I started playing Mortal Online just over a month ago. It is so refreshing to see something different to the run of the mill theme park games which are in abundance. I've sunk many hours into this game now and still thoroughly enjoying it. Many of the bugs have been sorted out and any that still exist have not hindered my gaming experience at all.
Of the 9 friends who joined me, 5 have not only stayed with the game they are now paying for the subscription. I too have started paying a monthly subscription and feel it is totally worth paying for. I haven't enjoyed an MMO this much in years.
I can see that this game would not appeal to everyone but I feel that the game is not getting the visibility so that people who would enjoy it get the chance to.
I only stumbled across the game through a forum of another game and if I had read most of the Mortal Online forum posts on MMO sites, they are so negative I probably would not have even tried it.
I'd suggest to anyone who wants to try something different to give this game a go. It has a permanent free trial which will show new players enough of the game to determine if they want to keep playing.
Welcome to MMORPG.COM
Sorry but your story just doesn't ring true to me. IMHO sounds like a blatant viral marketing first time post. The games retention rate is not even a fraction of what you claim to have experienced. Not saying it's impossible for your personal experience but I honestly think that if you take the "Forum Accts" that Henrick touts and compare it to the actual active player base you end up with something like 0.5% retention.
Good luck though. Hope you find happiness in MO or whatever game you play in the future.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Just because I don't post doesn't mean I've not been around for years. I've got extensive gaming experience in MMO's spanning the last 13 years (longer if you include MUDs) and played well over 50 MMO's (including many BETA tests).
Everyone has a view. My points should not be discounted just because I don't splatter my thoughts opening regularly on forums.
Sure, it shows the company not doing well and since they're not advertising the only way new people hear about it is through word of mouth and through forums such as this.
Even with all the negativity in forums like this, new people are trying Mortal Online and enjoying it. People want something different which is apparent from not only the people I've introduced to the game but the number of people talking on the in-game help chat. That is my point. Too little too late, perhaps but the Developers are still heavily involved in the game and working on many improvements.
Game released over 3 years ago and the CEO brags about 191,000 forum users. The game didn't fail because of lack of interest or not enough people knowing about it. The game failed because tons of people looking for a sandbox or the spiritual successor to UO tried it, and soon left because it failed to deliver.
They have had to let almost all of their staff go... so to expect much in the way of improvement is unlikely.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I see this 3 year thing quoted a lot, and yes the game has had a very wobbly start and most games would have closed their doors well before now but it is still going. MO went free trial late November 2013 allowing for people to actually try the game for free. This has helped bring in new players.
I hope things turn around for the company. We'll all have to see what happens. It would be very interesting to see what would happen to the population if it did go Green light since to this point there has really been no advertising but I won't be holding my breath.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore. No, it doesn't appeal to everyone because game is crap, not because it is too hardcore. The fact that someone still manages to enjoy it despite all glaring flaws does not make an argument, just shows that people are desperate for anything that resembles a sandbox. There are plenty of hardcore sandbox fans out there, who now ditched MO and follow more promising titles coming up.
Thankfully, there are lots of promising hybrids coming up, which do not boast being themeparks or sandboxes, but instead take best from both worlds. Games such as Archeage and Black Desert, which realized that good design is not real life imitation.
I see this 3 year thing quoted a lot, and yes the game has had a very wobbly start and most games would have closed their doors well before now but it is still going. MO went free trial late November 2013 allowing for people to actually try the game for free. This has helped bring in new players.
I hope things turn around for the company. We'll all have to see what happens. It would be very interesting to see what would happen to the population if it did go Green light since to this point there has really been no advertising but I won't be holding my breath.
How can you talk about things that you wouldnt know, since you started playing 1 month ago? Oh you
Seriously guys, I'm not a viral Marketer... Look how long I've been a member here for. Since 2008!!... I just feel passionate about the game.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I didn't realise this was an MO hate forum. There are two sides to the story but anyone that mentions they like the game gets slapped down.
This is very poor form guys.
I'm simply saying I've enjoyed playing this game and there are a lot of new players trying it.
I don't understand why I'm being personally attacked here. There were 3 pages bagging MO before I reluctantly tried to show another side.
Very dissapointed to see how little value you are adding to the discussion.
I see this 3 year thing quoted a lot, and yes the game has had a very wobbly start and most games would have closed their doors well before now but it is still going. MO went free trial late November 2013 allowing for people to actually try the game for free. This has helped bring in new players.
I hope things turn around for the company. We'll all have to see what happens. It would be very interesting to see what would happen to the population if it did go Green light since to this point there has really been no advertising but I won't be holding my breath.
How can you talk about things that you wouldnt know, since you started playing 1 month ago? Oh you
Simple. I did my research. Feel free to check my facts.
EDIT: adding.... and if you haven't played it in the last month, then you should try it again before you bag me as there have been a number of patches which have addressed issues which has made the game quite playable now.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore. No, it doesn't appeal to everyone because game is crap, not because it is too hardcore. The fact that someone still manages to enjoy it despite all glaring flaws does not make an argument, just shows that people are desperate for anything that resembles a sandbox. There are plenty of hardcore sandbox fans out there, who now ditched MO and follow more promising titles coming up.
Thankfully, there are lots of promising hybrids coming up, which do not boast being themeparks or sandboxes, but instead take best from both worlds. Games such as Archeage and Black Desert, which realized that good design is not real life imitation.
