran the risk that some of your high level characters died of old age. It's more those little details that I'm fond of.
Today the games are very streamlined. Questing feels like working a large ToDo list. You don't have to pay attention to the story and environment because you can always look into your ToDo list. All those quest helpers and map markers make the whole experience very uninspiring. If an errand is done it's done and unless it was required for some flagging mechanisms it doesn't matter any longer. If you reach max level then you continue farming equipment. You farm tier set 1, then tier set 2, ..., then tier set X, ..., then tier set Y, ... until you're bored. You're rewarded on every step. I wonder that you don't get a reward when you finish your restroom errand ("Oh, you're such a good boy/gal").
If you want to play "Nanny State Online" then the modern breed of MMOs is your thing.
It's not just mmo's. People have a tendency to remember the past glowingly in all areas.
Some people lament the 50s as being a golden age of American culture, yet, not so much if you ask African Americans for example.
People glorify the Renaissance and even Middle Ages to a certain extent, yet, those were arguably the worst conditions to live in for the majority of the people in human history.
And with mmo's people have forgotten a lot of the tedium and weirdness of the early years.
First I'm going to make a point to say... you're setting this up as if all old MMOs were identical and all had these problems. This is not the case, they were all vastly different. I'm guessing you're generally referring to EQ. So I'm going to answer all your questions from the frame of mind of the MMO I played the most.
No one remembers going days without a group with no way to progress without one.
You're right, I don't remember this, because it didn't exist. I was able to progress just fine without a group. I didn't enjoy not being able to find groups, because playing by yourself usually isn't that fun in any multiplayer game. That's kind of the whole reason I played them. But, I sure as hell could progress.
No one remembers spending 8+ hours in a raid, finally getting to the boss you need, which you've waited 3 months for your turn in the rotation, and then a competing guild trains you and takes the kill while you start the laborious process of corpse retrieval. "Ok rogues and necros - time to drag each of the 175 people out of the depths of the dungeon while we wait here naked"
You're right, I don't remember this, because there was no rotation or competiting guilds. We all worked together and if you contributed, you got an equal shot at the loot. EQ's raid system was bad, yet it's the same raid system modern MMOs use. Raids were done for fun. I would drop into a raid, do it for an hour or two or three, and leave when it was over, or earlier if I wanted. There were a few epic raids that almost no one ever completed, that lasted a good 8 hours. I only ever did Caer Sidi twice, but they are some of the most amazing and memorable raids in MMO history.
No one remembers how frustrating a corpse run lasting 3 hours past the 8 hour raid you'd been on was
You're right, I don't, because I never did a corpse run. Not all MMOs had them.
No one remembers having to constantly window out to look up quests which literally had no possible way of solving within the game itself. Talk about immersion breaking.
You're right, I don't, because if I ever was stuck on a quest I would ask people in the game, or just think about it a little harder (because all the quests WERE solvable in game).
No one remembers joining a game 3 months after release and finding the lower zones completely empty with no mechanic possible to level yourself.
You're right, I don't remember this. There were always people in the starter zones, until instancing was added an-oh that's a modern design element...
I'm not saying that there weren't benefits from some of the earlier 'lack' of features. But we always forget what the flip side of the coin looked like.
I'm also not saying that the present has it completely right either.
What I am saying is that I hope for the future more than I lament the past.
"I'm so disappointed with today's MMOs. Why can't they release something like those in the golden age of MMOs like UO?" and many others like this.
I just started playing MMORPGs two years ago so I'm definitely not a veteran in the genre. I'm just wondering, are those games in the "golden age" really that great or are these people just intoxicated by the feeling of nostalgia, and/or the good feeling provided by their very first MMO experience which can never be replicated no matter what developers do?
Though I think there is some nostalgis involved I have to say that the older mmo's had a very different feel and in many ways were more about being a world than being a playground where you run back and forth from quest marker to quest objective and get a prize.
They were places where you actually negotiated with players, fought with players, allied with players. Where your name meant something along with your reputation.
For me the difference realy hit home when, after playing LOTRO for a few hours, I logged into Lineage 2 for this huge siege event and realized that what was about to happen touched so many more players on the server than anything I had done in LOTRO.
