Players are older and less prone to go on compromises.
Significant part of early adopters and core players are tired of being used - mmorpg's tend to change in order to attract more casual gamers and early ad. and core pl. don't want that anymore.
tl ;dr
Many players want AAA quality AND less mainstream game that more closely fit with their tastes and expectations.
Yah, and theres where disconnect happens, expecting someone to make 100-200 million $$ game tailored to just you and your small niche is.....amusing.
If you have such specific taste, indie developers are all over the place, its always amusing to see certain specific niches whine all over the forums that mainstream games are - mainstream lol
Yes, but players wanting a 100 mln$ + game that targets i.e. (for simplicity sake) long-term ~300k subsription numbers will not go an play indie mmorpg or mainstream one targetted for millions of player mmorpg because those options are not what they want.
Showing them "business realities" won't change anything.
Low-budget indie mmorpg's already have shown that they are not able to attract majority of players who expect AAA quality.
Mainstream tailored for "milllions of players" appeal also shown that they are not able to keep majority of players playing- as those players who are satisfied with mmorpg designed for mass-appeal are mainly playing WoW.
You can not 'reason' with expectations. Expectations can be either fullfilled or not fullfilled, but they cannot be reasoned with. Not when they are about entertainment.
Most of those players will rather not play any mmorpg rather than play game they don't want to. It will become apparent once all those low-budget kickstarter mmorpg's will start to release. They will end-up exactly like current low-budget indie mmorpgs that are on the market atm.
Players are older and less prone to go on compromises.
Significant part of early adopters and core players are tired of being used - mmorpg's tend to change in order to attract more casual gamers and early ad. and core pl. don't want that anymore.
tl ;dr
Many players want AAA quality AND less mainstream game that more closely fit with their tastes and expectations.
Yah, and theres where disconnect happens, expecting someone to make 100-200 million $$ game tailored to just you and your small niche is.....amusing.
If you have such specific taste, indie developers are all over the place, its always amusing to see certain specific niches whine all over the forums that mainstream games are - mainstream lol
But far too many of these $100-200M games that have been done the last 8 years or so have done far below expectations. For every game that do well there are a bunch that do way under the expected numbers of players.
The problem ain't that they are mainstream, it is something very different. Imagine that 99% of all FPS games where WW2 games, that is pretty close to what we have with MMOs.
Players are older and less prone to go on compromises.
Significant part of early adopters and core players are tired of being used - mmorpg's tend to change in order to attract more casual gamers and early ad. and core pl. don't want that anymore.
tl ;dr
Many players want AAA quality AND less mainstream game that more closely fit with their tastes and expectations.
Yah, and theres where disconnect happens, expecting someone to make 100-200 million $$ game tailored to just you and your small niche is.....amusing.
If you have such specific taste, indie developers are all over the place, its always amusing to see certain specific niches whine all over the forums that mainstream games are - mainstream lol
Yes, but players wanting a 100 mln$ + game that targets i.e. (for simplicity sake) long-term ~300k subsription numbers will not go an play indie mmorpg or mainstream one targetted for millions of player mmorpg because those options are not what they want.
Showing them "business realities" won't change anything.
Low-budget indie mmorpg's already have shown that they are not able to attract majority of players who expect AAA quality.
Mainstream tailored for "milllions of players" appeal also shown that they are not able to keep majority of players playing- as those players who are satisfied with mmorpg designed for mass-appeal are mainly playing WoW.
You can not 'reason' with expectations. Expectations can be either fullfilled or not fullfilled, but they cannot be reasoned with. Not when they are about entertainment.
Most of those players will rather not play any mmorpg rather than play game they don't want to. It will become apparent once all those low-budget kickstarter mmorpg's will start to release. They will end-up exactly like current low-budget indie mmorpgs that are on the market atm.
Well, thats on developers to figure out, how to serve their niche with sufficient, notice not AAA, but sufficient qulity. And thats where kickstarter actually comes in, they can get funding, somthing that previous indie developers werent in position to do and it showed in their MMOs.
