But still fun to talk about. Why don't you think we all repeat our points again and again?
Yeah. I won't adress all poins, cause most what you consider 'better' I conisder 'worse' and funniest is, frequently for same reasons
I can tell. Still fun to discuss after so many rehashing.
Anyway for me playing mmorpg never was about dugneoning & raiding. Oh I did those as well, but they were just a small piece of big puzzle / system.
For me mmorpg's were and are mostly about people, economy, interdependability, politics and immersion.
haha .. for me, games are NEVER about people. I have enough RL friends & family. If i happen to make some friends online in playing, fine too. But that is NOT the focal point.
It is really about fun combat & progression. Dungeons & raids are good places for that.
Combat is important part, but well just a part.
Combat is probably the most important part. If combat is not fun (like Eve), forget it.
Dunegons, isntances and raids are even less important. Fun to do once in a while, but just an element and not more important than others.
Well where to do combat is important.
So yeah for your 'expectations' most of things / mechanics got better. Sure.
Yeh. And there is certainly more depth & complexity in combat than back in the EQ days.
For me it went into worse direction and just whole parts of mmropg experience were cut out or ridiculosely simplified.
Guess only one of us is going to be ahead.
Thus they became boring, because modern mmorpg's are diffrent KIND of game.
Playing just to make dugneons and arenas as a obejctive itself is boring.
Boring for you. Fun for me. Fun combat & progression is what matters to me. Doing it in a clean & convenient environemtn is added benefit.
Mmorpg's were interesting cause they were various elements thrown together and creating system in which they all impacted each other + immersion from virtual world.
With that gone, it is not much diffrent than hack & slash game, just with bit more people than in co-op.
Boring.
hahah .. co-op hack & slash is what is fun for me. Social stuff is boring. Why would i want to talk to strangers in game all day? (Strangely posting on forums is more fun).
Ehh but we talked about it already in some other topic nariusseldon haven't we?
Of course. Every 5 topics here is a rehash of this.
Still you're right it is sort of fun to repeat out stances / arguments once in a while ;p
Particularly doing slow work days before i can go home and kill some stuff in Diablo 3.
You are too obsessed with social & virtual world elements. So what if you lose those elements?
"You are too obsessed with guns in an FPS. So what if you don't have a gun and the camera isn't first person?"
You see how silly you sound? They're the entire point of the entire genre.
Genre changes. I play FP puzzle games like Quantum Conundrum. So it lost the gun, i still like it. I play FP RPG too. So there is no gun in Skyrim, still good.
The point of the genre changes. If you think a game like WOW is still focus on social & virtual world, you are delusional. Feel free to obsess with it. It is not coming back, at laest not in WOW, and many other MMOs.
It's true, most modern titles are designed for MMORPG tourists such as yourself, and not the purists they first catered to.
The genre is not better for the change, only bigger.
There is no better or worse in general. Just difference since gaming preference is personal.
Depending on how one measures better or worse, there certainly can be a difference in quality.
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
Especially considering that many new "progressive" features of MMORPGs make them more and more like lobby games, which existed well before MMORPGs.
After all, now you can play WoW by just queueing up for groups and never leaving the city. So progressive!
Well, you're right. MMOs are mostly lobby games now. Somewhere along the way, somehow, virtual worlds were substituted with virtual lobbies and I guess we didn't notice it early enough to call BS. Calling something an MMORPG now could mean pretty much anything at the moment.
No, I noticed and welcomed the change.
WOW is much better after LFD. In fact, I only went back after quiting because of LFR. And i will encourage WOW and other companeis to do so by voting with my wallet.
And what is so special about change of meaning? computer RPGs (which are just called RPGs) are very different than table top ones. Things change.
I don't really care if you welcome it or not. MMO is not really a suitable category anymore. It's just a catch-all for any game that wants to known as an MMO and advertizes as such. I should find that "Virtual Worlds" thread from a few months back... it is a lot more eloquent than my words.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
I think you're oversimplfying everything with your "as long as its fun" argument.