In LOTRO I had done some quests and some exploring and that was about it. In Lineage 2 I was about to defend our Castle against a coalition of players who wanted us out. It was a huge endeavor that lasted the full 2 hours and felt more like a server event than gettnig a group together to grind x instance for the y amount of time.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
No no, really; neither of the op's presented simple answers is complete enough for a question that's so complex.
People don't squeeze into these tiny labeled bins.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
First MMO is like a guy's first car. It holds a special place in your heart. I'll always think that NWN is the greatest MMO ever, but if I really think hard about it, it was a really crappy game compared to some today lol.
It's just like my 69 GTO Judge. In it's day, it was the greatest car ever made. Put it up against today's sports cars, it can't hold a candle to a 2013 Shelby GT500. It has like 2/3 the horsepower, none of the control, and no safety features except for a seatbelt XD
If the op had left it like that, without the additional value judgements attached...the answer is purely subjective, yes?
Personally, I'd note that "golden age" games were sufficient to entertain me during the "golden age", yet I don't play them currently.
"Golden Age" itself, I guess, is a bit of a value judgement. :shrug:
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
How is hypothesizing about someone's motives for liking something not subjective?
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
We're not talking about first MMOs.
I did not like EverQuest, and didn't play it much at all, but I can still see the values of its game design. I see the good and the bad.
We're talking about MMOs from a period, not whichever one we played first. The golden age MMOs, about 1997-2003.
And yes, they were without a doubt better. Less polish? To be sure. But really, if the only thing you can claim about a game is that its animations are smoother... that just speaks to the budget. Any studio with a budget could have made those nice animations. But not every studio can come up with good innovative features. Polish means just about nothing when the game underneath it is garbage.
What?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Not me.
I think modern MMOs are much better games than old ones. I am a veteran and i started when i played Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to MMOs. Then UO beta, then EQ for a year.
I fully embrace the current trend. Better gameplay. Better matching features. Better combat. Instances. Phasing. LFD/LFR. No more harsh penalty and boring time sink. Games need to be fun, and friendly to any schedule.
Seems to me that you don't like the MM part of MMO.
Its unarguable that modern MMOs are just flat out worse at being MMOs. They're better at being singleplayer games, but awful at making virtual persistent social worlds (which is what the term meant when it was coined).
Everything is arguable...particularly quality judgements like "worse".
I wish that I could bang a gavel and declare what MMOs should be.
Don't think anyone would take it very seriously though.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
When a game doesn't allow more than 30 people in a zone before it becomes instanced, and doesn't offer many group quests, it is quantifiably worse at being massively multiplayer than a game that allows hundreds of people to work together in the same game world.
Because mmos of the past are clearly still superior than the themepark games devs are shoveling out.
Grim Dawn, the next great action rpg!
http://www.grimdawn.com/
Because...you said so, right?
You might have an easier time promoting a point of view, if you didn't write so much as indisputable declaratives.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Because of the very logic and definition of the words... are you just trolling?
Two first person shooters.
One lets the player use guns. The other doesn't. Which is better at being a shooter?
Two multiplayer games. One let's you play with other people. The other does not. Which is better at being a multiplayer game?
Thats becuase, daoc pretty much was the pinical of mmorpgs today. (in an attempt to draw in wow crowds and do cool stuff they pretty much kiled the game, its fetterd gameplay and experince is still online today, but its a shell of its former self).
Most friendly open world pvp game ever, far more than wow or ac pretty much anygame. All you did is group with with the / a zerg or pick people off yourself. I group/ guild/ solo/ etc played daoc all were 100% viable.
And never raid? Seeing as raids had no population cap they normally took a ton of people along.. dragon raids at time restricted people but its was uncommon. So basiclly you didn't play these games to max level or never attempted to /tell anyone, these games did require you put effort out no insta queues and /free loot. But you could do it all casually.
I would also like to point out daoc had some bas aspects, it needed thempark questing (which should be bad exp compared to group exp / tradional means), it needed a better UI (thought at its release it had by far the best ui in mmos), it needed better means to level crafting (though the crafted items were the best in any mmo to date), TOA was awful for the game (the raids were fine, the scrolls should have never been in the game, and the strength of artis was far to high, they should have been marginal upgrades for min/maxers, as si equip largely was). Task dungeons were awful, been ok to have them if they were 20% easier and 40% less exp. I remember everything that was bad about daoc.. its camera was funky. But i also remmeber its gameplay experince was the best in mmorpgs to date. (And this wasn't my first mmorpg).