In any case, indie developers are in much better position now than they were before kickstarter, thats the main difference Its on them to deliver. if you think 70 000 000 $ is low budget....if they screw it up its because they just screwed up, not because it was low budget or kickstarter project.
Single player games yielded quite a few smashing hits and good games (Wasteland 2 for instance) and thats because their projecs were GOOD, so you also have to discern between good and bad project. Even if its "low budget" doesnt necessarily mean its bad product, or if its kickstarter project its by default bad.
Reading your views of game developers is truly cringeworthy - the MMO devs I've met and talked to are incredibly passionate, intelligent and above all creative people.
You're simply mistaken.
I agree with you, the problem comes from the publishing studios who funds the games, not the devs.
I read that when Jeff Strain (WC3, Diablo, GW) pitched his Undead labs he talked with a bunch of publishers and all of them just said that they gladly would hire him and his team but only if they would make something similar to Wow instead of their idea. Fortunatley did Microsoft just look on his resume and gave him the money but when someone who beeen lead designer of games that sold millons of copies still have huge problem you can imagine how it is for the average dev.
And I understand that the publishers want their money back with profit but just remaking the same game over and over is not the best way to achive that, your game actually need to stand out between the hundreds other MMOs if you want to make loads of money.
And many people here assumes the problem is that the games are too casual but while that do lower the potential customer base somewhat (but not as much as focusing on FFA PvP sandbox fans) it is the lack of originality that is the genres big issue now.
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Yeah, for every WoW or GW2, you have half a dozen warhammers, conan, ESO or others... all having to switch to F2P because they failed badly.
The only reason GW2 didn't have to "switch to F2P" is because it came with F2P monetization built-in, lol
Actually, it shouldn't be any surprise that most games are not smash hits. The same thing happens in every branch of the entertainment industry. Not every song reaches number 1 on the charts, not every TV series gets a second season...
For almost a decade now Blizzard have steadfastly resisted the temptation of extracting the maximum profits from WoW. They have refused to convert to F2P. Everybody knows that F2P is more profitable than P2P, we hear it almost every day on these forums. Clearly Blizzard (unlike 99% of other developers) have always refused to exploit their players to the maximum !
Players are older and less prone to go on compromises.
Significant part of early adopters and core players are tired of being used - mmorpg's tend to change in order to attract more casual gamers and early ad. and core pl. don't want that anymore.
tl ;dr
Many players want AAA quality AND less mainstream game that more closely fit with their tastes and expectations.
Yah, and theres where disconnect happens, expecting someone to make 100-200 million $$ game tailored to just you and your small niche is.....amusing.
If you have such specific taste, indie developers are all over the place, its always amusing to see certain specific niches whine all over the forums that mainstream games are - mainstream lol
But far too many of these $100-200M games that have been done the last 8 years or so have done far below expectations. For every game that do well there are a bunch that do way under the expected numbers of players.
The problem ain't that they are mainstream, it is something very different. Imagine that 99% of all FPS games where WW2 games, that is pretty close to what we have with MMOs.
They have done badly and below expectations because their expectations were....retarded, no need to sugar coat it heh
SWTOR and WS had quite different setting than WoW yet it did not help. WS even bragged about not going mainstream but after miniscule niche. Same with SWTOR, their endgame was niche (basically raid or die). Better perspective would be that their "long term game mehanisms that extend gameplay" werent suited for mainstream and were way too niche. When mainstream audience hit those they stopped playing, its quite simple. TSW also tried modern setting, AoC....
But thats going a bit too wide, crux of most complains is not about that, but indeed about mainstream games being mainstream.
if youre going mainstream be sure that you have mainstream retention mechanisms, which most of those games didnt have.
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Yeah, for every WoW or GW2, you have half a dozen warhammers, conan, ESO or others... all having to switch to F2P because they failed badly.
The only reason GW2 didn't have to "switch to F2P" is because it came with F2P monetization built-in, lol
Actually, it shouldn't be any surprise that most games are not smash hits. The same thing happens in every branch of the entertainment industry. Not every song reaches number 1 on the charts, not every TV series gets a second season...