If I am in the mood for a comedy movie, and I see an Adam Sandler movie that turns out to be a heart wrenching tragedy...then I would probably be disappointed. People like different things, and even a person craves different things at different times.
No argument here. I don't play lobby MMOs all day. I read, watch tv, movies and what-not.
People come to this board because they like MMORPGs. And you really have to admit that new school MMORPGs are greatly different from old school MMORPGs in terms of flavor, direction, and gameplay.
NO argumetn here. It is pretty obvious that modern MMOs are lobby co-op games in part, much more than old school games like EQ, as i have pointed out many times.
If you were a fan of old school MMORPGs, then you may want an experience that simply isn't really offered anymore. What is wrong with this? You may even like new school MMORPGs, but still crave the old school experience.
Nothing wrong with that. At the same time, i am NOT a fan of old school MMORPGs. I like the new MMORPG better. What is wrong with expression THIS opinion? This is a forum. Naturally there will be people with different preferences. I don't see there is a problem expressing mine.
In the end, I don't think most gamers are so eclectic that they will just enjoy whatever game is thrown at them if it can be considered fun. I love lobby RPGs like Diablo, Torchlight or Borderlands, but when I play an MMORPG...I want to play an MMORPG. I don't want to play an MMORPG that seems like it's trying to do everything it can to hide its persistent world and turn into Diablo.
You are right. I don't play anything that is thrown at me. I don't want to play a MMORPG like UO or EQ. I like to play one more like WOW, or DDO, or DCUO. And i will definitely play MMOs that are like Diablo (and I play Diablo 3 too .. no problem in playing multiple games).
Depending on how one measures better or worse, there certainly can be a difference in quality.
I measure the quality in combat gameplay. If it is deep and foster many different strategies and builds. If it makes you feel powerful and can kill many at the same time. If the graphical representation is satistifying. If it enable and foster multi-player gameplay.
I don't really care if you welcome it or not. MMO is not really a suitable category anymore. It's just a catch-all for any game that wants to known as an MMO and advertizes as such. I should find that "Virtual Worlds" thread from a few months back... it is a lot more eloquent than my words.
I don't really think you will care but i will express my opinion anyway because it is fun.
So what if MMOs have expand its definition. We all know what games are called MMOs.
And i have no problem if people want to give a different name to VW games. Labels only facilitate communication. So it is all good.
It is part nostalgia and the first mmo (that you liked, not first mmo you played!).
Partly it is because games really are pretty crappy now compared. And where we the old and the new misunderstand eachother is exactly that..
If you look at features and graphics from a new players perspective, new games are far better.
If you consider a mmorpg game to be a roleplaying game on a computer like older players often do, then the new games are empty soulless shells that doesnt inspire like some older games.
But nothing is black and white, and once inawhile some nice game comes out .. its just not a mmorpg.
If you want to provoke a little you might say, there has not been a mmorpg released in 7 years, although plenty multiplayer games calling themselves such.
Oh and if the future is manga styled punks with blue hair in schoolgirl uniforms and size ddddd++++ tits.......
Thing is, with todays technology and amount of investment, we would think it logical that at some point one of the new games may succeed in showing some long term gaming quality and not just a pretty face.
Depending on how one measures better or worse, there certainly can be a difference in quality.
I measure the quality in combat gameplay. If it is deep and foster many different strategies and builds. If it makes you feel powerful and can kill many at the same time. If the graphical representation is satistifying. If it enable and foster multi-player gameplay.
LOL, so you're saying there really hasn't been a decent MMORPG for you either. Join the club.
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
I think you're oversimplfying everything with your "as long as its fun" argument.
If I am in the mood for a comedy movie, and I see an Adam Sandler movie that turns out to be a heart wrenching tragedy...then I would probably be disappointed. People like different things, and even a person craves different things at different times.
No argument here. I don't play lobby MMOs all day. I read, watch tv, movies and what-not.
