I may be blind, but I have a hard time thinking of a truly BAD MMO that has come out in past years.
Rift's setting and art style was a bit to bland for my tastes, but, save for some optimization issues, played fine for the average themepark, and the multiple souls and specs were a very nice touch.
I loved TOR up until endgame, I raided with my guild and then I was done with it. No bitterness there, I found the game very fun for the time I played it.
GW2, great game, great value, I just, after playing it for a while, realized i really perfered the trinity system. Lack of progression hurts it for me too, but thats not why everyone plays. I know lots of people who like it.
EvE is fantastic at what they want the game to do, and what its meant to be. I just dont like sandbox that much, still gonna give star citizen a shot though.
Defiance was really the only truly disapointing game in recent memory, for me. The landmass was way to small vs what I was expecting, and nearly zero progression.
The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.
The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?
In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.
I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.
There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions.
EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.
No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.
can you provide a link for that number please? I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).
Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....
Almost every MMO is a financial 'success' - Its that the companies are not satisfied as they are chasing WOW numbers. Very rarely do MMOs fail and most make money. In any business this is considered a total success. To run in the Black. The problem is (another analogy- sorry) the guy running the mom and pop cafe isnt happy unless hes making the same profit the Mcdonalds is thats located off the highway-
If we gauge success as having to be in the same arena as "Wow" (which is what most companies think) there will never be a success again more likely than not- Nor will there be real innovation.
TSW was a bit innovative but flawed (and evident it was going to go F2P) and Rift was a WOW clone with its own flavor (and was/is decent enough)- Both of these games I am sure are financial successes. Maybe not to the point the suits in the boardroom demand.
EDIT_ Even Ultima Online is a subscription only game and still making mney with no development over 16 years after launch. Paid for probably a million times over and still running. But the numbers would never be "good enough" for a new MMO since they do not gauge success on profit but rather expectations that are based off of WOW in an oversaturated market of (mostly) clones and reskins.
Edit... reneg.... Yeah, you're right. I shouldn't say "financial success" because if these games weren't making any money they we wouldn't be seeing them churned out so quickly. I actually like your analogy better.
The main point I was trying to get at was that we punish the people who try to do new things, so you'll never see those shops running on shoestring budgets making games that are innovative.
BTW, it's showing support for games like Shards Online that will change the industry, it won't be the overseas dev shops or the AAA publishers. It's all about the indies! Seriously, go back that damn game! It's what you say you want!
BTW, it's showing support for games like Shards Online that will change the industry, it won't be the overseas dev shops or the AAA publishers. It's all about the indies! Seriously, go back that damn game! It's what you say you want!
The game i want probably cant be made for a couple million bucks
The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.
The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?
In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.
I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.
There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions.
EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.
No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.
can you provide a link for that number please? I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).
Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....
I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change. The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical. These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.
The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do. If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.
Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games.
We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change. The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical. These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.
The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do. If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.
Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games.
We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.
People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.
FYI, Bound by Flame actually ran numerous advertisements on MMORPG.com and they got a 4.5. So :P
I'd actually like to see the people with gripes write a good, non-biased review. To say that ESO is a bad game is ridiculous. You have to weight reviews appropriately, and it's not often all about how much someone enjoyed it over another, it's having a common yardstick. Likes/Not Likes should stick to Facebook.
I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change. The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical. These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.
The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do. If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.
Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games.
We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.
People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.
The companies don't change their behavior and practice because the people are spending money WHILE being cynical and skeptical. It's like deep down we all have some glimmer of hope that we're wrong but know the reality is we'll be let down but we'll risk it. I blame this on the developers as well, with their vague marketing, half truths, magic bean selling, P.R. powered Q&A sessions, and home cooking with media outlets *cough*mmorpg.com*cough*.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
And one more time MMORPG.com attempts to defend a major advertiser...
...by blaming the customers for the poor quality of the product? Again?
I suspect most of us are less concerned about how feature rich a new MMORPG may be than we are concerned that the "promised" features actually work. Consider: Who sets up players' expectations?
--The developers.
--The marketers.
--Their advertisements (aka paid reviews).
--Their shils in the forums.
--Their promises of great and wonderful things that are new and unique so we should spend our money on their product and not on someone else's product.
Do the players force these "expectations" onto the developers? No. So, when the players experience something that doesn't meet expectations, whose fault is it?
