Originally posted by VengeSunsoar The old ones were done for profit too. If ea and sony did not think they would get a profit from uo or eq they would not have developed those games.
They were done for profit, but it wasn't scrutinized over like it is today. There were at best small small marketing teams. Since the idea of MMO was new the main pressure was to just produce the game. It wasn't to produce a game that would maximize profits and scrutinize over every little thing in games (micro transactions). The only fee was for maintaining the servers and paying for an expansion here and there. Now there are whole teams of people and computer programs that gather information on what will manipulate people into spending more money. It is vastly different.
I have never once used my imagination during a video game, I am playing a structured scripted experience limited by the mechanics set forth by the developers no matter what I imagine it is still limited by what they permit you to do. I have yet to see a true virtual world where players can impact it on any significant way.
There's quite a few of them. I'd love to trust you but data shows otherwise.
How many well-know, mass-market MMOs are on that list? How many poorly made F2P asian cash-grabs, pay-to-win games are on the list? Where is your data showing that these games failed because they did not cater to gamer demands and not because their were cheaply/badly made?
Yes, there are games that die because developers fail to read it's player base (SWG case in point), but some fail because they have a great idea that appeals to a certain gamer type but are poorly executed (Vanguard case in point).
Also illustrates what a poor grasp most people have on data, statistics and root cause analysis.
I am familiar with some of the games in that list, and they were very sandbox style games that allowed or were going to allow a great deal of player freedom and ability to make changes to the world.
Where they well made though? How was the actual execution? You can't blindly say freedom and sandbox = success and not mention the actual execution. Case in point, Mortal Online. On paper this game should have been a huge hit and what the sandbox crowd has been wanting all this years. The problem? Well just go to the forums and see for yourself...
Again, no one is stating no game had failed due to a dev misreading the target player base. All I am saying it is ridiculous to say all MMO are failures because they don't cater to a particular playstyle like some one here seem to constantly preach. Real life is rarely so absolute or easy...
I would agree that a game's success has as much or more to do with executing the game's ideals as it does the ideals themselves. Obviously just being a sandbox game is not a recipe for success, otherwise those sandbox games wouldn't not be on that list of closed games. Neither is just being a theme park game. It is more complicated than that.
Take a fact, such as "MMORPGs have had to close", and then take that to mean "an MMORPG style that I don't like is constantly failing". Never mind that games will be closed, not launch, lose funding, etc. as a normal process of the video game industry. Never mind that the games that closed are not representative of the MMORPG style that is being questioned. Never mind that the MMORPG style that is being questioned has games that have been running for seven years or more. Never mind all that, just assume that a style of game "I" don't like is a failure. That's this thread.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Fenrir767 I have never once used my imagination during a video game, I am playing a structured scripted experience limited by the mechanics set forth by the developers no matter what I imagine it is still limited by what they permit you to do. I have yet to see a true virtual world where players can impact it on any significant way.
I think you fail to see that if you don't have a structured path anything is possible in your mind. You don't need to use tools to create something. You can create it in your mind. The video game is just fuel for the fire. It helps you to get there.
I would say that if it weren't for the nerdy and fanatical players of the past that we wouldn't see the mass market MMOs of today. It was the most nerdy and fanatical ones that got into creating games and eventually creating MMOs. I think a lot of those people are now being filtered out or controlled by corporations. The big thing these days is how to design a game to maximize profit. In the beginning of MMOs it was wow maybe we can bring some of these awesome worlds that we love to real life and live in them! It's a very different mentality by the creators of the games.
It's not a conspiracy and it's not rocket science. There just aren't that many of those nerdy, fanatical players*.
**
*Relative to gamers in general or MMORPG gamers in general.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I don't fail to see it, I don't agree with your POV every game in existence had some kind if structure especially video games and if I am going to use my imagination I will go and use it to create something that is not limited by someone else's imagination. Or I will find a pen and paper ruleset that allows me to create my own rules and world.
Imagining something within someone's limitations is pointless in my opinion and currently I see very few gamers if any besides yourself that feel otherwise.
EQ was a themepark. What kind of freedom did you have? You needed levels to go to new zones, e.g. tons of gated content. No freedom whatsoever. I guess you can choose which mob camp to farm for 10 hours but yeah, it is very themeparky.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I had an idea of a game that was a virtual world, where every player had the chance to do anything they wanted to do. I played runescape and everquest and I loved it... the freedom to do anything, to get stronger and try to see new areas and explore new things, are what really drew me in and made me want to play. The worlds were dangerous also, if you made mistakes you could die and it sort of felt like the world didn't care about your existence.
You see, the thing is, there are a LOT of playerswho don't share your ideas on what an mmo should be and who would never play the game you describe.
That is why games are where they are now. Because the majority of players seem to want "a game". One where they can spend some time and then move on to the next "game".
Not a virtual world, not a virtual "home".
That is why they "fail" (if they can be said to truly fail. Quite frankly, if a game stays in business then that seems like a success to me). Because players don't want to stay in these games and want to move on.
Heck, there are a plethora of players on this site who approach games like this.
The problem with this line of thinking is that most mmo's are terrible games. If you played them offline they wouldn't actually be fun to play. In addition, most mmos you have to pay a lot more for. Why do people spend so much on f2p mmo's just for a few more stats? It's because when you get to the core, why people are complaining about mmos on these boards constantly, is because they're looking for a different sort of experience from regular games when they play an mmo. I have normal games I play, like league of legends. I find it fun. I don't find wow fun anymore. I don't find eso fun. I don't find any mmo fun anymore where I start at level 1 and have to do some useless quest. It's boring.
What makes me come back to mmos, to even give them a try, is because when you've experienced a true "world" it's good. When you're part of a community, competing and working together while you build something or try to accomplish something it's fun. This is what brings me back. Also all the exploration from original eq and trying to navigate difficult dungeons with a group brings me back.
It's not about being a "game" or a "home" or whatever. It is about being fun. Old mmos were fun because of the ability to explore and interact with others and achieve. New mmos fail at this for me for all reasons stated. When theres zero challenge, zero excitement factor, no social interaction, there's nothing there that I find fun.
I fall into the other category that most people that played old school MMOs fell into, games like SWG and EQ I played for a month it was cool started to feel like work and quit. New MMOs are targeting that kind if gamer the one that was never satisfied by the old types of games and there are more if us than those that loved them.
Originally posted by fivoroth EQ was a themepark. What kind of freedom did you have? You needed levels to go to new zones, e.g. tons of gated content. No freedom whatsoever. I guess you can choose which mob camp to farm for 10 hours but yeah, it is very themeparky.
Eq is a themepark. I know you were being sarcastic here, but this is exactly it when you get down to it. In eq, there are so many different camps at each level. Some are good for certain parties, some for solo, some for specific classes, etc. Some for veterans, some for noobs. There were literally so many different options on what to level on. The game never makes it clear on what you're supposed to do. But this is what gives you freedom. There is no right or wrong way to play eq. One person might power level on the best camps to 60. Another might only group in obscure locations. Someone else might just want to solo easy mobs.
When you do a quest, it tells you exactly how much time to spend at each location. Once you kill 10 wolves, you will never need to kill those wolves again. But even still, when you're questing you know you can't make mistakes. You're basically on autopilot following what the game tells you to do. Some games even use auto pathing so you literally just click and move to the location automatically and back. It is almost like just doing boring tasks... there's no decision making,
I had an idea of a game that was a virtual world, where every player had the chance to do anything they wanted to do. I played runescape and everquest and I loved it... the freedom to do anything, to get stronger and try to see new areas and explore new things, are what really drew me in and made me want to play. The worlds were dangerous also, if you made mistakes you could die and it sort of felt like the world didn't care about your existence.
You see, the thing is, there are a LOT of playerswho don't share your ideas on what an mmo should be and who would never play the game you describe.
That is why games are where they are now. Because the majority of players seem to want "a game". One where they can spend some time and then move on to the next "game".
Not a virtual world, not a virtual "home".
That is why they "fail" (if they can be said to truly fail. Quite frankly, if a game stays in business then that seems like a success to me). Because players don't want to stay in these games and want to move on.
Heck, there are a plethora of players on this site who approach games like this.
The problem with this line of thinking is that most mmo's are terrible games. If you played them offline they wouldn't actually be fun to play. In addition, most mmos you have to pay a lot more for. Why do people spend so much on f2p mmo's just for a few more stats? It's because when you get to the core, why people are complaining about mmos on these boards constantly, is because they're looking for a different sort of experience from regular games when they play an mmo. I have normal games I play, like league of legends. I find it fun. I don't find wow fun anymore. I don't find eso fun. I don't find any mmo fun anymore where I start at level 1 and have to do some useless quest. It's boring.
What makes me come back to mmos, to even give them a try, is because when you've experienced a true "world" it's good. When you're part of a community, competing and working together while you build something or try to accomplish something it's fun. This is what brings me back. Also all the exploration from original eq and trying to navigate difficult dungeons with a group brings me back.
It's not about being a "game" or a "home" or whatever. It is about being fun. Old mmos were fun because of the ability to explore and interact with others and achieve. New mmos fail at this for me for all reasons stated. When theres zero challenge, zero excitement factor, no social interaction, there's nothing there that I find fun.
Based on what? Your definition of good? The jaded vet demographic on this site? A national survey conducted by a reputable polling firm?
And why do you feel you have to pay more in today's MMOs? The sub model is till at $15 or so? No one if forcing you to spend a dime on a F2P game or did I miss something?
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Originally posted by Horusra @vengeSunsoar...I will tell van Gogh he failed because he did not finacially support himself.
When an MMORPG is brought back a decade, or two decades after it sunsets, and is as popular or more popular as it was at release, then we can make comparisons between MMORPGs and Art, Star Trek the original series, etc.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
There's quite a few of them. I'd love to trust you but data shows otherwise.
Knowing what people want and being able to deliver it in a complete, quality package are not necessarily the same thing. The forum clowns that say the only thing preventing them from making the perfect MMO is money are the most laughable example of how that important distinction is lost on a lot of gamers.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Fenrir767 I have never once used my imagination during a video game, I am playing a structured scripted experience limited by the mechanics set forth by the developers no matter what I imagine it is still limited by what they permit you to do. I have yet to see a true virtual world where players can impact it on any significant way.
I think you fail to see that if you don't have a structured path anything is possible in your mind. You don't need to use tools to create something. You can create it in your mind. The video game is just fuel for the fire. It helps you to get there.
"anything is possible" is not entertaining to me. A well scripted experience is. Just like a movie .. i can imagine what the Avengers will do .. but it is a hell lots more than to see Joss Whedon's version .. and that is why I paid good money for it.
I had an idea of a game that was a virtual world, where every player had the chance to do anything they wanted to do. I played runescape and everquest and I loved it... the freedom to do anything, to get stronger and try to see new areas and explore new things, are what really drew me in and made me want to play. The worlds were dangerous also, if you made mistakes you could die and it sort of felt like the world didn't care about your existence.
You see, the thing is, there are a LOT of playerswho don't share your ideas on what an mmo should be and who would never play the game you describe.
That is why games are where they are now. Because the majority of players seem to want "a game". One where they can spend some time and then move on to the next "game".
Not a virtual world, not a virtual "home".
That is why they "fail" (if they can be said to truly fail. Quite frankly, if a game stays in business then that seems like a success to me). Because players don't want to stay in these games and want to move on.
Heck, there are a plethora of players on this site who approach games like this.
The problem with this line of thinking is that most mmo's are terrible games. If you played them offline they wouldn't actually be fun to play. In addition, most mmos you have to pay a lot more for. Why do people spend so much on f2p mmo's just for a few more stats? It's because when you get to the core, why people are complaining about mmos on these boards constantly, is because they're looking for a different sort of experience from regular games when they play an mmo. I have normal games I play, like league of legends. I find it fun. I don't find wow fun anymore. I don't find eso fun. I don't find any mmo fun anymore where I start at level 1 and have to do some useless quest. It's boring.
What makes me come back to mmos, to even give them a try, is because when you've experienced a true "world" it's good. When you're part of a community, competing and working together while you build something or try to accomplish something it's fun. This is what brings me back. Also all the exploration from original eq and trying to navigate difficult dungeons with a group brings me back.
It's not about being a "game" or a "home" or whatever. It is about being fun. Old mmos were fun because of the ability to explore and interact with others and achieve. New mmos fail at this for me for all reasons stated. When theres zero challenge, zero excitement factor, no social interaction, there's nothing there that I find fun.
I'm going to point again to what I already wrote.
You see, all this is you. Of course.
But the reality is that people ARE finding these games "fun" in their own way and are willing to play them and don't care about them being a world.
the people who are complaining want to see a world but in no way are these people in the majority any more.
What is seems to be is that the mmo experience is a "buy/log in for a bit/hit level cap and enjoy a few things, a few new people/move along" experience.
Now, you may not like this but it seems there are a lot of people who do.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
There's quite a few of them. I'd love to trust you but data shows otherwise.
Knowing what people want and being able to deliver it in a complete, quality package are not necessarily the same thing. The forum clowns that say the only thing preventing them from making the perfect MMO is money are the most laughable example of how that important distinction is lost on a lot of gamers.
Plus, no one ways every devs know .. just enough of them.
Plus, who says the market cannot change its mind? May be the projects are started long ago, and the market no longer wants it.
Originally posted by fivoroth EQ was a themepark. What kind of freedom did you have? You needed levels to go to new zones, e.g. tons of gated content. No freedom whatsoever. I guess you can choose which mob camp to farm for 10 hours but yeah, it is very themeparky.
Eq is a themepark. I know you were being sarcastic here, but this is exactly it when you get down to it. In eq, there are so many different camps at each level. Some are good for certain parties, some for solo, some for specific classes, etc. Some for veterans, some for noobs. There were literally so many different options on what to level on. The game never makes it clear on what you're supposed to do.
You're supposed to kill stuff and level til you puke. You fight mob tier A until you outlevel it, fight mob tier b til you outlevel it, mob tier c, d, e... repeat until cap. At cap, you fight the same nine things over and over in hopes of getting to participate in the argument over who gets the rare trinket.
If you look at only the EQ/WOW-style MMOs, EQ looks like a game with a lot of freedom. If you look at MMOs as a whole, EQ is just another race/class-restricted, level-based graphical dikuMUD variant.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You're supposed to kill stuff and level til you puke. You fight mob tier A until you outlevel it, fight mob tier b til you outlevel it, mob tier c, d, e... repeat until cap. At cap, you fight the same nine things over and over in hopes of getting to participate in the argument over who gets the rare trinket.
And for that game, i would much rather play Diablo 3. The combat is a lot more fun. There are more mob types. The loot is random so you can gear up a long long time. There is no loot argument.
And the best part .. you don't have to deal with strangers if you don't want to.
Comments
They were done for profit, but it wasn't scrutinized over like it is today. There were at best small small marketing teams. Since the idea of MMO was new the main pressure was to just produce the game. It wasn't to produce a game that would maximize profits and scrutinize over every little thing in games (micro transactions). The only fee was for maintaining the servers and paying for an expansion here and there. Now there are whole teams of people and computer programs that gather information on what will manipulate people into spending more money. It is vastly different.
Imo it isn't that different from today.
I would agree that a game's success has as much or more to do with executing the game's ideals as it does the ideals themselves. Obviously just being a sandbox game is not a recipe for success, otherwise those sandbox games wouldn't not be on that list of closed games. Neither is just being a theme park game. It is more complicated than that.
Take a fact, such as "MMORPGs have had to close", and then take that to mean "an MMORPG style that I don't like is constantly failing". Never mind that games will be closed, not launch, lose funding, etc. as a normal process of the video game industry. Never mind that the games that closed are not representative of the MMORPG style that is being questioned. Never mind that the MMORPG style that is being questioned has games that have been running for seven years or more. Never mind all that, just assume that a style of game "I" don't like is a failure. That's this thread.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I think you fail to see that if you don't have a structured path anything is possible in your mind. You don't need to use tools to create something. You can create it in your mind. The video game is just fuel for the fire. It helps you to get there.
It's not a conspiracy and it's not rocket science. There just aren't that many of those nerdy, fanatical players*.
**
*Relative to gamers in general or MMORPG gamers in general.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Imagining something within someone's limitations is pointless in my opinion and currently I see very few gamers if any besides yourself that feel otherwise.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
The problem with this line of thinking is that most mmo's are terrible games. If you played them offline they wouldn't actually be fun to play. In addition, most mmos you have to pay a lot more for. Why do people spend so much on f2p mmo's just for a few more stats? It's because when you get to the core, why people are complaining about mmos on these boards constantly, is because they're looking for a different sort of experience from regular games when they play an mmo. I have normal games I play, like league of legends. I find it fun. I don't find wow fun anymore. I don't find eso fun. I don't find any mmo fun anymore where I start at level 1 and have to do some useless quest. It's boring.
What makes me come back to mmos, to even give them a try, is because when you've experienced a true "world" it's good. When you're part of a community, competing and working together while you build something or try to accomplish something it's fun. This is what brings me back. Also all the exploration from original eq and trying to navigate difficult dungeons with a group brings me back.
It's not about being a "game" or a "home" or whatever. It is about being fun. Old mmos were fun because of the ability to explore and interact with others and achieve. New mmos fail at this for me for all reasons stated. When theres zero challenge, zero excitement factor, no social interaction, there's nothing there that I find fun.
Eq is a themepark. I know you were being sarcastic here, but this is exactly it when you get down to it. In eq, there are so many different camps at each level. Some are good for certain parties, some for solo, some for specific classes, etc. Some for veterans, some for noobs. There were literally so many different options on what to level on. The game never makes it clear on what you're supposed to do. But this is what gives you freedom. There is no right or wrong way to play eq. One person might power level on the best camps to 60. Another might only group in obscure locations. Someone else might just want to solo easy mobs.
When you do a quest, it tells you exactly how much time to spend at each location. Once you kill 10 wolves, you will never need to kill those wolves again. But even still, when you're questing you know you can't make mistakes. You're basically on autopilot following what the game tells you to do. Some games even use auto pathing so you literally just click and move to the location automatically and back. It is almost like just doing boring tasks... there's no decision making,
Based on what? Your definition of good? The jaded vet demographic on this site? A national survey conducted by a reputable polling firm?
And why do you feel you have to pay more in today's MMOs? The sub model is till at $15 or so? No one if forcing you to spend a dime on a F2P game or did I miss something?
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
When an MMORPG is brought back a decade, or two decades after it sunsets, and is as popular or more popular as it was at release, then we can make comparisons between MMORPGs and Art, Star Trek the original series, etc.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Knowing what people want and being able to deliver it in a complete, quality package are not necessarily the same thing. The forum clowns that say the only thing preventing them from making the perfect MMO is money are the most laughable example of how that important distinction is lost on a lot of gamers.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
"anything is possible" is not entertaining to me. A well scripted experience is. Just like a movie .. i can imagine what the Avengers will do .. but it is a hell lots more than to see Joss Whedon's version .. and that is why I paid good money for it.
I'm going to point again to what I already wrote.
You see, all this is you. Of course.
But the reality is that people ARE finding these games "fun" in their own way and are willing to play them and don't care about them being a world.
the people who are complaining want to see a world but in no way are these people in the majority any more.
What is seems to be is that the mmo experience is a "buy/log in for a bit/hit level cap and enjoy a few things, a few new people/move along" experience.
Now, you may not like this but it seems there are a lot of people who do.
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
Plus, no one ways every devs know .. just enough of them.
Plus, who says the market cannot change its mind? May be the projects are started long ago, and the market no longer wants it.
You're supposed to kill stuff and level til you puke. You fight mob tier A until you outlevel it, fight mob tier b til you outlevel it, mob tier c, d, e... repeat until cap. At cap, you fight the same nine things over and over in hopes of getting to participate in the argument over who gets the rare trinket.
If you look at only the EQ/WOW-style MMOs, EQ looks like a game with a lot of freedom. If you look at MMOs as a whole, EQ is just another race/class-restricted, level-based graphical dikuMUD variant.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
And for that game, i would much rather play Diablo 3. The combat is a lot more fun. There are more mob types. The loot is random so you can gear up a long long time. There is no loot argument.
And the best part .. you don't have to deal with strangers if you don't want to.
Right on every point.
Devs don’t get what an MMO means.
It means player interactions.
Politics between players.
Reputation with players.
Familiar faces.
Familiar guilds.
and persistence.
We want worlds, not scripted single player games.
The way mmo's were: Community, Exploration, Character Development, Conquest.
The way mmo's are now : Cut-Scenes,Cut-Scenes, solo Questing, Cut-Scenes...
www.CeaselessGuild.com