People come to this board because they like MMORPGs. And you really have to admit that new school MMORPGs are greatly different from old school MMORPGs in terms of flavor, direction, and gameplay.
NO argumetn here. It is pretty obvious that modern MMOs are lobby co-op games in part, much more than old school games like EQ, as i have pointed out many times.
If you were a fan of old school MMORPGs, then you may want an experience that simply isn't really offered anymore. What is wrong with this? You may even like new school MMORPGs, but still crave the old school experience.
Nothing wrong with that. At the same time, i am NOT a fan of old school MMORPGs. I like the new MMORPG better. What is wrong with expression THIS opinion? This is a forum. Naturally there will be people with different preferences. I don't see there is a problem expressing mine.
In the end, I don't think most gamers are so eclectic that they will just enjoy whatever game is thrown at them if it can be considered fun. I love lobby RPGs like Diablo, Torchlight or Borderlands, but when I play an MMORPG...I want to play an MMORPG. I don't want to play an MMORPG that seems like it's trying to do everything it can to hide its persistent world and turn into Diablo.
You are right. I don't play anything that is thrown at me. I don't want to play a MMORPG like UO or EQ. I like to play one more like WOW, or DDO, or DCUO. And i will definitely play MMOs that are like Diablo (and I play Diablo 3 too .. no problem in playing multiple games).
Nothing is wrong with expressing your opinion.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Depending on how one measures better or worse, there certainly can be a difference in quality.
I measure the quality in combat gameplay. If it is deep and foster many different strategies and builds. If it makes you feel powerful and can kill many at the same time. If the graphical representation is satistifying. If it enable and foster multi-player gameplay.
LOL, so you're saying there really hasn't been a decent MMORPG for you either. Join the club.
WOW is not so bad. There is a lot of complexity in combat if you want to optimize (just read elitistjerks.com). DCUO combat is less complex and more action oriented and can be fun.
Combat i like best is D3. Many viable builds and strategy (heck i use a different build to farm Act 1 inferno vs Act 2). And yet a different one if you play MP mostly. It is a good balance between action & strategy. While it is not a MMO, it is close enough in playstyle.
haha .. for me, games are NEVER about people. I have enough RL friends & family. If i happen to make some friends online in playing, fine too. But that is NOT the focal point.
It is really about fun combat & progression. Dungeons & raids are good places for that.
Well people part are not because I want to make friends through a game. It is just fun to do something together with others and I don't mean running through dungeon with nameless randoms from LFG tool
That's not fun.
Fighting yes, but it has added benefit if you fight with or against people you at least know a name and after you play half a year on a server without cross-server things and easy transfers, then you know who's asshole, who is considered good in pvp and then you know fight will be good. You know who trolls and who's reliable.
There is also politics when whole 'game world' community consist of those finite amount of people that are on a server.
Trading, exploring,etc
Dungeons & raids are ok. I even had been raid leader for a short time (semi-casual raid alliance not progression one), but that's get old if that's only or almost only thing you do
Combat is important part, but well just a part.
Combat is probably the most important part. If combat is not fun (like Eve), forget it.
Combat in EvE can be very fun actually. Fun comes not purely from combat itself, but from all things that happen before and after a fight.
So yeah for your 'expectations' most of things / mechanics got better. Sure.
Yeh. And there is certainly more depth & complexity in combat than back in the EQ days.
Sure is, but when it is made at expense of everything non-combat then it is nor worth it.
For me it went into worse direction and just whole parts of mmropg experience were cut out or ridiculosely simplified.
Guess only one of us is going to be ahead.
Ahead? Well certainly I am not going with current mmorpg 'flow'. Don't get me wrong I am kinda sad actually cause of that. I would like to like current mmorpg's but well they are boring so what can I do? They were still giving limited amount of fun when they still had some small 'virtual world parts' as sort of remainder from old mmorpg's. Some fun was because of 'newness' and 'diffrent' and 'conveniant' that came with WoW, but that got OLD really fast.
Thus they became boring, because modern mmorpg's are diffrent KIND of game.