For almost a decade now Blizzard have steadfastly resisted the temptation of extracting the maximum profits from WoW. They have refused to convert to F2P. Everybody knows that F2P is more profitable than P2P, we hear it almost every day on these forums. Clearly Blizzard (unlike 99% of other developers) have always refused to exploit their players to the maximum !
Why in the world would WoW deprive itself from mandatory box+sub when it can have ALL types of monetization built in?
If youre going by WoWs standard games should have:
Players are older and less prone to go on compromises.
Significant part of early adopters and core players are tired of being used - mmorpg's tend to change in order to attract more casual gamers and early ad. and core pl. don't want that anymore.
tl ;dr
Many players want AAA quality AND less mainstream game that more closely fit with their tastes and expectations.
Yah, and theres where disconnect happens, expecting someone to make 100-200 million $$ game tailored to just you and your small niche is.....amusing.
If you have such specific taste, indie developers are all over the place, its always amusing to see certain specific niches whine all over the forums that mainstream games are - mainstream lol
Yes, but players wanting a 100 mln$ + game that targets i.e. (for simplicity sake) long-term ~300k subsription numbers will not go an play indie mmorpg or mainstream one targetted for millions of player mmorpg because those options are not what they want.
Showing them "business realities" won't change anything.
Low-budget indie mmorpg's already have shown that they are not able to attract majority of players who expect AAA quality.
Mainstream tailored for "milllions of players" appeal also shown that they are not able to keep majority of players playing- as those players who are satisfied with mmorpg designed for mass-appeal are mainly playing WoW.
You can not 'reason' with expectations. Expectations can be either fullfilled or not fullfilled, but they cannot be reasoned with. Not when they are about entertainment.
Most of those players will rather not play any mmorpg rather than play game they don't want to. It will become apparent once all those low-budget kickstarter mmorpg's will start to release. They will end-up exactly like current low-budget indie mmorpgs that are on the market atm.
Well, thats on developers to figure out, how to serve their niche with sufficient, notice not AAA, but sufficient qulity. And thats where kickstarter actually comes in, they can get funding, somthing that previous indie developers werent in position to do and it showed in their MMOs.
In any case, indie developers are in much better position now than they were before kickstarter, thats the main difference Its on them to deliver. if you think 70 000 000 $ is low budget....if they screw it up its because they just screwed up, not because it was low budget or kickstarter project.
Single player games yielded quite a few smashing hits and good games (Wasteland 2 for instance) and thats because their projecs were GOOD, so you also have to discern between good and bad project. Even if its "low budget" doesnt necessarily mean its bad product, or if its kickstarter project its by default bad.
Many previous indie MMORPGs did get sizeable funding, often in sizeable amounts (not 70 but still) from private investors or goverment grants. I.e. budget of Darkfall Online if I do remember right was several millions of $ and that was 10 years ago. So all those 500k, 800k, 1mln something $ infusions to Kickstarter MMORPGs today don't really change anything substantially.
As for Star Citizen - that is a diffrent beast. Is it even an MMORPG? Does not seem like it. Is it an MMO or is it is "just" a multiplayer game or maybe is it a new genre? Who knows it seems we'll find out once it will release.
From business point of view it is already a success, Cloud Imperium Games are already running succesful business, making a lot of sales.
As for player reception post-release. I doubt it will be viewed as alternative to "ground based" MMORPGs, I am expecting that players will treat it as something diffrent. I also do expect huge dissapointment outcry once it finally releases, especially from those backers who backed SC at some point but were not following it's developement closely and not riding hype-wave for several years.
As for other Kickstarter project being succesful like several multiplayer and especially single player games like Wasteland 2 you mentioned, and others.
Then sure - I was not commenting about kickstarter in general.
I was saying specifically and only about MMORPGs. Not about any other type of game, single player, multiplayer, online or not.