MMORPG.com continues to lose what little credibility it has left with these repeated attempts to rationalize a bad product. ESO could have been a great game, but it isn't. ZOS didn't listen to its testers. ZOS didn't get a clue from the massive cancellation of pre-orders after the open Beta sessions. ZOS hasn't gotten a clue from the massive cancellation of subscriptions.
ZOS built up player expectations with a whole lot of marketing hype and then didn't deliver on the product they promised.
FACT: That is not their customers' fault.
Very solid post.
I second that. Awesome post!
Not to pick on any one post in particular but quoting these in particular to illustrate the mentality of people on this site that leads to the “poisoning of the well”. Posts like these ignore the fact that to many people, the games in question are an entertaining past-time that is worth the cost. Doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree that a game is worthwhile but the acidic vitriol that is spewed in this sites comment section in a daily basis is the real reason this site has lost any credibility with most of the gaming community. In fact, mention MMORPG.com in most game world chat and the overwhelming consensus is that it is a home for the angry, jaded old vets that hate… well pretty much every MMO released in the last 5 years. Sadly, I agree with them.
No one (at least not anyone with any maturity) is saying people have to like every game that comes out. But posters kind of lose any credibility when:
· Their post history has them bashing EVERY MMO in current release.
· Flaming one game as the reason MMOs are in decline and ridiculing said games supporters but on the same breath, rabidly defending the game(s) they like and labeling every negative poster as “troll” or “hater.”
· Rabidly decry a game but admit to have never played it.
· Calls themselves fans of the genre but admit to hate every modern MMO and admit they haven’t played an MMO in over 5 years but oddly still log over a hundred posts a month on a site dedicated to MMOs…
Dislike a game all you want. Discuss (notice this is different that troll) the merits/flaws of a game to your heart contents. Just remember:
· Be civil. Most of us on this site are here because we like MMOs. We may not agree on which ones are good/bad but we agree that we like the genre.
· These are games. Maintain a little perspective and realize that because a dev releases a game you loathe, the sky is not falling and it is not the end of the world or civilization as we know it.
· Anonymity is not free license to act like a douche. If you wouldn’t say something to someone’s face, maybe it shouldn’t be posted online under an anonymous façade.
· Did I mention this are just games?
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change. The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical. These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.
The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do. If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.
Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games.
We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.
People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.
The companies don't change their behavior and practice because the people are spending money WHILE being cynical and skeptical. It's like deep down we all have some glimmer of hope that we're wrong but know the reality is we'll be let down but we'll risk it. I blame this on the developers as well, with their vague marketing, half truths, magic bean selling, P.R. powered Q&A sessions, and home cooking with media outlets *cough*mmorpg.com*cough*.
Yeah, if I was Spiders and gave MMORPG so much money (for real), only for MMORPG to turn around and give me a bad review, I'd be seriously pissed. /sarcasm
Write a post about truth in media, have it censored or removed. I wish I could make this shit up.
Good work.
Well if it's truth then back it up with facts. You do an awful lot of talking about journalistic integrity, but do nothing to substantiate your facts the way you supposedly want journalists to.
Feature creep can kill a well intended game and poorly implemented features are a double curse because they frustrate the user and steal resources from other areas of development. Vanguard is a good example of a game probably killed by it's overly ambitious feature list. I think it's ok to have a game that launches with a short feature list as long as the devs are clear about what features they intend to amend to the game after launch, and whether those features will be free or part of a paid expansion and whether or not they have a defined time table.
Players want features but they also want quality. Unfortunately only the largest developers can usually deliver on both. And some games from huge developers only gained most of their features over several expansions and others games are now forced to launch with those features to compete. I have a new car to sell you, it has no stereo, no power windows, no gps, no cruise control, and only comes in one color, but it's a ton of fun to drive, has a powerful engine, has no miles, and will take you anywhere. Would you buy it?
In short, gamers should probably shorten their list of must have features, but insist those be implemented flawlessly and devs should hold back the tide of hype and feature creep, but be open to adding features alongside content as the community consensus dictates. Be aware though that some features cannot/should not be tacked on after the fact (PvP, seamless world, crafting) but others can be (mounts, naval combat, housing, etc.,).
The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.
The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?
In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.
I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.
There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions.
EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.
No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.
can you provide a link for that number please? I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).
Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....