Unfortunately even if this game was completely bug free, this style of game will only ever target the minority of MMOers, based on the number of themepark style, time=win games the majority want an easy game. What I've seen from games like Shadowbane, Wizardry and even Darkfall, the numbers are much lower than the Everquest / WoW style games.
Saying you think a game is "crap" doesn't really explain anything. All it says is that the game didn't appeal to you.
I agree, I am desperate for a true sandbox experience and Mortal Online is the closest thing to that at the moment. I accept that the game has glitches but I haven't noticed many and my gaming sessions have not been compromised.
I too am looking forward to what is around the corner but I will be using Mortal Onlines design as my measuring stick.
Unfortunately even if this game was completely bug free, this style of game will only ever target the minority of MMOers, based on the number of themepark style, time=win games the majority want an easy game. What I've seen from games like Shadowbane, Wizardry and even Darkfall, the numbers are much lower than the Everquest / WoW style games.
Once again, you are confusing cause and effect. The reason the sandbox games are as unpopular as they are now (note: I am not saying they can beat WoW, but they surely can do better than the current numbers) is not because they are so niche. It is because the current options to choose from crap. Objectively speaking, the game design, the features, the quality of the games is crap. They are unnecessary complex, bugged and user unfriendly. Want a good example of a sandbox? Minecraft. It is as simple at its core as a game can be, yet possibilities are unlimited. There is PvP, PvE, crafting, whatever you wish for with some mods. Sure, it doesn't look nearly as pretty, nor is it overly realistic, but I dare you to name me ONE thing you cant do in MO but not in Minecraft (with mods). Sandbox can go mainstream, it just needs to be well designed.
If we are to have this discussion, can we please agree that us not playing the games in questions has nothing to do (at least for me, and I believe many others on this forum) with them being too niche or hardcore, I don't play them because they are poorly designed, bugged piles of crap. Simple as that.
Of course the number of players in such games will be lower than WoW, but at this point the audience matured enough to devour a well made sandbox. The sandbox fans numbers will always remain in minority (as does the "pro gamers" numbers), but there are lot more of those out there, waiting for a decent title. Sadly, there is no such available. The fact that you, and a handful of others, decided to endure the bugs and downsides of MO just to have something that remotely represents your ideal game does not mean that it is objectively a good game.
I am not saying that you can't enjoy MO. You can enjoy whatever you want, but in the end it is still a crappy game. Sure, me calling it for crap is not exactly helpful. But I dont really want to go on in details about all crappy mechanics the game features, such as wasteful choice of useful combinations in their "sandbox" systems, poor PvP design or bad tech. If the game was "bug free", fix its broken and overly complex features, and adjust PvP systems, people would love it. It wouldn't reach status of WoW, of course (nothing can atm), but you bet it would do a lot better than it does currently. In the beginning, people were excited about MO and its "hardcore" features. People left not because it was too niche, but because the game and the company behind it were crap. And don't even get me started on SV, how they lied, tricked and cheated their userbase. Or the corrupted GMs. Even if they polish the game up, I would not return, I think, because I despise everything SV stands for.
My point? IT BEING NICHE IS NOT A FREAKING EXCUSE. If they delivered a bug free version of heir original promises, people would love it.
Simple. I did my research. Feel free to check my facts.
EDIT: adding.... and if you haven't played it in the last month, then you should try it again before you bag me as there have been a number of patches which have addressed issues which has made the game quite playable now.
I see. Allow me to tell you though that if you havent being around MO for long time as many of us did its very difficult for you to imagine all the uncomfortable occasions that SV lead its supporters into.
No i havent tried the game for months. And thanks but no thanks for the suggestion. I ve heard the exact same thing (after recent patches MO is playable) so many times that i cant even remember. Will not gamble again with an unstable installation and spend many many hours to install MO again. After 3 and a bit more years in and out of the game i have come to the concusion that the game is a mess and the company behind it appart from the fact that they have terrible ways, no planning at all, they didnt stick to their vision, they totaly lack the manpower, the skills and the education to develope a somehow playable and decent game they are just "hungry for money" amateurs that dont hesitate at all to lie, deceive and manipulate their playerbase just to grab a few coins and keep a small playerbase under "custody"
Remember my first month i was excited as you say you are right now. But since then i gaved the game so many chances and unfortunatelly things didnt got any better. Some random improvements here and there but the major problems were still there and i m afraid that still are.Like it or not though this game has as a side effect to burn its playerbase. And remember my words cause once you go into more depth regarding the mechanics and the way that people abusing them, you will realize that SV is the biggest griefer among the ones that exploiting their own game and they simply dont give a damn. Once you realize that several days even months of playtime may vanish into thin air not cause of other players (which is acceptable in an open world full loot pvp game) but due to bugs and unprofessionalism, you will start to see things differently. Once you see your ingame friends and all the people -friends and foes- that you enjoyed playing with leaving the game cause of the exact same reasons that are SV fails not to repeat, then pls come back and we may discuss about how playable MO is.
No personnal "baging" is intended but between you and me, admiting that you play 1 month the game and having referrences about the disasterous release and the (god should make it) f2p model that happened several months ago, doesnt make sense to me. You wouldnt possibly know how the population was before the f2p model as you dont have the slightest idea about the population charging in game to check every major patch that was supposed to revolutionarize MO and the servers being empty after a few days, cause SV was failing each single bloody time to deliver and the game was unplayable for several months after.