Playing just to make dugneons and arenas as a obejctive itself is boring.
Boring for you. Fun for me. Fun combat & progression is what matters to me. Doing it in a clean & convenient environemtn is added benefit.
Yeah, we're getting somewhere
Unpredicitable, surpsising and changing enviroment is what is one of best things.
One of reasons why it is so boring is cause mmorpg's are so structured and 'clean'.
For me.
Mmorpg's were interesting cause they were various elements thrown together and creating system in which they all impacted each other + immersion from virtual world.
With that gone, it is not much diffrent than hack & slash game, just with bit more people than in co-op.
Boring.
hahah .. co-op hack & slash is what is fun for me. Social stuff is boring. Why would i want to talk to strangers in game all day? (Strangely posting on forums is more fun).
Killing stuff is fun. But when it is only killig stuff then it gets boring. I need varied types of stimulation.
When I trade, then craft, then do some pilitics, then fight, then explore, then tame, then fight again. Then something is happening all the time.
Just fight, fight, fight get's too boring (damn I am saying that too often haha).
It is like earing 5 bananas vs. eating 1 banana, then 1 pear, 1 apple, 1 'pack' of grapes and 1 orange
Ehh but we talked about it already in some other topic nariusseldon haven't we?
Of course. Every 5 topics here is a rehash of this.
Don't think it gonna change either. Might even get worse. Definately there are more those topics now than there were 5 years ago.
Still you're right it is sort of fun to repeat out stances / arguments once in a while ;p
Particularly doing slow work days before i can go home and kill some stuff in Diablo 3.
I would prefer to peel 1 kg of onions than to play D3 for 1 hour tbh
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
You are too obsessed with social & virtual world elements. So what if you lose those elements?
"You are too obsessed with guns in an FPS. So what if you don't have a gun and the camera isn't first person?"
You see how silly you sound? They're the entire point of the entire genre.
Genre changes. I play FP puzzle games like Quantum Conundrum. So it lost the gun, i still like it.
I didn't say anything about FP Puzzle Games. I specifically said First Person Shooter.
If you call something a First Person Shooter, you imply that you can shoot things.
If you call something massively multiplayer, you imply that you can play with thousands of people in a persistent virtual world. Thats what the term refers to.
I'm done trying to explain things to you I guess.
BTW, MM does NOT mean virtual world.
It used to. It's the meaning behind the acronym, in the same way that RPG doesn't mean, a game where you play a role. Because you play a role in every single game, but not every game is an RPG. MMORPG referred to massive persistent worlds with a focus on socializing.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
Fortunetally (or not?) I am not shareholder of corpotation creating mmorpg's so I don't have to worry about finances.
It used to. It's the meaning behind the acronym, in the same way that RPG doesn't mean, a game where you play a role. Because you play a role in every single game, but not every game is an RPG. MMORPG referred to massive persistent worlds with a focus on socializing.
"used to" is correct. It is no longer. Just like the word "computer" no longer means a person who does mathematical computation.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
The problem is that you are assuming that the realities of the market are static like the reality of gravity. They are not.
Things change. Games that people thought would become major players wind up being relegated to minor roles (SWTOR, WAR). And then some unassuming indie games and mods wind up becoming huge players (Minecraft, Day-Z, Counterstrike).
If anything, I would say that the "reality" of the game market is rapidly changing, and the industry is slow to catch up with it. That's why many indie games wind up doing so well. They have the agility and the ability to take risks that big game devs just don't have.
So I wouldn't assume that "everyone" wants what publishers are putting out right now. If they did, then there wouldn't be these massive indie hits.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
Fortunetally (or not?) I am not shareholder of corpotation creating mmorpg's so I don't have to worry about finances.
Do you care about the direction of new MMO devs? If so, you need to care about financial reality because that is what drives development.
haha .. for me, games are NEVER about people. I have enough RL friends & family. If i happen to make some friends online in playing, fine too. But that is NOT the focal point.
It is really about fun combat & progression. Dungeons & raids are good places for that.