Personally i'm starved for a quality MMO. I'm definitely starved for something that isn't designed as a single story runthrough with little else to keep it interesting. I'm only playing B2P-ESO because games like Camelot Unchained, Lost Ark, Black Desert and Lineage Eternal is still not released.
I suspect ESO won't keep me interested for too long, which is convenient because Witcher 3 is very likely to do so. Maybe i'm not really starved for games, but the real issue is me being allergic to monetization in modern games.
I see a lot of threads on various gaming forums all exclaiming that MMOs are dying and they use the examples of the recent fail MMO releases of ESO, Wildstar and Archeage to back up their argument. They usually site that these games failed because people just aren't interested in MMOs anymore. But having played each one of these games at launch and spending god knows how much time in que just to play these games near release I'd totally disagree that there is a lack of interest. I mean even WoW a 10 year old game had an unexpected sub bump with their recent release of their new expansion. I remember the devs at Blizzard citing the launch issues that had were due to a huge influx of players that they really didn't account for since interest in the game has been waning the last few years. I think a lot of players flocked backed to WoW because the marketing for the new expansion kind teased a return to the former glory days of BC as well as a lack of new MMO that was actually decent.
So my question is do you think the MMO genre is dying or is it just a sheer lack of innovation that has permeated the market that has made it seem like there is no hope for this genre?
I personally think gamer's are really starved for a new quality MMO and most of the crap we got the last few years has really not been able to deliver.
Yes, your right......Really, your right.
I go even farther and say, mmo players would like an mmo. Not players on your screen.
This has nothing to do with old school thinking, this is what an mmo is. A world made for others to help fill it and work together.
They have done badly and below expectations because their expectations were....retarded, no need to sugar coat it heh
SWTOR and WS had quite different setting than WoW yet it did not help. WS even bragged about not going mainstream but after miniscule niche. Same with SWTOR, their endgame was niche (basically raid or die). Better perspective would be that their "long term game mehanisms that extend gameplay" werent suited for mainstream and were way too niche. When mainstream audience hit those they stopped playing, its quite simple. TSW also tried modern setting, AoC....
But thats going a bit too wide, crux of most complains is not about that, but indeed about mainstream games being mainstream.
if youre going mainstream be sure that you have mainstream retention mechanisms, which most of those games didnt have.
TOR is actually earning a lot of cash nowadays, but for a Star wars game it should probably do better. But the thing with TOR is that it is a very instanced game that focus on the personal story and that do affect the long term playablility somewhat.
But I do agree with you there, the mechanics need to work with the game and trinity combat and raiding endgame doesn't really fit perfectly for a Star wars game. And adding super easy casual gameplay for the open world and as soon as you are top level changing things to hardcore raiding is pretty stupid. That means raiders will be forced to spend 3 weeks in gameplay they hate before starting and casual players have nothing to do at all after a while. And of course this is also a typical example of lack of originality since most games do the same thing here.
But the setting do matter and so do the mechanics of the game and just using the exact same thing as everyone else will mean your game just will go unnoticed as a one of many game.
Some expectations from certain studios were indeed incredible stupid (Warhammers Barnett must have been smoking heavy stuff for thinking he actually would get most of Wows players) but even more realistic ones have not gone as expected.
They have done badly and below expectations because their expectations were....retarded, no need to sugar coat it heh
SWTOR and WS had quite different setting than WoW yet it did not help. WS even bragged about not going mainstream but after miniscule niche. Same with SWTOR, their endgame was niche (basically raid or die). Better perspective would be that their "long term game mehanisms that extend gameplay" werent suited for mainstream and were way too niche. When mainstream audience hit those they stopped playing, its quite simple. TSW also tried modern setting, AoC....
But thats going a bit too wide, crux of most complains is not about that, but indeed about mainstream games being mainstream.
if youre going mainstream be sure that you have mainstream retention mechanisms, which most of those games didnt have.
TOR is actually earning a lot of cash nowadays, but for a Star wars game it should probably do better. But the thing with TOR is that it is a very instanced game that focus on the personal story and that do affect the long term playablility somewhat.