Only a few percentage of the people that using MO forums are "wow audience". The rest of us we re praying for a decent sandbox that we can get our hands on. And my friend MO is not even close to decent. Thats not debatable and in any case its not a matter of personnal taste. Its a fact proved by the 10ths of thousand people that came, saw and left due to the poor state of the game and SV's bad ways of practise. There are ofc many many more valid arguments that have being said for many many times and theres no need to repeat them each time that a MO fan or a SV's employe comes in these forums and sais the usual crap: MO is back on track, population is booming, latest patches made MO an AAA title, half assed features will be focused to make them working and functional, new revolutionary AI is on the way, nodeline issues are not an issue anymore, prediction is better than ever, exploiters are geting punished, MO's source code is a masterpiece, servers are stable, large scale pvp is smooth, no game crashes, developement is fast, stable and patches are frequent.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore.
That has always been the first rule of How To Market a Poorly Designed Game.
And the sniff "at least we're better than those guys" is all that drives and holds together certain communities.
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.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore.
That has always been the first rule of How To Market a Poorly Designed Game.
And the sniff "at least we're better than those guys" is all that drives and holds together certain communities.
I've been absent from the thread a while, before the tangent Toferio and others have gone off on propagates any futher i'd like to point out:
The argument that the game is "hardcore" and that it doesn't appeal to everyone is somehow a good thing is an argument invented within this thread by those who do not like the game.
Us proponents of the game did not make this argument. Someone within the thread that was not us "defenders of MO" invented the argument and then argued against it in an effort to look correct.
It is easy to be correct if one gets to define the argument of the opposing side for them rather than speak to what was actually said. It can "win" arguments on the internet at times, but it is poor form and does more harm to real discussion than good.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore.
That has always been the first rule of How To Market a Poorly Designed Game.
And the sniff "at least we're better than those guys" is all that drives and holds together certain communities.
I've been absent from the thread a while, before the tangent Toferio and others have gone off on propagates any futher i'd like to point out:
The argument that the game is "hardcore" and that it doesn't appeal to everyone is somehow a good thing is an argument invented within this thread by those who do not like the game.
I was referring to the general attitude I see so often from the defenders of the game, who claim MO doesn't have more players because it is so unique, niche and hardcore for your average MMO player. The kind of attitude I saw in following posts of yours:
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
These types of games aren't for everyone.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
It is also a difficult game with very few accessibility features and because of this and several other things many people just do not like it and that is fine.
As I said, my statement was not directed to you exclusively, but the general attitude of many MO players as a whole I've seen on these boards. MO is not a "difficult" game, it is unnecessarily complex and user unfriendly, poor design of which shuns many players away. Somehow, you make it sound like it is good and intended design. It isn't, they just can't do any better. But hey, that's just me, I may have misunderstood you. I firmly believe that a game like MO could get a lot more players if it didn't fail at its basic, which is why I disagree with any hint of "it is too niche/hard" argument.
I was referring to the general attitude I see so often from the defenders of the game, who claim MO doesn't have more players because it is so unique, niche and hardcore for your average MMO player. The kind of attitude I saw in following posts of yours:
As I said, my statement was not directed to you exclusively, but the general attitude of many MO players as a whole I've seen on these boards. MO is not a "difficult" game, it is unnecessarily complex and user unfriendly, poor design of which shuns many players away. Somehow, you make it sound like it is good and intended design. It isn't, they just can't do any better. But hey, that's just me, I may have misunderstood you. I firmly believe that a game like MO could get a lot more players if it didn't fail at its basic, which is why I disagree with any hint of "it is too niche/hard" argument.
Referring to general attitudes isn't productive if those attitudes aren't being expressed within the thread. It sort of derails the conversation, especially when as I pointed out it does so in a way that makes your side of the fence look more enlightened.
I do feel MO is a "difficult" game compared to many others. Its fine if you disagree but neither of us are really going to prove our viewpoint nor would it be productive to attempt to do so.
I also feel it is more time consuming and requires more effort on the part of the player than many other games like WOW and Neverwinter where one can just log in, get something done, and log off the game whenever they feel like it with no adverse consequences. That sort of thing suits someone who has a lot of responsibilities, children, multiple or demanding jobs, a demanding social life, etc.. MO is not as well suited to that type of player.
Mortal Online itself can be a lot of work, and people who aren't playing games to do work are often going to be turned off by it.
To say that the game can be difficult, time consuming, and rewarding in a way that is different from other games in the genre does not make any statement that the game is better than any other. To say that very few of us within the gaming community enjoy this sort of thing does not make any statement that we are better than any other gamers. If anyone has inferred that from any statement made here that is a personal problem within themselves.
The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure. That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist. Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.
The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure. That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist. Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.
There is no illogic here. The game has nearly 200,000 forum members. That is a number that is touted by the CEO. That is around 200,000 people who actually cared enough to make a forum account. A much larger number have obviously looked at the game but not made an account. Compare that number to the amount of active players. That's going to result in a rate of something like 0.5%.
By your reasoning, simply because SOMEONE... SOMEWHERE likes a game, that game should get more exposure because it's obvious that not EVERYONE hates it. From my perspective, THAT is an illigical statement.