Well people part are not because I want to make friends through a game. It is just fun to do something together with others and I don't mean running through dungeon with nameless randoms from LFG tool
That's not fun.
Fighting yes, but it has added benefit if you fight with or against people you at least know a name and after you play half a year on a server without cross-server things and easy transfers, then you know who's asshole, who is considered good in pvp and then you know fight will be good. You know who trolls and who's reliable.
There is also politics when whole 'game world' community consist of those finite amount of people that are on a server.
Trading, exploring,etc
Dungeons & raids are ok. I even had been raid leader for a short time (semi-casual raid alliance not progression one), but that's get old if that's only or almost only thing you do
Combat is important part, but well just a part.
Combat is probably the most important part. If combat is not fun (like Eve), forget it.
Combat in EvE can be very fun actually. Fun comes not purely from combat itself, but from all things that happen before and after a fight.
So yeah for your 'expectations' most of things / mechanics got better. Sure.
Yeh. And there is certainly more depth & complexity in combat than back in the EQ days.
Sure is, but when it is made at expense of everything non-combat then it is nor worth it.
For me it went into worse direction and just whole parts of mmropg experience were cut out or ridiculosely simplified.
Guess only one of us is going to be ahead.
Ahead? Well certainly I am not going with current mmorpg 'flow'. Don't get me wrong I am kinda sad actually cause of that. I would like to like current mmorpg's but well they are boring so what can I do? They were still giving limited amount of fun when they still had some small 'virtual world parts' as sort of remainder from old mmorpg's. Some fun was because of 'newness' and 'diffrent' and 'conveniant' that came with WoW, but that got OLD really fast.
Thus they became boring, because modern mmorpg's are diffrent KIND of game.
Playing just to make dugneons and arenas as a obejctive itself is boring.
Boring for you. Fun for me. Fun combat & progression is what matters to me. Doing it in a clean & convenient environemtn is added benefit.
Yeah, we're getting somewhere
Unpredicitable, surpsising and changing enviroment is what is one of best things.
One of reasons why it is so boring is cause mmorpg's are so structured and 'clean'.
For me.
Mmorpg's were interesting cause they were various elements thrown together and creating system in which they all impacted each other + immersion from virtual world.
With that gone, it is not much diffrent than hack & slash game, just with bit more people than in co-op.
Boring.
hahah .. co-op hack & slash is what is fun for me. Social stuff is boring. Why would i want to talk to strangers in game all day? (Strangely posting on forums is more fun).
Killing stuff is fun. But when it is only killig stuff then it gets boring. I need varied types of stimulation.
When I trade, then craft, then do some pilitics, then fight, then explore, then tame, then fight again. Then something is happening all the time.
Just fight, fight, fight get's too boring (damn I am saying that too often haha).
It is like earing 5 bananas vs. eating 1 banana, then 1 pear, 1 apple, 1 'pack' of grapes and 1 orange
Ehh but we talked about it already in some other topic nariusseldon haven't we?
Of course. Every 5 topics here is a rehash of this.
Don't think it gonna change either. Might even get worse. Definately there are more those topics now than there were 5 years ago.
Still you're right it is sort of fun to repeat out stances / arguments once in a while ;p
Particularly doing slow work days before i can go home and kill some stuff in Diablo 3.
I would prefer to peel 1 kg of onions than to play D3 for 1 hour tbh
This is a perfect example why new players dont understand old players, it is simply they dont agree on what a mmorpg is.
One think its a game where the amount of fun&action equals how good the game is; how many features and how effective it is. This one will see anything not related to action as a time zink, and he is the majority so thats what games give him.
The other one looks at the game as a roleplaying world offering adventure, not only hacking down enemies faster while looking better but as a whole experience in a different world. This one would play with minecraft graphics if it would mean deeper and more complex systems (a world on its own terms), and when he see all looks and no foundation the game falls apart when the initial excitement falls.
Do you care about the direction of new MMO devs? If so, you need to care about financial reality because that is what drives development.
Yeah. I am aware of that.