Note wow did some awsome things, TBC was amazing for a group/raider (i saw most of what i liked in it in toa raids also mind you but in daoc they were just rough and crude.. mind you better than vanilla wow raids). And i loved leveling classes in wow.. if they let me today by character slots for wow @ $10 a pop id buy 3-4 and i don't even play it anymore.. but i would.
In another thread just a few min.s ago ipost how im sick of being given one experince and path to the top , it was a TSW thread. Their quest can be super detialed.. i couldn't giva . I want to be able to experolore and grow my character from that, kill, craft, research, heal, etc. I want to do it in groups, solo, raids, w/e i want FREEDOM in my mmo not some prescripted event for 95% of my games experince. GW2 is at least giving us the illusion otherwise, but after 6+ characters you'll see it also...
Myabe people do not understand this i have well over 20 daoc character that i got to at least 40+ (most of them pre toa [this means [it took a long time]) and many more 30+. The game was fun just to play (to me) , i played it a lot with or without friends as you always had a reason to make new friends (didn't have to but it rewarded you then and their) And even awful players, that could cast a heal, a power buff, spam 1 1 1 1 1 on a back guy were better than no guy there (save dungeons becuase of aggro and respaw.. but then you taught them about it becuase you really wanted that buff/ w/e). [similar for eq, etc.]. And if i was level 20 and wanted exp i had 50-60 places do do that in .. sure were they in the same area .. withina few areas, but each time i leveled i did it different (with all of those character.. all of them).
This is just a wall of text now.. but this isn't no rose-colored anything the mmos i have played for mutiple years i did so because they were great. Do i want new experinces sure, do i feel like the experinces i had are hard to find in these old games for sure dev. changed things to make the game seem more attractive, while sub numbers drop, the math is easy... and wow is lucky as most mmos have been trash following it.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
This guys is correct in this line of thought. He didn't say a better game be specifically addressed the "MM" aprt of MMOs, thus games that are mpore massive and have more people playing together in REGULAR gameplay (actually playing together) would be better at the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER aspect. You could argue this but its definatly true at face value.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I do miss the old style open vast area's to explore and experience. now a days everything seems smaller and less intriguing. Also back then mmo's populations were lower. Now a days if your game has less then 11mil players its considered a failure and flamed to death.
Of course you see this, and what you first described, as identical. Reduction to the absurd.
I'm right, you're wrong, so there. Neener. Neener neener. (responding in kind)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Well it is opposite for me.
1 .Matching features - I guess you mean like matchmaking for arena fights? Well that's something that is alien and whole arena fights is not something I look for in mmorpg.
2. Better gameplay - argueably. Better combat mechanics? Possibly. Lower open world fights challange lower enjoyment from it those mechanics below enjoyment from older mmorpg's fights.
Non-combat gameplay = much worse.
3. Instances - too much instances nowadays. Worse experience.
4. Phasing - significantly decrease experience and feel like single player experience. Not what I look in mmorpg. That's next minus.
5. LFD / LFR - auto-teleport and auto-grouping features - kill social aspect, kill one server = separate world features, kill ostracism that allow to keep douchebags and trolls in check thus making experience worse, kill immersion.
6. Death penalty - corpse runs were bad I agree. There were some other good DP though. Practiaclly no death penalty nowadays is making death meaningless, disallows interesitng game mechanics, remove thrill and sense of danger. Throiwng baby with bath water.
7. Time sinks - LOL seriously? There are as many time sinks now as before. They are just in diffrent form. Farming intances for medallions? Daily quests? Just to name two most common ones.
==============
Simply there are diffrent kind of players who prefer diffrent things and some groups of players are neglected.
That's precisely why you see all those topics. Because some players want diffrent KIND of games / mmorpg's that ones on the market and they want them relatively well financed & made. Not old or overambitious forever early beta state like DFO / MO and many more.
That's painfully simple.
Me! I was much younger back in high school (before calculators existed) and I sure don't have any nostalgia over that period of my life, I hated those days back then and still do today.
The nostalgia card gets dropped too often, we damn well remember what was both good and bad about early MMORPG's and one thing we're sure of is that what we enjoyed about the older titles is largely missing from today's 'games', regardless what improvements they made.