But I do agree with you there, the mechanics need to work with the game and trinity combat and raiding endgame doesn't really fit perfectly for a Star wars game. And adding super easy casual gameplay for the open world and as soon as you are top level changing things to hardcore raiding is pretty stupid. That means raiders will be forced to spend 3 weeks in gameplay they hate before starting and casual players have nothing to do at all after a while. And of course this is also a typical example of lack of originality since most games do the same thing here.
But the setting do matter and so do the mechanics of the game and just using the exact same thing as everyone else will mean your game just will go unnoticed as a one of many game.
Some expectations from certain studios were indeed incredible stupid (Warhammers Barnett must have been smoking heavy stuff for thinking he actually would get most of Wows players) but even more realistic ones have not gone as expected.
If Warhammer didn't have issues with the battles at the fortresses (which was initially HIDDEN by them making the zones very difficult to flip) and if they had a GOOD city defense // sacking system instead of what they had, then Warhammer might have met that vision. Warhammer was a very good game, except for the above and the inbalance between order and chaos. It also initially did pull quite a large number of people from WoW. They went back once they found out about these problems.
I'm not starving for MMOs. My interests have changed enough so that I have no interest in what mmorpgs have to offer. I prever fast-playing pvp matches (genre is not particularly important) without the need to spend large amounts of time preparing for them.
Sounds like some people are starved for friends. So they turn to MMO's like chat rooms use to be. There are plenty of games out there to play. Face it you just do not like them, but that does not mean they are not quality.
Let's see... why are players starved for something new?
Um, because they've played a Paladin or Paladin-like character in every game that has come out? (Insert your favorite class here, because odds are you always play it no matter what title the game is).
Um, because they've acquired gear and replaced gear ad nauseam in every game that has come out?
Um, because they've seen or killed giant scorpions, spiders, rats, bears, yaks, fish, humans, undead, not-so-undead, demons, and dragons ad nauseam in every game that has come out?
Um, because they've wielded a staff, sword, dagger, bow, rifle, shield, mace, gun, or talisman in every game that has come out?
Um, because they have walked, run, rode, flew, teleported, and otherwise propelled through jungles, deserts, mountains, valleys, seas, lunar moon landings, caves, et al in every game that has come out?
Um, because they have done this and so much more so many times over and over again that you can't put a fresh spin on it no matter how hard you try?
Camelot Unchained... more of the same. Black Desert... more of the same. Shroud of the Avatar... more of the same. Insert any game title you've ever wanted to play... more of the same.
Guy's no matter how many times you play chess... it's still chess. You're starved for something new... and as I have said time and again, none of this stuff is new... it's just recycled with a new coat of paint.
I think some games get so big in their goals they forget the basics, make it fun.
One of the most important things i look for is how well the game flows, of the character looks bad in movement or combat, or casting, its not as good an experience. Most games today have spastic looking combat IMO.
Meaningful PvP is a must also, good rewards or at least make sense as to why I want to fight someone. Sandbox pvp usually just ends in grief killing it seems.
I may be alone in this, but 1 thing about the "end game" is that the early game is usually more fun. The end game is over complex sometimes, such as a character with 20 combat skills that you want to use all at the same time, or crowd control just becomes insane at higher lvls.
Anyone else thing early game is more fun than endgame in most cases?
I also think alot of people don't realize these games take a large commitment of time and participation, you get out of it what you put into it. Some games have moved towards que's and instances so players rely on the system to dictate what they do, instead of taking charge, forming groups and making friends instead of being dropped in with some guy you rush through an instance with and won't speak to again unless you get que'd up together. Better access to PUG's helps the casual player, but also hurts the community at the same time i think, it's a catch 22.
Originally posted by Enbysra They may be great at using all the technology, and doing lines upon lines of coding... but they are all engineers, mechanics, specialized in using the tools. There are no seers, no creative-intellectual minds developing worlds, developing stories, developing anything of quality to being truly the art they once were... Masterpieces of their day and age.
Usually most just stop at 'they're lazy', but it's always good to see someone willing to go full retard now and then. Bravo, Enbysra! O7
Truly Lok baby, you should not be so harsh on yourself. I take it you are one of the technology users? The code writers? The "engineers, mechanics or tool specialized"? My condolences, I was not necessarily aiming at your nerves to be struck, but now that they have been...
Reading your views of game developers is truly cringeworthy - the MMO devs I've met and talked to are incredibly passionate, intelligent and above all creative people.
You're simply mistaken.
If I was mistaken, I would have found a single MMORPG to stick with by now... And I should add, "I want to be proven wrong."
Maybe it's you?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
There is a large player base waiting to support games but the idea that is dying is the QUALITY of game design.We still have massive amounts of games coming out,go figure in a time where designing a game is super costly.pretty much proves these are all cheap budget games trying to cash in on any market they see as currently viable.
We just had the Voxel wave,Moba wave,mobile gaming has already been flooded,not sure what's next but i do know it will be a cheap budget game design.
The really sad part is that with such a huge starving player base,tons of horrible game designs are going to get supported and make money.Then because we have so few quality titles Blizzard just keeps getting rich selling anything because,well because they have a following that buys anything they sell and don't care to go outside the box since they know the quality is just the same.
ALl of these games are not designed to be played like a role playing game living out an adventure in a world,they are designed to follow a path,a laid out path that leads them to some weak end game or just pvp.
A good quality design is one that would allow itself to evolve over time,just as we do in real life.In reality these are all single player game designs just adding in internet and that makes for a very shallow MMORPG.I can deliver a decent single player experience and i am sure that is what the majority find satisfying,but you are not getting a role playing game,you are getting around 150-200 hours of game play,then it's over.That is why so many players are just hopping game to game to game and nothing holds any longevity.
I highly doubt we will see any change in development,every dev is looking for the cheapest possible gimmick to make a sell and to do it in as fast a time as possible with as small a team as possible.The formula means there is no possible way to deliver a Triple A game and that is exactly what we have been receiving,games i would rate anywhere from a E>B-.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I see a lot of threads on various gaming forums all exclaiming that MMOs are dying and they use the examples of the recent fail MMO releases of ESO, Wildstar and Archeage to back up their argument. They usually site that these games failed because people just aren't interested in MMOs anymore. But having played each one of these games at launch and spending god knows how much time in que just to play these games near release I'd totally disagree that there is a lack of interest. I mean even WoW a 10 year old game had an unexpected sub bump with their recent release of their new expansion. I remember the devs at Blizzard citing the launch issues that had were due to a huge influx of players that they really didn't account for since interest in the game has been waning the last few years. I think a lot of players flocked backed to WoW because the marketing for the new expansion kind teased a return to the former glory days of BC as well as a lack of new MMO that was actually decent.
So my question is do you think the MMO genre is dying or is it just a sheer lack of innovation that has permeated the market that has made it seem like there is no hope for this genre?
I personally think gamer's are really starved for a new quality MMO and most of the crap we got the last few years has really not been able to deliver.
The people that say this are older players, it's no different than asking an older person what they think of dubstep or something.
I see a lot of threads on various gaming forums all exclaiming that MMOs are dying and they use the examples of the recent fail MMO releases of ESO, Wildstar and Archeage to back up their argument. They usually site that these games failed because people just aren't interested in MMOs anymore. But having played each one of these games at launch and spending god knows how much time in que just to play these games near release I'd totally disagree that there is a lack of interest. I mean even WoW a 10 year old game had an unexpected sub bump with their recent release of their new expansion. I remember the devs at Blizzard citing the launch issues that had were due to a huge influx of players that they really didn't account for since interest in the game has been waning the last few years. I think a lot of players flocked backed to WoW because the marketing for the new expansion kind teased a return to the former glory days of BC as well as a lack of new MMO that was actually decent.
So my question is do you think the MMO genre is dying or is it just a sheer lack of innovation that has permeated the market that has made it seem like there is no hope for this genre?
I personally think gamer's are really starved for a new quality MMO and most of the crap we got the last few years has really not been able to deliver.
The people that say this are older players, it's no different than asking an older person what they think of dubstep or something.
Not all. Some of us oldies do actually enjoy current MMOs. But dubstep does suck
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I am 54 and have no difficulty finding games to play. What is so special about not finding a game to play ,is there a special club of sad gamers who complain about everything and cannot adapt to what is currently available. Please don't give me the "I have higher standards than you ", you're just picky .
Comments
Yes, but players wanting a 100 mln$ + game that targets i.e. (for simplicity sake) long-term ~300k subsription numbers will not go an play indie mmorpg or mainstream one targetted for millions of player mmorpg because those options are not what they want.
Showing them "business realities" won't change anything.
Low-budget indie mmorpg's already have shown that they are not able to attract majority of players who expect AAA quality.
Mainstream tailored for "milllions of players" appeal also shown that they are not able to keep majority of players playing- as those players who are satisfied with mmorpg designed for mass-appeal are mainly playing WoW.
You can not 'reason' with expectations. Expectations can be either fullfilled or not fullfilled, but they cannot be reasoned with. Not when they are about entertainment.
Most of those players will rather not play any mmorpg rather than play game they don't want to. It will become apparent once all those low-budget kickstarter mmorpg's will start to release. They will end-up exactly like current low-budget indie mmorpgs that are on the market atm.
But far too many of these $100-200M games that have been done the last 8 years or so have done far below expectations. For every game that do well there are a bunch that do way under the expected numbers of players.
The problem ain't that they are mainstream, it is something very different. Imagine that 99% of all FPS games where WW2 games, that is pretty close to what we have with MMOs.
Well, thats on developers to figure out, how to serve their niche with sufficient, notice not AAA, but sufficient qulity. And thats where kickstarter actually comes in, they can get funding, somthing that previous indie developers werent in position to do and it showed in their MMOs.
In any case, indie developers are in much better position now than they were before kickstarter, thats the main difference Its on them to deliver. if you think 70 000 000 $ is low budget....if they screw it up its because they just screwed up, not because it was low budget or kickstarter project.
Single player games yielded quite a few smashing hits and good games (Wasteland 2 for instance) and thats because their projecs were GOOD, so you also have to discern between good and bad project. Even if its "low budget" doesnt necessarily mean its bad product, or if its kickstarter project its by default bad.
I agree with you, the problem comes from the publishing studios who funds the games, not the devs.
I read that when Jeff Strain (WC3, Diablo, GW) pitched his Undead labs he talked with a bunch of publishers and all of them just said that they gladly would hire him and his team but only if they would make something similar to Wow instead of their idea. Fortunatley did Microsoft just look on his resume and gave him the money but when someone who beeen lead designer of games that sold millons of copies still have huge problem you can imagine how it is for the average dev.
And I understand that the publishers want their money back with profit but just remaking the same game over and over is not the best way to achive that, your game actually need to stand out between the hundreds other MMOs if you want to make loads of money.
And many people here assumes the problem is that the games are too casual but while that do lower the potential customer base somewhat (but not as much as focusing on FFA PvP sandbox fans) it is the lack of originality that is the genres big issue now.
The only reason GW2 didn't have to "switch to F2P" is because it came with F2P monetization built-in, lol
Actually, it shouldn't be any surprise that most games are not smash hits. The same thing happens in every branch of the entertainment industry. Not every song reaches number 1 on the charts, not every TV series gets a second season...
For almost a decade now Blizzard have steadfastly resisted the temptation of extracting the maximum profits from WoW. They have refused to convert to F2P. Everybody knows that F2P is more profitable than P2P, we hear it almost every day on these forums. Clearly Blizzard (unlike 99% of other developers) have always refused to exploit their players to the maximum !