Still I've spent too much time in my life explaining to myself "they need to change game like that cause they need more money" or "then need to add this things in cash shop - well they are company after all are they are doing business" or "they are trying to play safe cause noone want to lose money. right?"
Then I realized that I've been defending corporations for a long time. Both some of their decisions on game forums of games I played and even more importantly "explained" them to myself.
You know what? I am on discussion forum and I discuss games. I am not totally disregarding economic realities. That would be absurd.
Still I am done with "it HAS to be that way cause it is business".
I am theoretically discussing about what game I would play or what features are nice or why some game succeded or why some game failed in MY opinion.
Money wise? what I can do money wise is to say that I am not looking for free entertaiment. I am ready to pay the price.
Even above average price to get product that will satisfy me and if that fee is not affecting what I consider most important in gameplay.
One think its a game where the amount of fun&action equals how good the game is; how many features and how effective it is. This one will see anything not related to action as a time zink, and he is the majority so thats what games give him.
The other one looks at the game as a roleplaying world offering adventure, not only hacking down enemies faster while looking better but as a whole experience in a different world. This one would play with minecraft graphics if it would mean deeper and more complex systems (a world on its own terms), and when he see all looks and no foundation the game falls apart when the initial excitement falls.
Well not really.
I would not play with minecraft graphics.
Graphics are not most important, and they do NOT have to be top-notch, but they have to be hmm at least average I would say.
There is certain standard I don't go below.
Taking that aside - you're right that I don't consider 'more actio & combat' = automatically better.
I need more things that just combat and as viable things to do, not half-assed side-features.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you .
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
Fortunetally (or not?) I am not shareholder of corpotation creating mmorpg's so I don't have to worry about finances.
Do you care about the direction of new MMO devs? If so, you need to care about financial reality because that is what drives development.
If devs wanted a successful MMO they wouldn't be making WoW clones. Or have you not noticed that for the last 7 years, each and every WoW clone has collapsed after launch, halfed their team, closed and merged a bunch of servers, and have done it so regularly and so often, it's considered NORMAL now.
So devs can... produce an unoriginal WoW clone that costs tons of money in polish and advertisements, and compete in a market DIRECTLY against the outlier unreachable behemoth that is WoW, and all the other WoW clones already there (every MMO)
Or, you can work with a smaller budget, and make a hardcore, well designed MMO and aim at at a MASSIVE niche that is almost entirely untapped. The problem is, publishers are stupid, and oldschool MMOs take complete understanding of the game systems, as well as competent design. Whereas modern MMOs can solve every problem by throwing instancing at it.
Vanguard proved the market still exists. It sold about 500k copies in the first week, way back in 2007, during the SAME WEEK as Burning Crusade?
Money wise? what I can do money wise is to say that I am not looking for free entertaiment. I am ready to pay the price.
Even above average price to get product that will satisfy me and if that fee is not affecting what I consider most important in gameplay.
Yeah I am prepared to pay 10 times the usual monthly fee for a quality game (like my 6 accounts on a certain mmorpg), because if you do the calculations even at that price its one of the cheapest and most rewarding forms of entertainment for me.
Oh and I am tiered of >>trying<< new mmorpgs and in that process seeing the end of the game; how about a game I will play.
"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'd say lack of variety in mmorpg's plays it part in this. People can't be playing the new variations of the old games if they don't exist, have been forced into the generic mold or if those that are released are just pretty bad. So they have little choice but to reminisce.
Also have you tried some of them to see what you think? They may not have been developed very well post wow but a few can be worth trying. Anarchy online instantly springs to mind.
It has nothing to do with "the past" but it has everything to do with what is fun. I tend to think the reason that no game surpasses WoW is not because WoW is so great, but rather that no game by itself has been able to compete in a crowded market. I would go so far as to say that WoW has LOST popularity and is on the decline based upon the number of OTHER MMO's that are concurrently running at the moment. Many developers look only at the supposed sub numbers tauted by Blizzard but fail to see that there are far more in number playing every other MMO out there. Why? Because most are not looking to play WoW...they WANT something not like WoW.