It was ridiculous of him to ask for one as this very site had a huge news article about the amount of money micro transactions make in games. I think SWTOR was 7th and wow 6th All the games above them where pure F2P games without subbs , so yes at the end of 2013 SWTOR made the most money for a western MMO with a subb other than WOW , fact. Next time tell him don't be lazy and keep up with the times that was 2013 and we are almost half way through 2014.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing. "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13 The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
This thread is both hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
First off, the article was not written by Bill Murphy or Mike B or Suzie Ford. its written by a freelance contributor who does columns about the social and community aspects of MMORPGs. Shes not out to sell games or inform us on games, just to discuss community aspects of MMORPGs. Furthermore, its a COMMON opinion to like ESO. It might or might not be the majority opinion, but a LOT of people feel the way she does about the game: it has flaws but its more good than bad and its an enjoyable game. She certainly did not give the game a ringing endorsement and draws attention to the fact a lot of people dont like it. It doesnt read like a pro ESO article to me at all.
And her points are clearly valid given the response in this thread.
People talk about developers and publishers and their evils, but as someone who has been in the genre since 2000 I can say the biggest negative change is the player base. There is a portion of the player base that is loud, rude, and devoid of logic and common sense. That portion is significantly more noticeable than it was in the early days of the genre.
As an example of what developers have to deal with:
two of the major criticisms agains Rift at release were tiny world and leveling was too fast. They tried to fix that with Storm Legion. And now everyone screams that its grindy with wasted space. Now Trion didn't knock it out of the park with the zone design in SL, but they are NEVER given credit for doing what people asked for. Myself included, as i said Im part of the problem and I am especially hard on Trion (mostly because I feel rift is so close to being a great MMORPG yet so far, for me). But people will always harp on the negatives and usually take the positives for granted.
ESO is one of the few games to move away from three tree progression (even ArcheAge sticks to three trees), contains open world dungeons (yet people want to harp on how quest caves are reused), is generally considered a great looking game (this takes up tons of resources), has a good story...yet if someone likes it its an offense to mankind?
This thread is both hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
First off, the article was not written by Bill Murphy or Mike B or Suzie Ford. its written by a freelance contributor who does columns about the social and community aspects of MMORPGs. Shes not out to sell games or inform us on games, just to discuss community aspects of MMORPGs. Furthermore, its a COMMON opinion to like ESO. It might or might not be the majority opinion, but a LOT of people feel the way she does about the game: it has flaws but its more good than bad and its an enjoyable game. She certainly did not give the game a ringing endorsement and draws attention to the fact a lot of people dont like it. It doesnt read like a pro ESO article to me at all.
And her points are clearly valid given the response in this thread............
So what you meant to say is that the Social and Community freelance writer for MMORPG.com should have had an entire article about how non social and community broken Phased questing is in an AAA multimillion dollar MMO released in 2014 is and how it is unacceptable.................right?
So if I write about how I like a game, I'm a "fanboy".
If I write about how I dislike a game, I'm a "hater".
Now if I write any criticism about a game, I'm "poisoning the well".
What can I write on a game forum that does not get me branded somehow?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
MMORPGs have come a long way from the time when choices were few and the announcement of a new game was something people generally got excited over. These days, it seems like the announcement of a game in development is opening the gates for an mass game of ‘let’s predict what will go wrong with this project before it even launches’. While there’s nothing wrong with discussion or debate, the rise in social media and various platforms granting voices to the community seems to have also led to a sour edge to it all.
very single minded of you.. its this mentality thats aloud the game industry to continue ti produce sub par money grabbing products with no inovation... almost all new games in the last 10 years ag the same thing!! are you sure your enjoying the games you play ?? i know im not and i know the majority of the gaming community isnt either.. we need to keep beating games down until developers start thinking about the prodcuct and customer satisfaction once again rather than profits and wallets. the well is just a well.. a pile of bricks stacked up so high with a stagnant pool of water at the bottom. the well is the perfect descripion for the current games market.. identical bricks tightly packed together all holding the same content and product.
Of course I am, otherwise I wouldnt be playing them.
I would love a good PvE sandbox, like SWG but fantasy instead of sci fi. But i am enjoying playing games like EQ2, WoW, and SWTOR and Im very glad all three games exist.
Totally agree with OP, most of the haters as I have stated before, have so many complaints and predict so much doom but at the same time have ALL the answers. There is no way they can enjoy anything and really make themselves miserable in anything they do.
The problem isn't with the games being released. The problem is the vocal minority in the mmorpg community.
These people will never stop poisoning the well because they will never find the perfect game they are looking for.
They generally speaking are miserable and dislike their lives. They seek a game that can replace their life. A game that they can play 24/7 to avoid reality. Any game that can't keep them entertained 24/7 for the rest of their lives will fail.
Comments
I may be blind, but I have a hard time thinking of a truly BAD MMO that has come out in past years.
Rift's setting and art style was a bit to bland for my tastes, but, save for some optimization issues, played fine for the average themepark, and the multiple souls and specs were a very nice touch.
I loved TOR up until endgame, I raided with my guild and then I was done with it. No bitterness there, I found the game very fun for the time I played it.
GW2, great game, great value, I just, after playing it for a while, realized i really perfered the trinity system. Lack of progression hurts it for me too, but thats not why everyone plays. I know lots of people who like it.
EvE is fantastic at what they want the game to do, and what its meant to be. I just dont like sandbox that much, still gonna give star citizen a shot though.
Defiance was really the only truly disapointing game in recent memory, for me. The landmass was way to small vs what I was expecting, and nearly zero progression.
So that's a no then?
Edit... reneg.... Yeah, you're right. I shouldn't say "financial success" because if these games weren't making any money they we wouldn't be seeing them churned out so quickly. I actually like your analogy better.
The main point I was trying to get at was that we punish the people who try to do new things, so you'll never see those shops running on shoestring budgets making games that are innovative.
BTW, it's showing support for games like Shards Online that will change the industry, it won't be the overseas dev shops or the AAA publishers. It's all about the indies! Seriously, go back that damn game! It's what you say you want!
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
The game i want probably cant be made for a couple million bucks
there's this one. http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-20-league-of-legends-2013-revenue-topped-USD600m-report
I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change. The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical. These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.
The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do. If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.
Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games.
We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.
FYI, Bound by Flame actually ran numerous advertisements on MMORPG.com and they got a 4.5. So :P
I'd actually like to see the people with gripes write a good, non-biased review. To say that ESO is a bad game is ridiculous. You have to weight reviews appropriately, and it's not often all about how much someone enjoyed it over another, it's having a common yardstick. Likes/Not Likes should stick to Facebook.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
The companies don't change their behavior and practice because the people are spending money WHILE being cynical and skeptical. It's like deep down we all have some glimmer of hope that we're wrong but know the reality is we'll be let down but we'll risk it. I blame this on the developers as well, with their vague marketing, half truths, magic bean selling, P.R. powered Q&A sessions, and home cooking with media outlets *cough*mmorpg.com*cough*.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not to pick on any one post in particular but quoting these in particular to illustrate the mentality of people on this site that leads to the “poisoning of the well”. Posts like these ignore the fact that to many people, the games in question are an entertaining past-time that is worth the cost. Doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree that a game is worthwhile but the acidic vitriol that is spewed in this sites comment section in a daily basis is the real reason this site has lost any credibility with most of the gaming community. In fact, mention MMORPG.com in most game world chat and the overwhelming consensus is that it is a home for the angry, jaded old vets that hate… well pretty much every MMO released in the last 5 years. Sadly, I agree with them.
No one (at least not anyone with any maturity) is saying people have to like every game that comes out. But posters kind of lose any credibility when:
· Their post history has them bashing EVERY MMO in current release.
· Flaming one game as the reason MMOs are in decline and ridiculing said games supporters but on the same breath, rabidly defending the game(s) they like and labeling every negative poster as “troll” or “hater.”
· Rabidly decry a game but admit to have never played it.
· Calls themselves fans of the genre but admit to hate every modern MMO and admit they haven’t played an MMO in over 5 years but oddly still log over a hundred posts a month on a site dedicated to MMOs…
Dislike a game all you want. Discuss (notice this is different that troll) the merits/flaws of a game to your heart contents. Just remember:
· Be civil. Most of us on this site are here because we like MMOs. We may not agree on which ones are good/bad but we agree that we like the genre.
· These are games. Maintain a little perspective and realize that because a dev releases a game you loathe, the sky is not falling and it is not the end of the world or civilization as we know it.
· Anonymity is not free license to act like a douche. If you wouldn’t say something to someone’s face, maybe it shouldn’t be posted online under an anonymous façade.
· Did I mention this are just games?
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Yeah, if I was Spiders and gave MMORPG so much money (for real), only for MMORPG to turn around and give me a bad review, I'd be seriously pissed. /sarcasm
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Write a post about truth in media, have it censored or removed. I wish I could make this shit up.
Good work.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Well if it's truth then back it up with facts. You do an awful lot of talking about journalistic integrity, but do nothing to substantiate your facts the way you supposedly want journalists to.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Feature creep can kill a well intended game and poorly implemented features are a double curse because they frustrate the user and steal resources from other areas of development. Vanguard is a good example of a game probably killed by it's overly ambitious feature list. I think it's ok to have a game that launches with a short feature list as long as the devs are clear about what features they intend to amend to the game after launch, and whether those features will be free or part of a paid expansion and whether or not they have a defined time table.
Players want features but they also want quality. Unfortunately only the largest developers can usually deliver on both. And some games from huge developers only gained most of their features over several expansions and others games are now forced to launch with those features to compete. I have a new car to sell you, it has no stereo, no power windows, no gps, no cruise control, and only comes in one color, but it's a ton of fun to drive, has a powerful engine, has no miles, and will take you anywhere. Would you buy it?
In short, gamers should probably shorten their list of must have features, but insist those be implemented flawlessly and devs should hold back the tide of hype and feature creep, but be open to adding features alongside content as the community consensus dictates. Be aware though that some features cannot/should not be tacked on after the fact (PvP, seamless world, crafting) but others can be (mounts, naval combat, housing, etc.,).
It was ridiculous of him to ask for one as this very site had a huge news article about the amount of money micro transactions make in games. I think SWTOR was 7th and wow 6th All the games above them where pure F2P games without subbs , so yes at the end of 2013 SWTOR made the most money for a western MMO with a subb other than WOW , fact. Next time tell him don't be lazy and keep up with the times that was 2013 and we are almost half way through 2014.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
This thread is both hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
First off, the article was not written by Bill Murphy or Mike B or Suzie Ford. its written by a freelance contributor who does columns about the social and community aspects of MMORPGs. Shes not out to sell games or inform us on games, just to discuss community aspects of MMORPGs. Furthermore, its a COMMON opinion to like ESO. It might or might not be the majority opinion, but a LOT of people feel the way she does about the game: it has flaws but its more good than bad and its an enjoyable game. She certainly did not give the game a ringing endorsement and draws attention to the fact a lot of people dont like it. It doesnt read like a pro ESO article to me at all.
And her points are clearly valid given the response in this thread.
People talk about developers and publishers and their evils, but as someone who has been in the genre since 2000 I can say the biggest negative change is the player base. There is a portion of the player base that is loud, rude, and devoid of logic and common sense. That portion is significantly more noticeable than it was in the early days of the genre.
As an example of what developers have to deal with:
two of the major criticisms agains Rift at release were tiny world and leveling was too fast. They tried to fix that with Storm Legion. And now everyone screams that its grindy with wasted space. Now Trion didn't knock it out of the park with the zone design in SL, but they are NEVER given credit for doing what people asked for. Myself included, as i said Im part of the problem and I am especially hard on Trion (mostly because I feel rift is so close to being a great MMORPG yet so far, for me). But people will always harp on the negatives and usually take the positives for granted.
ESO is one of the few games to move away from three tree progression (even ArcheAge sticks to three trees), contains open world dungeons (yet people want to harp on how quest caves are reused), is generally considered a great looking game (this takes up tons of resources), has a good story...yet if someone likes it its an offense to mankind?
So what you meant to say is that the Social and Community freelance writer for MMORPG.com should have had an entire article about how non social and community broken Phased questing is in an AAA multimillion dollar MMO released in 2014 is and how it is unacceptable.................right?
So if I write about how I like a game, I'm a "fanboy".
If I write about how I dislike a game, I'm a "hater".
Now if I write any criticism about a game, I'm "poisoning the well".
What can I write on a game forum that does not get me branded somehow?
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
very single minded of you.. its this mentality thats aloud the game industry to continue ti produce sub par money grabbing products with no inovation... almost all new games in the last 10 years ag the same thing!! are you sure your enjoying the games you play ?? i know im not and i know the majority of the gaming community isnt either.. we need to keep beating games down until developers start thinking about the prodcuct and customer satisfaction once again rather than profits and wallets. the well is just a well.. a pile of bricks stacked up so high with a stagnant pool of water at the bottom. the well is the perfect descripion for the current games market.. identical bricks tightly packed together all holding the same content and product.
Of course I am, otherwise I wouldnt be playing them.
I would love a good PvE sandbox, like SWG but fantasy instead of sci fi. But i am enjoying playing games like EQ2, WoW, and SWTOR and Im very glad all three games exist.
The problem isn't with the games being released. The problem is the vocal minority in the mmorpg community.
These people will never stop poisoning the well because they will never find the perfect game they are looking for.
They generally speaking are miserable and dislike their lives. They seek a game that can replace their life. A game that they can play 24/7 to avoid reality. Any game that can't keep them entertained 24/7 for the rest of their lives will fail.