Your arguments regarding exposure have been made many times in the past by other advocates of the company. Each time they had a spike in player base which quickly reverted back as people left. For example go and look up the posts related to the Dawn expansion, the Awakening expansion, the initial free trial, the subsequent F2P (misnomer) announcement, their "EPIC PATCH" numbers one and 2, and their facebook promotion. Many of these received promotions on major sites like MMORPG.COM and MASSIVELY.COM
There have also been reviews, re-reviews, play blogs and more published on those same sites...
Mortal Online did not fail because it lacked exposure. It failed because it was a bad game created by a company that was in over it's head, blatantly over promised and under delivered, and behaved in a manner which many found to be shady.
If Mortal Online is eventually Greenlit (and I do believe that eventually the game will be as I cannot understand how a game that is released 3+ years is excluded) you will once again see a short rise in population followed by a return to normal. This is what history has shown us. Absolutely nothing in the official financial reports released by the company would lead us to believe that Steam Greenlight would be any different from the prior instances of publicity.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
1 - You don't have any actual reliable data on what the present user retention rates would be.
2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something. Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.
That is where you are being illogical and you have failed to show otherwise.
1 - You don't have any actual reliable data on what the present user retention rates would be.
2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something. Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.
That is where you are being illogical and you have failed to show otherwise.
I'm obviously not going to convince one as passionate about the game as yourself, but I am quite content that 99 of every 100 people will understand what I said. I have no need to convince you. I will happilly watch the Steam Greenlight situation as either outcome provides ongoing entertainment for me.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Referring to general attitudes isn't productive if those attitudes aren't being expressed within the thread. It sort of derails the conversation, especially when as I pointed out it does so in a way that makes your side of the fence look more enlightened.
And as I pointed out, I referred to said attitude only because I felt your posts implied it, not for the sake of derailing the conversation.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
I also feel it is more time consuming and requires more effort on the part of the player than many other games like WOW and Neverwinter where one can just log in, get something done, and log off the game whenever they feel like it with no adverse consequences. That sort of thing suits someone who has a lot of responsibilities, children, multiple or demanding jobs, a demanding social life, etc.. MO is not as well suited to that type of player.
To say that the game can be difficult, time consuming, and rewarding in a way that is different from other games in the genre does not make any statement that the game is better than any other. To say that very few of us within the gaming community enjoy this sort of thing does not make any statement that we are better than any other gamers. If anyone has inferred that from any statement made here that is a personal problem within themselves.
It is, imho, a false sense of complexity and forced time waste. The game is time consuming because it is based around grind, not because it is rich on content and depth. The complexity is there just or the sake of it, 99% of crafted items are completely useless. It is time consuming because you have to grind gear every time you die, not because it is challenging.
Let's take WoW, which you mention, as a example. For the sake of argument I am going to ignore the recent expansion, to show what I consider "meaningful" time consumption. Let's examine raids. I don't need to mention the whole gear preparation and gearing up, because processes are similar in both games (even if in WoW it takes skill to acquire gear, while in MO it takes grind, and by skill I mean teamplay PvE). The raids alone take days and days of team effort to progress and clear, which is, imho, a much more meaningful time invested rather than skill and material grind in MO.
I am not saying all that to claim either of the games is better than other, but to show that both games are time consuming, but MO in what I feel a meaningless way. I don't understand (if that's what you implied) how the feeling of having something done when you log out is bad, it should be a must in every game.
Sure, MO is a huge timesink. I agree that it doesn't suit your casual WoW player. Where I disagree, however, is that it could be designed to be much less of a time waste and still retain its core sandbox gameplay.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
None of that really matters as:
2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something. Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.
Incorrect. Just apply the logic you mention so much to figure out why, but I will explain my point of view. If MO "succeeds" (which is a very subjective term, but let's skip that discussion), it would show other developers that it is okay to release a shitty product (again, subjective, let's move on as I am merely explaining a personal PoV), to lie and cheat your playerbase (this is not even subjective, but facts), to never deliver on your promises and still success at being a game developer. MO is a bad example, and new developers following same path is what we, as players, have to lose rom it. You are desperate enough for sandbox games so you won't care, I think, but I do not want such practice to become standard. This is not even about MO, but about SV.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure. That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist. Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.
The game doesn't deserve more exposure. It can earn more exposure by showing itself to be a good or innovative product to enough people on Steam. What the people who currently play the game think of it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that you like it. It only matters what the people who use Steam think of it. Starvault deliberately chose a small niche game play style. Well surprise, there aren't that many people on Steam who want to play a game based on Starvault's vision, even without knowing the game's history.
As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You really should take my statements literally as they are said and not infer anything from them. If I want to convey any implication I will state it explicitly within the text. It is too easy to misunderstand one another here without assuming meaning other than what is precisely written.
I can't disagree with your statements on WOW and the grind in MO as to how you dislike them. I only disagree that changing the way MO functions could make us both happy. Removing that "grind" as you call it would likely remove a lot of what I enjoy about the game.
I have 4 characters and 3 of them craft. My 4th is only there to gather materials for my other 3. The grind you speak of gearing up is all I do when I play the game. That grind is 100% of my gameplay. My friends also don't really have to grind as they can just tell me they are running low on armor or bows and I will have a shipment over to them.
Maybe the process could be simplified but I don't want it simplified. I enjoy it just as it is. I certainly wouldn't want it more like WOW.
I consider the notion that if MO were to find success would be bad for the genre because it would show devs that we are willing to accept games of this type to be ridiculous. If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. Even moreso, the argument is invalidated by the fact that we all know the game is obviously not ever going to achieve any success by your standards and I never claimed it would or should. SV's practices aren't going to be emulated by any majorly successful company for an extended period and we all know why.
If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation.
I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies.
Originally posted by lizardbones
As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.
Not sure really who thinks that, as Greenlight is shit for a system atm, lots of great games are being ignored.
Originally posted by Toferio Originally posted by RamanadjinnIf the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies. Originally posted by lizardbonesAs far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.
Not sure really who thinks that, as Greenlight is shit for a system atm, lots of great games are being ignored.
If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself.
Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself.
Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.
The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.
The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.
Not all MO fans actually think this way.
I believe if MO were greenlit SV's income would see no dramatic change.
Regardless.. SV is a small company. very small. As such they have a small group mentality and their productiveness isn't limited by their funding alone. And so funding would not necessarily increase their productivity. With extremely small groups at times a large spike in income can have the opposite effect. It sounds like most everyone could agree on this.
I do feel there are more people out there who would enjoy MO if they gave it a chance., but that is hardly a claim that the game is due for some sort of population explosion.
The main disagreement isn't that we feel people are going to flock to the game and love it if they just try it. It is that many of us feel it is a good game that very few people are going to like. You guys can call it crap and fling mud at it, but you're not going to convince us that something we love is crap, nor are you going to prove that it is objectively bad. So we are at a stalemate there.
Comments
Welcome to MMORPG.COM
Sorry but your story just doesn't ring true to me. IMHO sounds like a blatant viral marketing first time post. The games retention rate is not even a fraction of what you claim to have experienced. Not saying it's impossible for your personal experience but I honestly think that if you take the "Forum Accts" that Henrick touts and compare it to the actual active player base you end up with something like 0.5% retention.
Good luck though. Hope you find happiness in MO or whatever game you play in the future.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Just because I don't post doesn't mean I've not been around for years. I've got extensive gaming experience in MMO's spanning the last 13 years (longer if you include MUDs) and played well over 50 MMO's (including many BETA tests).
Everyone has a view. My points should not be discounted just because I don't splatter my thoughts opening regularly on forums.
Sure, it shows the company not doing well and since they're not advertising the only way new people hear about it is through word of mouth and through forums such as this.
Even with all the negativity in forums like this, new people are trying Mortal Online and enjoying it. People want something different which is apparent from not only the people I've introduced to the game but the number of people talking on the in-game help chat. That is my point. Too little too late, perhaps but the Developers are still heavily involved in the game and working on many improvements.
Game released over 3 years ago and the CEO brags about 191,000 forum users. The game didn't fail because of lack of interest or not enough people knowing about it. The game failed because tons of people looking for a sandbox or the spiritual successor to UO tried it, and soon left because it failed to deliver.
They have had to let almost all of their staff go... so to expect much in the way of improvement is unlikely.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I see this 3 year thing quoted a lot, and yes the game has had a very wobbly start and most games would have closed their doors well before now but it is still going. MO went free trial late November 2013 allowing for people to actually try the game for free. This has helped bring in new players.
I hope things turn around for the company. We'll all have to see what happens. It would be very interesting to see what would happen to the population if it did go Green light since to this point there has really been no advertising but I won't be holding my breath.
It is amusing seeing defenders of MO twist the "it doesn't appeal to everyone" argument into a positive thing, as the game is too hardcore. No, it doesn't appeal to everyone because game is crap, not because it is too hardcore. The fact that someone still manages to enjoy it despite all glaring flaws does not make an argument, just shows that people are desperate for anything that resembles a sandbox. There are plenty of hardcore sandbox fans out there, who now ditched MO and follow more promising titles coming up.
Thankfully, there are lots of promising hybrids coming up, which do not boast being themeparks or sandboxes, but instead take best from both worlds. Games such as Archeage and Black Desert, which realized that good design is not real life imitation.
How can you talk about things that you wouldnt know, since you started playing 1 month ago? Oh you
Seriously guys, I'm not a viral Marketer... Look how long I've been a member here for. Since 2008!!... I just feel passionate about the game.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I didn't realise this was an MO hate forum. There are two sides to the story but anyone that mentions they like the game gets slapped down.
This is very poor form guys.
I'm simply saying I've enjoyed playing this game and there are a lot of new players trying it.
I don't understand why I'm being personally attacked here. There were 3 pages bagging MO before I reluctantly tried to show another side.
Very dissapointed to see how little value you are adding to the discussion.
Simple. I did my research. Feel free to check my facts.
EDIT: adding.... and if you haven't played it in the last month, then you should try it again before you bag me as there have been a number of patches which have addressed issues which has made the game quite playable now.
Unfortunately even if this game was completely bug free, this style of game will only ever target the minority of MMOers, based on the number of themepark style, time=win games the majority want an easy game. What I've seen from games like Shadowbane, Wizardry and even Darkfall, the numbers are much lower than the Everquest / WoW style games.
Saying you think a game is "crap" doesn't really explain anything. All it says is that the game didn't appeal to you.
I agree, I am desperate for a true sandbox experience and Mortal Online is the closest thing to that at the moment. I accept that the game has glitches but I haven't noticed many and my gaming sessions have not been compromised.
I too am looking forward to what is around the corner but I will be using Mortal Onlines design as my measuring stick.
Once again, you are confusing cause and effect. The reason the sandbox games are as unpopular as they are now (note: I am not saying they can beat WoW, but they surely can do better than the current numbers) is not because they are so niche. It is because the current options to choose from crap. Objectively speaking, the game design, the features, the quality of the games is crap. They are unnecessary complex, bugged and user unfriendly. Want a good example of a sandbox? Minecraft. It is as simple at its core as a game can be, yet possibilities are unlimited. There is PvP, PvE, crafting, whatever you wish for with some mods. Sure, it doesn't look nearly as pretty, nor is it overly realistic, but I dare you to name me ONE thing you cant do in MO but not in Minecraft (with mods). Sandbox can go mainstream, it just needs to be well designed.
If we are to have this discussion, can we please agree that us not playing the games in questions has nothing to do (at least for me, and I believe many others on this forum) with them being too niche or hardcore, I don't play them because they are poorly designed, bugged piles of crap. Simple as that.
Of course the number of players in such games will be lower than WoW, but at this point the audience matured enough to devour a well made sandbox. The sandbox fans numbers will always remain in minority (as does the "pro gamers" numbers), but there are lot more of those out there, waiting for a decent title. Sadly, there is no such available. The fact that you, and a handful of others, decided to endure the bugs and downsides of MO just to have something that remotely represents your ideal game does not mean that it is objectively a good game.
I am not saying that you can't enjoy MO. You can enjoy whatever you want, but in the end it is still a crappy game. Sure, me calling it for crap is not exactly helpful. But I dont really want to go on in details about all crappy mechanics the game features, such as wasteful choice of useful combinations in their "sandbox" systems, poor PvP design or bad tech. If the game was "bug free", fix its broken and overly complex features, and adjust PvP systems, people would love it. It wouldn't reach status of WoW, of course (nothing can atm), but you bet it would do a lot better than it does currently. In the beginning, people were excited about MO and its "hardcore" features. People left not because it was too niche, but because the game and the company behind it were crap. And don't even get me started on SV, how they lied, tricked and cheated their userbase. Or the corrupted GMs. Even if they polish the game up, I would not return, I think, because I despise everything SV stands for.
My point? IT BEING NICHE IS NOT A FREAKING EXCUSE. If they delivered a bug free version of heir original promises, people would love it.
I see. Allow me to tell you though that if you havent being around MO for long time as many of us did its very difficult for you to imagine all the uncomfortable occasions that SV lead its supporters into.
No i havent tried the game for months. And thanks but no thanks for the suggestion. I ve heard the exact same thing (after recent patches MO is playable) so many times that i cant even remember. Will not gamble again with an unstable installation and spend many many hours to install MO again. After 3 and a bit more years in and out of the game i have come to the concusion that the game is a mess and the company behind it appart from the fact that they have terrible ways, no planning at all, they didnt stick to their vision, they totaly lack the manpower, the skills and the education to develope a somehow playable and decent game they are just "hungry for money" amateurs that dont hesitate at all to lie, deceive and manipulate their playerbase just to grab a few coins and keep a small playerbase under "custody"
Remember my first month i was excited as you say you are right now. But since then i gaved the game so many chances and unfortunatelly things didnt got any better. Some random improvements here and there but the major problems were still there and i m afraid that still are.Like it or not though this game has as a side effect to burn its playerbase. And remember my words cause once you go into more depth regarding the mechanics and the way that people abusing them, you will realize that SV is the biggest griefer among the ones that exploiting their own game and they simply dont give a damn. Once you realize that several days even months of playtime may vanish into thin air not cause of other players (which is acceptable in an open world full loot pvp game) but due to bugs and unprofessionalism, you will start to see things differently. Once you see your ingame friends and all the people -friends and foes- that you enjoyed playing with leaving the game cause of the exact same reasons that are SV fails not to repeat, then pls come back and we may discuss about how playable MO is.
No personnal "baging" is intended but between you and me, admiting that you play 1 month the game and having referrences about the disasterous release and the (god should make it) f2p model that happened several months ago, doesnt make sense to me. You wouldnt possibly know how the population was before the f2p model as you dont have the slightest idea about the population charging in game to check every major patch that was supposed to revolutionarize MO and the servers being empty after a few days, cause SV was failing each single bloody time to deliver and the game was unplayable for several months after.
Only a few percentage of the people that using MO forums are "wow audience". The rest of us we re praying for a decent sandbox that we can get our hands on. And my friend MO is not even close to decent. Thats not debatable and in any case its not a matter of personnal taste. Its a fact proved by the 10ths of thousand people that came, saw and left due to the poor state of the game and SV's bad ways of practise. There are ofc many many more valid arguments that have being said for many many times and theres no need to repeat them each time that a MO fan or a SV's employe comes in these forums and sais the usual crap: MO is back on track, population is booming, latest patches made MO an AAA title, half assed features will be focused to make them working and functional, new revolutionary AI is on the way, nodeline issues are not an issue anymore, prediction is better than ever, exploiters are geting punished, MO's source code is a masterpiece, servers are stable, large scale pvp is smooth, no game crashes, developement is fast, stable and patches are frequent.
Have a nice day.
That has always been the first rule of How To Market a Poorly Designed Game.
And the sniff "at least we're better than those guys" is all that drives and holds together certain communities.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've been absent from the thread a while, before the tangent Toferio and others have gone off on propagates any futher i'd like to point out:
The argument that the game is "hardcore" and that it doesn't appeal to everyone is somehow a good thing is an argument invented within this thread by those who do not like the game.
Us proponents of the game did not make this argument. Someone within the thread that was not us "defenders of MO" invented the argument and then argued against it in an effort to look correct.
It is easy to be correct if one gets to define the argument of the opposing side for them rather than speak to what was actually said. It can "win" arguments on the internet at times, but it is poor form and does more harm to real discussion than good.
I was referring to the general attitude I see so often from the defenders of the game, who claim MO doesn't have more players because it is so unique, niche and hardcore for your average MMO player. The kind of attitude I saw in following posts of yours:
As I said, my statement was not directed to you exclusively, but the general attitude of many MO players as a whole I've seen on these boards. MO is not a "difficult" game, it is unnecessarily complex and user unfriendly, poor design of which shuns many players away. Somehow, you make it sound like it is good and intended design. It isn't, they just can't do any better. But hey, that's just me, I may have misunderstood you. I firmly believe that a game like MO could get a lot more players if it didn't fail at its basic, which is why I disagree with any hint of "it is too niche/hard" argument.
Referring to general attitudes isn't productive if those attitudes aren't being expressed within the thread. It sort of derails the conversation, especially when as I pointed out it does so in a way that makes your side of the fence look more enlightened.
I do feel MO is a "difficult" game compared to many others. Its fine if you disagree but neither of us are really going to prove our viewpoint nor would it be productive to attempt to do so.
I also feel it is more time consuming and requires more effort on the part of the player than many other games like WOW and Neverwinter where one can just log in, get something done, and log off the game whenever they feel like it with no adverse consequences. That sort of thing suits someone who has a lot of responsibilities, children, multiple or demanding jobs, a demanding social life, etc.. MO is not as well suited to that type of player.
Mortal Online itself can be a lot of work, and people who aren't playing games to do work are often going to be turned off by it.
To say that the game can be difficult, time consuming, and rewarding in a way that is different from other games in the genre does not make any statement that the game is better than any other. To say that very few of us within the gaming community enjoy this sort of thing does not make any statement that we are better than any other gamers. If anyone has inferred that from any statement made here that is a personal problem within themselves.
The only disagreement that matters here, and the key place the opponents are being illogical, is in that many of us feel the game has value and should have more exposure. That a few of us feel this way is evidence fans of the game exist. Therefore it is illogical to say the game should not have more exposure, as even if some individuals hate it, it is clear some portion of the MMO community does not.
There is no illogic here. The game has nearly 200,000 forum members. That is a number that is touted by the CEO. That is around 200,000 people who actually cared enough to make a forum account. A much larger number have obviously looked at the game but not made an account. Compare that number to the amount of active players. That's going to result in a rate of something like 0.5%.
By your reasoning, simply because SOMEONE... SOMEWHERE likes a game, that game should get more exposure because it's obvious that not EVERYONE hates it. From my perspective, THAT is an illigical statement.
Your arguments regarding exposure have been made many times in the past by other advocates of the company. Each time they had a spike in player base which quickly reverted back as people left. For example go and look up the posts related to the Dawn expansion, the Awakening expansion, the initial free trial, the subsequent F2P (misnomer) announcement, their "EPIC PATCH" numbers one and 2, and their facebook promotion. Many of these received promotions on major sites like MMORPG.COM and MASSIVELY.COM
There have also been reviews, re-reviews, play blogs and more published on those same sites...
Mortal Online did not fail because it lacked exposure. It failed because it was a bad game created by a company that was in over it's head, blatantly over promised and under delivered, and behaved in a manner which many found to be shady.
If Mortal Online is eventually Greenlit (and I do believe that eventually the game will be as I cannot understand how a game that is released 3+ years is excluded) you will once again see a short rise in population followed by a return to normal. This is what history has shown us. Absolutely nothing in the official financial reports released by the company would lead us to believe that Steam Greenlight would be any different from the prior instances of publicity.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
None of that really matters as:
1 - You don't have any actual reliable data on what the present user retention rates would be.
2 - You lose nothing from MO having more exposure, while those few individuals who would benefit from it would gain something. Advocating others not be allowed to gain even when there is no loss involved is illogical.
That is where you are being illogical and you have failed to show otherwise.
I'm obviously not going to convince one as passionate about the game as yourself, but I am quite content that 99 of every 100 people will understand what I said. I have no need to convince you. I will happilly watch the Steam Greenlight situation as either outcome provides ongoing entertainment for me.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
And as I pointed out, I referred to said attitude only because I felt your posts implied it, not for the sake of derailing the conversation.
It is, imho, a false sense of complexity and forced time waste. The game is time consuming because it is based around grind, not because it is rich on content and depth. The complexity is there just or the sake of it, 99% of crafted items are completely useless. It is time consuming because you have to grind gear every time you die, not because it is challenging.
Let's take WoW, which you mention, as a example. For the sake of argument I am going to ignore the recent expansion, to show what I consider "meaningful" time consumption. Let's examine raids. I don't need to mention the whole gear preparation and gearing up, because processes are similar in both games (even if in WoW it takes skill to acquire gear, while in MO it takes grind, and by skill I mean teamplay PvE). The raids alone take days and days of team effort to progress and clear, which is, imho, a much more meaningful time invested rather than skill and material grind in MO.
I am not saying all that to claim either of the games is better than other, but to show that both games are time consuming, but MO in what I feel a meaningless way. I don't understand (if that's what you implied) how the feeling of having something done when you log out is bad, it should be a must in every game.
Sure, MO is a huge timesink. I agree that it doesn't suit your casual WoW player. Where I disagree, however, is that it could be designed to be much less of a time waste and still retain its core sandbox gameplay.
Incorrect. Just apply the logic you mention so much to figure out why, but I will explain my point of view. If MO "succeeds" (which is a very subjective term, but let's skip that discussion), it would show other developers that it is okay to release a shitty product (again, subjective, let's move on as I am merely explaining a personal PoV), to lie and cheat your playerbase (this is not even subjective, but facts), to never deliver on your promises and still success at being a game developer. MO is a bad example, and new developers following same path is what we, as players, have to lose rom it. You are desperate enough for sandbox games so you won't care, I think, but I do not want such practice to become standard. This is not even about MO, but about SV.
The game doesn't deserve more exposure. It can earn more exposure by showing itself to be a good or innovative product to enough people on Steam. What the people who currently play the game think of it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that you like it. It only matters what the people who use Steam think of it. Starvault deliberately chose a small niche game play style. Well surprise, there aren't that many people on Steam who want to play a game based on Starvault's vision, even without knowing the game's history.
As far as the attitudes of the people on this forum, MO not getting a Greenlight on Steam (in their mind) justifies their views on MO not being a good game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You really should take my statements literally as they are said and not infer anything from them. If I want to convey any implication I will state it explicitly within the text. It is too easy to misunderstand one another here without assuming meaning other than what is precisely written.
I can't disagree with your statements on WOW and the grind in MO as to how you dislike them. I only disagree that changing the way MO functions could make us both happy. Removing that "grind" as you call it would likely remove a lot of what I enjoy about the game.
I have 4 characters and 3 of them craft. My 4th is only there to gather materials for my other 3. The grind you speak of gearing up is all I do when I play the game. That grind is 100% of my gameplay. My friends also don't really have to grind as they can just tell me they are running low on armor or bows and I will have a shipment over to them.
Maybe the process could be simplified but I don't want it simplified. I enjoy it just as it is. I certainly wouldn't want it more like WOW.
I consider the notion that if MO were to find success would be bad for the genre because it would show devs that we are willing to accept games of this type to be ridiculous. If the game ever finds "success" by your definition your whole argument would be invalid as the game would be a success and worthy of emulation. Even moreso, the argument is invalidated by the fact that we all know the game is obviously not ever going to achieve any success by your standards and I never claimed it would or should. SV's practices aren't going to be emulated by any majorly successful company for an extended period and we all know why.
I.. what? How does that invalidates my argument in any way. That is exactly the issue, if the game is "successful" in its current state, it would be considered worthy of emulation, which is exactly what I am afraid of, SV practices established by new devs. Not that major companies would do it, but the new aspiring indies.
Not sure really who thinks that, as Greenlight is shit for a system atm, lots of great games are being ignored.
If Greenlight is a bad system, why do the people who like MO get so upset when it doesn't get a Greenlight? Why do they argue that MO deserves to get a Greenlight on Steam? Because getting a Greenlight on Steam is a real world indicator of player interest in a game's ideas, if not the game itself.
Games like DOTA2 have half a million concurrent players. The most popular MMORPG on Steam has 2,048 concurrent players. It's Star Trek Online btw. The idea that an MMORPG with a tiny audience is going to get a Greenlight on Steam or that it's going to get significant sales on Steam is ludicrous. There isn't anything about MO + Steam that makes sense.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The answer to your question is really simple. MO fans do actually believe that if MO will get greenlit, SV;s incomes will significally raise and those incomes will be used towards games developement which is ridiculous as we speak. At the same time the same individuals fail to comprehend that even if we double or tripple the current playerbase, it will be very hard for MO to keep the new players ingame cause the game itself is in terrible state. And unfortunatelly i really cannot see SV changing its ways nor drawing a new course since the last 3 years they re repeating the same mistakes over and over again. My guess will be that even if MO gets greenlit and suceeds on getting a larger playerbase and ofc higher incomes, those funds will go in the same bottomless pit that all funds went till this moment we re making this discussion. And i m afraid that this bottomless pit hasnt anything to do with MO's developement or hiring professional developers to do the job that amateurs doing as we speak.
Not all MO fans actually think this way.
I believe if MO were greenlit SV's income would see no dramatic change.
Regardless.. SV is a small company. very small. As such they have a small group mentality and their productiveness isn't limited by their funding alone. And so funding would not necessarily increase their productivity. With extremely small groups at times a large spike in income can have the opposite effect. It sounds like most everyone could agree on this.
I do feel there are more people out there who would enjoy MO if they gave it a chance., but that is hardly a claim that the game is due for some sort of population explosion.
The main disagreement isn't that we feel people are going to flock to the game and love it if they just try it. It is that many of us feel it is a good game that very few people are going to like. You guys can call it crap and fling mud at it, but you're not going to convince us that something we love is crap, nor are you going to prove that it is objectively bad. So we are at a stalemate there.