Comments
Depending on how one measures better or worse, there certainly can be a difference in quality.
"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
I don't really care if you welcome it or not. MMO is not really a suitable category anymore. It's just a catch-all for any game that wants to known as an MMO and advertizes as such. I should find that "Virtual Worlds" thread from a few months back... it is a lot more eloquent than my words.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
I measure the quality in combat gameplay. If it is deep and foster many different strategies and builds. If it makes you feel powerful and can kill many at the same time. If the graphical representation is satistifying. If it enable and foster multi-player gameplay.
I don't really think you will care but i will express my opinion anyway because it is fun.
So what if MMOs have expand its definition. We all know what games are called MMOs.
And i have no problem if people want to give a different name to VW games. Labels only facilitate communication. So it is all good.
The answer to OP is.. both.
It is part nostalgia and the first mmo (that you liked, not first mmo you played!).
Partly it is because games really are pretty crappy now compared. And where we the old and the new misunderstand eachother is exactly that..
If you look at features and graphics from a new players perspective, new games are far better.
If you consider a mmorpg game to be a roleplaying game on a computer like older players often do, then the new games are empty soulless shells that doesnt inspire like some older games.
But nothing is black and white, and once inawhile some nice game comes out .. its just not a mmorpg.
If you want to provoke a little you might say, there has not been a mmorpg released in 7 years, although plenty multiplayer games calling themselves such.
Oh and if the future is manga styled punks with blue hair in schoolgirl uniforms and size ddddd++++ tits.......
Thing is, with todays technology and amount of investment, we would think it logical that at some point one of the new games may succeed in showing some long term gaming quality and not just a pretty face.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
LOL, so you're saying there really hasn't been a decent MMORPG for you either. Join the club.
"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
Nothing is wrong with expressing your opinion.
I think the reason so many people argue with you is simply how your opinion is presented. I'm not sure if you do it intentionally, but you often come off an attitude of:
"I am right because I am the majority, and you are wrong."
Once again, if you're not intending to communicate the above sentence, then your opinion is 100% okay. If you are though, then that would be why everyone argues with you
.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
WOW is not so bad. There is a lot of complexity in combat if you want to optimize (just read elitistjerks.com). DCUO combat is less complex and more action oriented and can be fun.
Combat i like best is D3. Many viable builds and strategy (heck i use a different build to farm Act 1 inferno vs Act 2). And yet a different one if you play MP mostly. It is a good balance between action & strategy. While it is not a MMO, it is close enough in playstyle.
Because it's not about opinion, it's about reality. Right and wrong have nothing to do with it. There are financial realities that drive business. Those realities win 100% of the time. I might even agree with some people that there are elements of gameplay I'd like to see come back. So what? That doesn't represent the majority and as such, it's not going to happen.
It's like arguing against gravity. It doesn't matter what you say, reality wins.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
It used to. It's the meaning behind the acronym, in the same way that RPG doesn't mean, a game where you play a role. Because you play a role in every single game, but not every game is an RPG. MMORPG referred to massive persistent worlds with a focus on socializing.
Fortunetally (or not?) I am not shareholder of corpotation creating mmorpg's so I don't have to worry about finances.
"used to" is correct. It is no longer. Just like the word "computer" no longer means a person who does mathematical computation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer
The problem is that you are assuming that the realities of the market are static like the reality of gravity. They are not.
Things change. Games that people thought would become major players wind up being relegated to minor roles (SWTOR, WAR). And then some unassuming indie games and mods wind up becoming huge players (Minecraft, Day-Z, Counterstrike).
If anything, I would say that the "reality" of the game market is rapidly changing, and the industry is slow to catch up with it. That's why many indie games wind up doing so well. They have the agility and the ability to take risks that big game devs just don't have.
So I wouldn't assume that "everyone" wants what publishers are putting out right now. If they did, then there wouldn't be these massive indie hits.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Do you care about the direction of new MMO devs? If so, you need to care about financial reality because that is what drives development.
This is a perfect example why new players dont understand old players, it is simply they dont agree on what a mmorpg is.
One think its a game where the amount of fun&action equals how good the game is; how many features and how effective it is. This one will see anything not related to action as a time zink, and he is the majority so thats what games give him.
The other one looks at the game as a roleplaying world offering adventure, not only hacking down enemies faster while looking better but as a whole experience in a different world. This one would play with minecraft graphics if it would mean deeper and more complex systems (a world on its own terms), and when he see all looks and no foundation the game falls apart when the initial excitement falls.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
Yeah. I am aware of that.
Still I've spent too much time in my life explaining to myself "they need to change game like that cause they need more money" or "then need to add this things in cash shop - well they are company after all are they are doing business" or "they are trying to play safe cause noone want to lose money. right?"
Then I realized that I've been defending corporations for a long time. Both some of their decisions on game forums of games I played and even more importantly "explained" them to myself.
You know what? I am on discussion forum and I discuss games. I am not totally disregarding economic realities. That would be absurd.
Still I am done with "it HAS to be that way cause it is business".
I am theoretically discussing about what game I would play or what features are nice or why some game succeded or why some game failed in MY opinion.
Money wise? what I can do money wise is to say that I am not looking for free entertaiment. I am ready to pay the price.
Even above average price to get product that will satisfy me and if that fee is not affecting what I consider most important in gameplay.
Well not really.
I would not play with minecraft graphics.
Graphics are not most important, and they do NOT have to be top-notch, but they have to be hmm at least average I would say.
There is certain standard I don't go below.
Taking that aside - you're right that I don't consider 'more actio & combat' = automatically better.
I need more things that just combat and as viable things to do, not half-assed side-features.
If devs wanted a successful MMO they wouldn't be making WoW clones. Or have you not noticed that for the last 7 years, each and every WoW clone has collapsed after launch, halfed their team, closed and merged a bunch of servers, and have done it so regularly and so often, it's considered NORMAL now.
So devs can... produce an unoriginal WoW clone that costs tons of money in polish and advertisements, and compete in a market DIRECTLY against the outlier unreachable behemoth that is WoW, and all the other WoW clones already there (every MMO)
Or, you can work with a smaller budget, and make a hardcore, well designed MMO and aim at at a MASSIVE niche that is almost entirely untapped. The problem is, publishers are stupid, and oldschool MMOs take complete understanding of the game systems, as well as competent design. Whereas modern MMOs can solve every problem by throwing instancing at it.
Vanguard proved the market still exists. It sold about 500k copies in the first week, way back in 2007, during the SAME WEEK as Burning Crusade?
Yeah I am prepared to pay 10 times the usual monthly fee for a quality game (like my 6 accounts on a certain mmorpg), because if you do the calculations even at that price its one of the cheapest and most rewarding forms of entertainment for me.
Oh and I am tiered of >>trying<< new mmorpgs and in that process seeing the end of the game; how about a game I will play.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
I'd say lack of variety in mmorpg's plays it part in this. People can't be playing the new variations of the old games if they don't exist, have been forced into the generic mold or if those that are released are just pretty bad. So they have little choice but to reminisce.
Also have you tried some of them to see what you think? They may not have been developed very well post wow but a few can be worth trying. Anarchy online instantly springs to mind.
It has nothing to do with "the past" but it has everything to do with what is fun. I tend to think the reason that no game surpasses WoW is not because WoW is so great, but rather that no game by itself has been able to compete in a crowded market. I would go so far as to say that WoW has LOST popularity and is on the decline based upon the number of OTHER MMO's that are concurrently running at the moment. Many developers look only at the supposed sub numbers tauted by Blizzard but fail to see that there are far more in number playing every other MMO out there. Why? Because most are not looking to play WoW...they WANT something not like WoW.
Let's party like it is 1863!
Seriously, how did you manage to get this far in life and be so utterly clueless about how the world works?
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