"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
It's not just mmo's. People have a tendency to remember the past glowingly in all areas.
Some people lament the 50s as being a golden age of American culture, yet, not so much if you ask African Americans for example.
People glorify the Renaissance and even Middle Ages to a certain extent, yet, those were arguably the worst conditions to live in for the majority of the people in human history.
And with mmo's people have forgotten a lot of the tedium and weirdness of the early years.
No one remembers going days without a group with no way to progress without one.
No one remembers spending 8+ hours in a raid, finally getting to the boss you need, which you've waited 3 months for your turn in the rotation, and then a competing guild trains you and takes the kill while you start the laborious process of corpse retrieval. "Ok rogues and necros - time to drag each of the 175 people out of the depths of the dungeon while we wait here naked"
No one remembers how frustrating a corpse run lasting 3 hours past the 8 hour raid you'd been on was
No one remembers having to constantly window out to look up quests which literally had no possible way of solving within the game itself. Talk about immersion breaking.
No one remembers joining a game 3 months after release and finding the lower zones completely empty with no mechanic possible to level yourself.
No one remembers the good ol' days had spectacular titles like, Dark and Light and Auto Assault. And other travesties to gaming kind.
--------------------------------------------------------
I'm not saying that there weren't benefits from some of the earlier 'lack' of features. But we always forget what the flip side of the coin looked like.
I'm also not saying that the present has it completely right either.
What I am saying is that I hope for the future more than I lament the past.
___________________________________
And just to comment.
Anyone ever notice Guild Wars wasn't really about guilds warring with each other. Yeah yeah, it was there, but it wasn't how most people played it. Probably the same for the mistitled upcoming GW2. I know the lore involves warring guilds, but c'mon you'd think that name would indicate a gameplay even more revolutionary than they are attempting - i.e. a game built around guild vs. guild combat.
And anyone ever notice that in Everquest you were hardly ever questing? The major route to max involved 95% sitting in one place with a monk or bard pulling you mobs. Quests were important and in some ways necessary, but it wasn't like you were for EVER QUESTing. I thought Neverquest would have been a more accurate title - or Evergrind.
Because it was better and the new music sucks. I don't see how this applies to MMO's...oh wait...
I didn't play the "Golden Age" MMORPGs. I grew up with some old CRPGs. Some of those are now 10 years, 20 years or 25 years old. Among those are not only games for PCs, but for various home computers as well.
These games are very inferior when it comes to visuals, sound and controls. A few games managed to implement a user interface which is still today very usable and functional. But ... but every game has some pros in regards to game mechanics (e.g. round based combat / isometric perspective). There is even a 25 year old CRPG which had aging implemented. You couldn't simply go and farm experience until you could easily beat the game (or one of its sequels). If you did you ran the risk that some of your high level characters died of old age. It's more those little details that I'm fond of.
Today the games are very streamlined. Questing feels like working a large ToDo list. You don't have to pay attention to the story and environment because you can always look into your ToDo list. All those quest helpers and map markers make the whole experience very uninspiring. If an errand is done it's done and unless it was required for some flagging mechanisms it doesn't matter any longer. If you reach max level then you continue farming equipment. You farm tier set 1, then tier set 2, ..., then tier set X, ..., then tier set Y, ... until you're bored. You're rewarded on every step. I wonder that you don't get a reward when you finish your restroom errand ("Oh, you're such a good boy/gal").
If you want to play "Nanny State Online" then the modern breed of MMOs is your thing.
Whatever Dad.
/wink
There you go.
Though I think there is some nostalgis involved I have to say that the older mmo's had a very different feel and in many ways were more about being a world than being a playground where you run back and forth from quest marker to quest objective and get a prize.
They were places where you actually negotiated with players, fought with players, allied with players. Where your name meant something along with your reputation.
For me the difference realy hit home when, after playing LOTRO for a few hours, I logged into Lineage 2 for this huge siege event and realized that what was about to happen touched so many more players on the server than anything I had done in LOTRO.
In LOTRO I had done some quests and some exploring and that was about it. In Lineage 2 I was about to defend our Castle against a coalition of players who wanted us out. It was a huge endeavor that lasted the full 2 hours and felt more like a server event than gettnig a group together to grind x instance for the y amount of time.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo