Wrote a rant. Deleted it. Wasn't worth the space it took up.
OP: I can relate to how you feel.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
The first thing you did when you logged on to Meridian 59 in 1996 was to go out in the moat and kill 10 rats...
But you are nevertheless right, MMOs have been pretty much the same the last 10 years. It seems however that things are changing, already last year games like GW2 and TSW did offer some new features & ideas and future games like WoDO and Class 4 will be taking this a lot further.
My suggestion is that you support upcomming games that tries to be different while ignoring games that pretty much are more of the same, voting with your wallet have always been the best way to support change in gaming.
I have a feeling that the genre will be very different 5 years from now.
I have a feeling that the genre will be very different 5 years from now.
The "genre" is already very different. I think people have lost sight of games that are like MMOs, but not quite, and MMO ideas going into other genre.
If you use a strict definition of what a MMO is (by its traditional characteristics), then the genre will never really change, because you will just classify something new NOT a MMO, and thus outside of the genre. That is the problem here. People are too narrow.
If you include games that are like MMOs, or similar to part of MMOs, or take MMO features, then the "genre" has been changing and expanding. Some examples:
- ARPG with MMO featuers. Traditionally, ARPG are like MMOs anyway (focus on combat & progression). D3 add AH & crafting. PoE adds persistent zones. Personally i think these games are very close to combat centric MMOs, and don't evaluate them differently.
- MOBA and other instanced based pvp games (like WOT, and Star Conflict) .. essentially takes MMO progression, arena combat, and focus on that.
- "world war games" like PS2 .. essentially take the open world pvp idea and runs with it.
- instanced pve games (DDO, vindictice, SD gundam ...) .. just do dungeon runs, and nothing else.
- Destiny is going to be a new kind of online game with some MMO features (i.e. shared world shooter)
I don't like typical MMORPGs built for massive box sales and dwindling populations. But developers are starting to see that building a game for everyone means they aren't really going to please anyone either. We wouldn't be seeing Age of Wushu, ArcheAge, Black Desert Online, World of Darkness and so on getting made if they still thought everyone wanted a WoW clone.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
I think developers are starting to get what made MMOs work. Going back to grass roots of what made them fun. Indy games making small MMOs that focus on 1 or 2 types of customers. Big ticket MMOs are all now talking about roots on what made MMOs fun and talking a lot more about elder game. I think the past few years have been a costly learning curve but I think they maybe getting it. Combat has seen some nice changes as well. My call is the best is yet to come.
I'll agree, I like to joke that the MMORPG "Dark Age" began (for me) in 2006 when titles all started to seem depressingly similar to each other. (which not coincidentially coincides with my joining these forums here)
EVE did manage to hold me over the past 5 years, but anything created later than 2004 hasn't really appealed to me more than 2-3 months. (I'm always hoping for a longer playing experience but no such luck)
I guess I enjoy them well enough to find some fun for a few months, which isn't such a bad thing I suppose, but as far as long term appeal maybe those days are over unless I find a really interesting new sub-genre to explore that I've either overlooked or is yet to be delivered.
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 even think MMORPG is the term for the genre we liked, I think it's a very much outdated one that is too general.
I'm into online games with seamless worlds, you know Dayz isn't an MMORPG but it's damn better than anything released these days. Also though in Dayz your character is persistent and there are more people on each server than most MMOs have or even allow in one zone.
I mean I haven't liked a single one since 2005 and have been looking in the genre ever since. My point is however that the MMORPG genre has evolved into this WoW clone genre, where you make a character, log in, speak to an npc to kill 10 rats, do this until you're high enough level to get to the next zone, to repeat it all again. You then end up doing this until you get to the end game which is made up of standing around wondering what to do because you're bored of Battlegrounds and bored of instances.
It's been this way since 1999 when EQ was started. What you discribed is pretty much what EQ is.
Regarding clones, there are many many many many games out there that look and play nothing like WoW. If all you are doing is looking at wow clones than thats all you see, however to say that thats all there is, is factually wrong.
I got into the genre back in the day because I wanted virtual worlds, games back then offered this and they were all massively different from each other as the genre was in it's infancy and we didn't have many worlds. Now however MMORPG just means a game like WoW and I know EQ fanbois will be complaining, however they aren't true EQ fans. I mean I'm sick of these people who pop up and say WoW is an EQ clone........ sorry but play EQ from 2000 and play WoW from 2004, they were massivel different games, that is why EQ people hated it.
Wow is an EQ clone, yes there are many things that are different. However there there are a great many things that are the same, or rather were on WoW's release.
The MMO genre was also one that amazed graphically as well as scale wise. I mean the genre has this weird perception now where it's always looked bad and never been immersive and now every MMO is some cartoony thing... again thanx to WoW. I remember pre WoW where I was thinking the graphics are amazing for what it was doing. I remember playing EQ in Upper School and my parents saying how good looking it was and I remember games like EQ2 and SWG blowing everyones minds. I mean even Planetside looked good back in 2003, I was blown away with many things in that game. The genre has seemed to given in though to the current gen consoles and never truely entered the DX9 era and just seemed to have stuck with WoW graphics.
Once again there are many many many games that do not look like WoW. If all you are doing is looking at wow clones than thats all you see, however to say that thats all there is, is factually wrong.
After playing Dayz I realised it isn't me, it's the games and how when a game creates an amazing world with challenge, not only do I jump on it, but so do 1.6 million other gamers. I realised that the MMORPG genre that I used to love was basically a genre for emergent gaming, a sandbox one where we create the story and one where we have control.
I reminded myself, I love SIm City, I love The SIms, I love EVE Online, I love Dayz, ArmA and every other game in this style. My Fave MMOS were EQ Pre Luclin/PoP, EVE, PoP and SWG Pre CU. My fave games are the Dayz or the GTAs or the Euro Truck Simulators lol. Ones that are for the hardcore, ones that don't treat the gamer as dumb, ones that you create the story and give you control.
There is nothing more boring to me than doing a kill 10 rats quest for some NPC who gives me some shit 3 line dialogue of story for why I'm doing it over and over again. Even games like SWTOR or GW2 where people claimed they were different, I ended up doing the same thing over and over.
So I realise, this genre is dead and the games I strive for aren't part of it.
You need to expand your horizons a bit more.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
i agree with the op from a standpoint of teh WOW clone.. if it is that you mean nothing has really significantly changed since WOW. All the pillars fo gaming have really gone unchanged. noone has tried to reinvent the whell much other the GW2, whether you like that game or not. SWtor has doen some changes but nowhere near enogh to be fresh.
1. we are still going to quest givers, going out to complete a mission and coem back to quest giver.
2. we are still doing only static, unchanging dungeouns and raids for endgame
3. character building/level progression is still the same
4. gear grinding still the same.
5. no reinventing of talent trees/specialization trees
i mean i could really keep going, but the bottom line is that we need a real fresh start on MMO's at this point. i stopped play in the end of last year and honestly havent looked back. Its just all the same stuff now.
The MMO "genre" is now a mile wide and two inches deep, including every kind of anything that can be "claimed" to be an MMO/MMORPG (lobby shooters, browser based crap, direct from Asia reskined F2P imports, non-persistent world co-op games and on and on)that are not even MMOs. Compare that with the games of the original crop (say UO or Meridian to SWG) and you see the difference. Each one of the original games, mostly had its own identity, was based around a persistent world, and had much more depth in terms of game play mechanics (especially compared to he stuff being released these days). So while there are many more games being called MMOs (and their revenue counted), as far as PC based, "real" MMOs, there have been many fewer (in the mold of the original games) as time has gone on.
Or maybe the OP is right. The genre might be alive and well and have fantastic games for YOU.
That's very true.
I'm sort of with the OP, I thought mmo's were virtual worlds. I've enjoyed myself in the games I've played but I really am looking for a "virtual world".
I do notice that I'm mostly playing morrowind and skyrim over mmo's. Currently the only mmo that has caught my attention is Tera (not a virtual world but I love the combat) but I can't find a good group to play with.
The only upcomign games that I am curious about is Elder Scrolls Online because of the setting and because of the pvp (and yes, I'm one of the people who is dissapointed that the world is divided) and Archeage.
It's possible that my mmo days are numbered unless a more vitrual world can be made.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
i agree with the op from a standpoint of teh WOW clone.. if it is that you mean nothing has really significantly changed since WOW. All the pillars fo gaming have really gone unchanged. noone has tried to reinvent the whell much other the GW2, whether you like that game or not. SWtor has doen some changes but nowhere near enogh to be fresh.
1. we are still going to quest givers, going out to complete a mission and coem back to quest giver.
2. we are still doing only static, unchanging dungeouns and raids for endgame
3. character building/level progression is still the same
4. gear grinding still the same.
5. no reinventing of talent trees/specialization trees
i mean i could really keep going, but the bottom line is that we need a real fresh start on MMO's at this point. i stopped play in the end of last year and honestly havent looked back. Its just all the same stuff now.
GW2 turned that upside down and one of the best changes in MMOs I have seen. Did lots of quests and adventures and never went back to hand in any quests.
I think MMOs need to take a page from old school MMOs and mix up dungeons with modern instanced dungeons that tell a story and some old school open world massive dungeons that can support many teams.
I dont think gear griding is needed. Its a old tool that dose nothing for the community. I think Neverwinters player made content is the way to go and Wildstar Warplots again player made content that will keep the game going till devs can make more as well.
Originally posted by Burntvet The MMO "genre" is now a mile wide and two inches deep, including every kind of anything that can be "claimed" to be an MMO/MMORPG (lobby shooters, browser based crap, direct from Asia reskined F2P imports, non-persistent world co-op games and on and on)that are not even MMOs. Compare that with the games of the original crop (say UO or Meridian to SWG) and you see the difference. Each one of the original games, mostly had its own identity, was based around a persistent world, and had much more depth in terms of game play mechanics (especially compared to he stuff being released these days). So while there are many more games being called MMOs (and their revenue counted), as far as PC based, "real" MMOs, there have been many fewer (in the mold of the original games) as time has gone on.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
It's possible that my mmo days are numbered unless a more vitrual world can be made.
Or just change the definition.
LOL, WOT, D3, PoE .. show that you can have similar gameplay to some aspect of MMO (arena pvp, instanced dungeons ..) without a virtual world and still have very successful.
Originally posted by Burntvet The MMO "genre" is now a mile wide and two inches deep, including every kind of anything that can be "claimed" to be an MMO/MMORPG (lobby shooters, browser based crap, direct from Asia reskined F2P imports, non-persistent world co-op games and on and on)that are not even MMOs. Compare that with the games of the original crop (say UO or Meridian to SWG) and you see the difference. Each one of the original games, mostly had its own identity, was based around a persistent world, and had much more depth in terms of game play mechanics (especially compared to he stuff being released these days). So while there are many more games being called MMOs (and their revenue counted), as far as PC based, "real" MMOs, there have been many fewer (in the mold of the original games) as time has gone on.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
Well I am certainly wider than when I started playing them (fucking awful joke, I am ashamed). But deeper, I barely get my ankles wet in most new releases.
Originally posted by Burntvet The MMO "genre" is now a mile wide and two inches deep, including every kind of anything that can be "claimed" to be an MMO/MMORPG (lobby shooters, browser based crap, direct from Asia reskined F2P imports, non-persistent world co-op games and on and on)that are not even MMOs. Compare that with the games of the original crop (say UO or Meridian to SWG) and you see the difference. Each one of the original games, mostly had its own identity, was based around a persistent world, and had much more depth in terms of game play mechanics (especially compared to he stuff being released these days). So while there are many more games being called MMOs (and their revenue counted), as far as PC based, "real" MMOs, there have been many fewer (in the mold of the original games) as time has gone on.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
As others have mentioned, even though some of the original games "exist", they are so far from their roots that they might as well not. Pick the original game that is still going, and the "jump the shark" patch or expansion can be named, when a large part of the player base left. This was Trammel for UO, whatever for EQ and on and on. And for a game like SWG, that was gutted and then closed, people can't play the most popular Pre-CU version (by population numbers) can they? The only reason some of the original games exist, is because they are stupidly cheap to keep running, once most meaningful development is done (devs have spoke repeatedly on this toopic). So, just because a few of the originals remain online, and most definitely not in their original forms (the exception being EvE, the devs of which have been smart enough to not mess with a good thing) means nothing.
Originally posted by Burntvet The MMO "genre" is now a mile wide and two inches deep, including every kind of anything that can be "claimed" to be an MMO/MMORPG (lobby shooters, browser based crap, direct from Asia reskined F2P imports, non-persistent world co-op games and on and on)that are not even MMOs. Compare that with the games of the original crop (say UO or Meridian to SWG) and you see the difference. Each one of the original games, mostly had its own identity, was based around a persistent world, and had much more depth in terms of game play mechanics (especially compared to he stuff being released these days). So while there are many more games being called MMOs (and their revenue counted), as far as PC based, "real" MMOs, there have been many fewer (in the mold of the original games) as time has gone on.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
As others have mentioned, even though some of the original games "exist", they are so far from their roots that they might as well not. Pick the original game that is still going, and the "jump the shark" patch or expansion can be named, when a large part of the player base left. This was Trammel for UO, whatever for EQ and on and on. And for a game like SWG, that was gutted and then closed, people can't play the most popular Pre-CU version (by population numbers) can they? The only reason some of the original games exist, is because they are stupidly cheap to keep running, once most meaningful development is done (devs have spoke repeatedly on this toopic). So, just because a few of the originals remain online, and most definitely not in their original forms (the exception being EvE, the devs of which have been smart enough to not mess with a good thing) means nothing.
Eve in it's orginal form is quite different than eve today.
While many features of the old games have changed,most the game mechanics have not changed. There is still just as much decision making to be done today as there was before, meaning the games are just as deep.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I mean I haven't liked a single one since 2005 and have been looking in the genre ever since. My point is however that the MMORPG genre has evolved into this WoW clone genre, where you make a character, log in, speak to an npc to kill 10 rats, do this until you're high enough level to get to the next zone, to repeat it all again. You then end up doing this until you get to the end game which is made up of standing around wondering what to do because you're bored of Battlegrounds and bored of instances.
I got into the genre back in the day because I wanted virtual worlds, games back then offered this and they were all massively different from each other as the genre was in it's infancy and we didn't have many worlds. Now however MMORPG just means a game like WoW and I know EQ fanbois will be complaining, however they aren't true EQ fans. I mean I'm sick of these people who pop up and say WoW is an EQ clone........ sorry but play EQ from 2000 and play WoW from 2004, they were massivel different games, that is why EQ people hated it.
The MMO genre was also one that amazed graphically as well as scale wise. I mean the genre has this weird perception now where it's always looked bad and never been immersive and now every MMO is some cartoony thing... again thanx to WoW. I remember pre WoW where I was thinking the graphics are amazing for what it was doing. I remember playing EQ in Upper School and my parents saying how good looking it was and I remember games like EQ2 and SWG blowing everyones minds. I mean even Planetside looked good back in 2003, I was blown away with many things in that game. The genre has seemed to given in though to the current gen consoles and never truely entered the DX9 era and just seemed to have stuck with WoW graphics.
After playing Dayz I realised it isn't me, it's the games and how when a game creates an amazing world with challenge, not only do I jump on it, but so do 1.6 million other gamers. I realised that the MMORPG genre that I used to love was basically a genre for emergent gaming, a sandbox one where we create the story and one where we have control.
I reminded myself, I love SIm City, I love The SIms, I love EVE Online, I love Dayz, ArmA and every other game in this style. My Fave MMOS were EQ Pre Luclin/PoP, EVE, PoP and SWG Pre CU. My fave games are the Dayz or the GTAs or the Euro Truck Simulators lol. Ones that are for the hardcore, ones that don't treat the gamer as dumb, ones that you create the story and give you control.
There is nothing more boring to me than doing a kill 10 rats quest for some NPC who gives me some shit 3 line dialogue of story for why I'm doing it over and over again. Even games like SWTOR or GW2 where people claimed they were different, I ended up doing the same thing over and over.
So I realise, this genre is dead and the games I strive for aren't part of it.
I hate to be the one who break you but in the moment you used the therm "WoW clone" you already stated your limited point of view in the genre, in easy words you are the one limiting your sight in the matter, fortunately thats not what is really happening. Said that then yes, maybe you will find your new place elsewhere.
It's possible that my mmo days are numbered unless a more vitrual world can be made.
Or just change the definition.
LOL, WOT, D3, PoE .. show that you can have similar gameplay to some aspect of MMO (arena pvp, instanced dungeons ..) without a virtual world and still have very successful.
those aren't virtual worlds.
I don't want instanced dungeons,. Not a one. No arenas unless it's one that players can bet on sort of like a coluseum. There's nothign in any of those games that infer a world.
I want travel, boats, groups making their own kingdoms, fighting for their own kingdoms, players just creating towns and being social,
hmmm the closest thign I can think of is that I want morrowind online with sieging and other player built structures. That's what I want. And the quests can be taken out, that's fine.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
my 2 cents .. again on the same topic, but different thread.. lol
I gave up on MMO's as have all my friends.. SWTOR was our last chance and it failed miserably.. We've played since the launch of EQ, and got our feet wet with AD&D in the 80's.. The desire to play a fantasy RPG came and gone based on the new defintion of a mmorpg.. It has changed since the begining.. What we have now is static themepark rides of predeitermined destiny... Are the characters we play in today's games OURS, or are we repeating someone elses ideas? I never played AD&D or EQ to relive someone else's story, that is what single rpg games or for like Dragon Age and Skyrim.. I honestly don't see anything coming down the pipe that interest me..
Where are the days when our choices of actions effect our characters? I should have the ability to ally or kill any npc target in the game if I"m willing to live the consequenses of my actions.. If I want to camp city guards and destroy my reputation, while earning rep with the bandits, that should be MY option.. The last game that gave me that option was EQ.. BTW.. I never did reach level cap in AD&D in all the years I played it.. hmmmmmmm Something to think about.. I played for the fun of the content, not the artifical number next to "Level"..
Comments
Wrote a rant. Deleted it. Wasn't worth the space it took up.
OP: I can relate to how you feel.
*yawn* next !
People always think great games are coming and when these great games finally launch we learn they aren't so great......
The first thing you did when you logged on to Meridian 59 in 1996 was to go out in the moat and kill 10 rats...
But you are nevertheless right, MMOs have been pretty much the same the last 10 years. It seems however that things are changing, already last year games like GW2 and TSW did offer some new features & ideas and future games like WoDO and Class 4 will be taking this a lot further.
My suggestion is that you support upcomming games that tries to be different while ignoring games that pretty much are more of the same, voting with your wallet have always been the best way to support change in gaming.
I have a feeling that the genre will be very different 5 years from now.
The "genre" is already very different. I think people have lost sight of games that are like MMOs, but not quite, and MMO ideas going into other genre.
If you use a strict definition of what a MMO is (by its traditional characteristics), then the genre will never really change, because you will just classify something new NOT a MMO, and thus outside of the genre. That is the problem here. People are too narrow.
If you include games that are like MMOs, or similar to part of MMOs, or take MMO features, then the "genre" has been changing and expanding. Some examples:
- ARPG with MMO featuers. Traditionally, ARPG are like MMOs anyway (focus on combat & progression). D3 add AH & crafting. PoE adds persistent zones. Personally i think these games are very close to combat centric MMOs, and don't evaluate them differently.
- MOBA and other instanced based pvp games (like WOT, and Star Conflict) .. essentially takes MMO progression, arena combat, and focus on that.
- "world war games" like PS2 .. essentially take the open world pvp idea and runs with it.
- instanced pve games (DDO, vindictice, SD gundam ...) .. just do dungeon runs, and nothing else.
- Destiny is going to be a new kind of online game with some MMO features (i.e. shared world shooter)
I don't like typical MMORPGs built for massive box sales and dwindling populations. But developers are starting to see that building a game for everyone means they aren't really going to please anyone either. We wouldn't be seeing Age of Wushu, ArcheAge, Black Desert Online, World of Darkness and so on getting made if they still thought everyone wanted a WoW clone.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
I'll agree, I like to joke that the MMORPG "Dark Age" began (for me) in 2006 when titles all started to seem depressingly similar to each other. (which not coincidentially coincides with my joining these forums here)
EVE did manage to hold me over the past 5 years, but anything created later than 2004 hasn't really appealed to me more than 2-3 months. (I'm always hoping for a longer playing experience but no such luck)
I guess I enjoy them well enough to find some fun for a few months, which isn't such a bad thing I suppose, but as far as long term appeal maybe those days are over unless I find a really interesting new sub-genre to explore that I've either overlooked or is yet to be delivered.
"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 even think MMORPG is the term for the genre we liked, I think it's a very much outdated one that is too general.
I'm into online games with seamless worlds, you know Dayz isn't an MMORPG but it's damn better than anything released these days. Also though in Dayz your character is persistent and there are more people on each server than most MMOs have or even allow in one zone.
You need to expand your horizons a bit more.
i agree with the op from a standpoint of teh WOW clone.. if it is that you mean nothing has really significantly changed since WOW. All the pillars fo gaming have really gone unchanged. noone has tried to reinvent the whell much other the GW2, whether you like that game or not. SWtor has doen some changes but nowhere near enogh to be fresh.
1. we are still going to quest givers, going out to complete a mission and coem back to quest giver.
2. we are still doing only static, unchanging dungeouns and raids for endgame
3. character building/level progression is still the same
4. gear grinding still the same.
5. no reinventing of talent trees/specialization trees
i mean i could really keep going, but the bottom line is that we need a real fresh start on MMO's at this point. i stopped play in the end of last year and honestly havent looked back. Its just all the same stuff now.
That's very true.
I'm sort of with the OP, I thought mmo's were virtual worlds. I've enjoyed myself in the games I've played but I really am looking for a "virtual world".
I do notice that I'm mostly playing morrowind and skyrim over mmo's. Currently the only mmo that has caught my attention is Tera (not a virtual world but I love the combat) but I can't find a good group to play with.
The only upcomign games that I am curious about is Elder Scrolls Online because of the setting and because of the pvp (and yes, I'm one of the people who is dissapointed that the world is divided) and Archeage.
It's possible that my mmo days are numbered unless a more vitrual world can be made.
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
GW2 turned that upside down and one of the best changes in MMOs I have seen. Did lots of quests and adventures and never went back to hand in any quests.
I think MMOs need to take a page from old school MMOs and mix up dungeons with modern instanced dungeons that tell a story and some old school open world massive dungeons that can support many teams.
I dont think gear griding is needed. Its a old tool that dose nothing for the community. I think Neverwinters player made content is the way to go and Wildstar Warplots again player made content that will keep the game going till devs can make more as well.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
Or just change the definition.
LOL, WOT, D3, PoE .. show that you can have similar gameplay to some aspect of MMO (arena pvp, instanced dungeons ..) without a virtual world and still have very successful.
Well I am certainly wider than when I started playing them (fucking awful joke, I am ashamed). But deeper, I barely get my ankles wet in most new releases.
They said that when SWTOR and TSW were in the works. GW2 and WoW are still ahead of them in popularity.
No. Most of those games are still around, therefore the genre is just as deep as it ever was, if not more. The addition of more games does not make it less deep, however, as you say it is wider.
As others have mentioned, even though some of the original games "exist", they are so far from their roots that they might as well not. Pick the original game that is still going, and the "jump the shark" patch or expansion can be named, when a large part of the player base left. This was Trammel for UO, whatever for EQ and on and on. And for a game like SWG, that was gutted and then closed, people can't play the most popular Pre-CU version (by population numbers) can they? The only reason some of the original games exist, is because they are stupidly cheap to keep running, once most meaningful development is done (devs have spoke repeatedly on this toopic). So, just because a few of the originals remain online, and most definitely not in their original forms (the exception being EvE, the devs of which have been smart enough to not mess with a good thing) means nothing.Eve in it's orginal form is quite different than eve today.
While many features of the old games have changed,most the game mechanics have not changed. There is still just as much decision making to be done today as there was before, meaning the games are just as deep.
I hate to be the one who break you but in the moment you used the therm "WoW clone" you already stated your limited point of view in the genre, in easy words you are the one limiting your sight in the matter, fortunately thats not what is really happening. Said that then yes, maybe you will find your new place elsewhere.
those aren't virtual worlds.
I don't want instanced dungeons,. Not a one. No arenas unless it's one that players can bet on sort of like a coluseum. There's nothign in any of those games that infer a world.
I want travel, boats, groups making their own kingdoms, fighting for their own kingdoms, players just creating towns and being social,
hmmm the closest thign I can think of is that I want morrowind online with sieging and other player built structures. That's what I want. And the quests can be taken out, that's fine.
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
my 2 cents .. again on the same topic, but different thread.. lol
I gave up on MMO's as have all my friends.. SWTOR was our last chance and it failed miserably.. We've played since the launch of EQ, and got our feet wet with AD&D in the 80's.. The desire to play a fantasy RPG came and gone based on the new defintion of a mmorpg.. It has changed since the begining.. What we have now is static themepark rides of predeitermined destiny... Are the characters we play in today's games OURS, or are we repeating someone elses ideas? I never played AD&D or EQ to relive someone else's story, that is what single rpg games or for like Dragon Age and Skyrim.. I honestly don't see anything coming down the pipe that interest me..
Where are the days when our choices of actions effect our characters? I should have the ability to ally or kill any npc target in the game if I"m willing to live the consequenses of my actions.. If I want to camp city guards and destroy my reputation, while earning rep with the bandits, that should be MY option.. The last game that gave me that option was EQ.. BTW.. I never did reach level cap in AD&D in all the years I played it.. hmmmmmmm Something to think about.. I played for the fun of the content, not the artifical number next to "Level"..