They have done badly and below expectations because their expectations were....retarded, no need to sugar coat it heh
SWTOR and WS had quite different setting than WoW yet it did not help. WS even bragged about not going mainstream but after miniscule niche. Same with SWTOR, their endgame was niche (basically raid or die). Better perspective would be that their "long term game mehanisms that extend gameplay" werent suited for mainstream and were way too niche. When mainstream audience hit those they stopped playing, its quite simple. TSW also tried modern setting, AoC....
But thats going a bit too wide, crux of most complains is not about that, but indeed about mainstream games being mainstream.
if youre going mainstream be sure that you have mainstream retention mechanisms, which most of those games didnt have.
Why in the world would WoW deprive itself from mandatory box+sub when it can have ALL types of monetization built in?
If youre going by WoWs standard games should have:
box
sub
paid expansions
cash shop
Many previous indie MMORPGs did get sizeable funding, often in sizeable amounts (not 70 but still) from private investors or goverment grants. I.e. budget of Darkfall Online if I do remember right was several millions of $ and that was 10 years ago. So all those 500k, 800k, 1mln something $ infusions to Kickstarter MMORPGs today don't really change anything substantially.
As for Star Citizen - that is a diffrent beast. Is it even an MMORPG? Does not seem like it. Is it an MMO or is it is "just" a multiplayer game or maybe is it a new genre? Who knows it seems we'll find out once it will release.
From business point of view it is already a success, Cloud Imperium Games are already running succesful business, making a lot of sales.
As for player reception post-release. I doubt it will be viewed as alternative to "ground based" MMORPGs, I am expecting that players will treat it as something diffrent. I also do expect huge dissapointment outcry once it finally releases, especially from those backers who backed SC at some point but were not following it's developement closely and not riding hype-wave for several years.
As for other Kickstarter project being succesful like several multiplayer and especially single player games like Wasteland 2 you mentioned, and others.
Then sure - I was not commenting about kickstarter in general.
I was saying specifically and only about MMORPGs. Not about any other type of game, single player, multiplayer, online or not.
Only about MMORPGs specifically.
Personally i'm starved for a quality MMO. I'm definitely starved for something that isn't designed as a single story runthrough with little else to keep it interesting. I'm only playing B2P-ESO because games like Camelot Unchained, Lost Ark, Black Desert and Lineage Eternal is still not released.
I suspect ESO won't keep me interested for too long, which is convenient because Witcher 3 is very likely to do so. Maybe i'm not really starved for games, but the real issue is me being allergic to monetization in modern games.
Yes, your right......Really, your right.
I go even farther and say, mmo players would like an mmo. Not players on your screen.
This has nothing to do with old school thinking, this is what an mmo is. A world made for others to help fill it and work together.
TOR is actually earning a lot of cash nowadays, but for a Star wars game it should probably do better. But the thing with TOR is that it is a very instanced game that focus on the personal story and that do affect the long term playablility somewhat.
But I do agree with you there, the mechanics need to work with the game and trinity combat and raiding endgame doesn't really fit perfectly for a Star wars game. And adding super easy casual gameplay for the open world and as soon as you are top level changing things to hardcore raiding is pretty stupid. That means raiders will be forced to spend 3 weeks in gameplay they hate before starting and casual players have nothing to do at all after a while. And of course this is also a typical example of lack of originality since most games do the same thing here.
But the setting do matter and so do the mechanics of the game and just using the exact same thing as everyone else will mean your game just will go unnoticed as a one of many game.
Some expectations from certain studios were indeed incredible stupid (Warhammers Barnett must have been smoking heavy stuff for thinking he actually would get most of Wows players) but even more realistic ones have not gone as expected.
list of mmo's games are long and if someone can't find good & quality game for play it is not about bad games it is about bad & baby cry players
Personal I don't care for new mmo's , mostly there are not mmo's it is mostly SP co-op games sold as mmo's.
If some game surprised me with fun gameplay ,it is good if not ,it is not big deal .
If Warhammer didn't have issues with the battles at the fortresses (which was initially HIDDEN by them making the zones very difficult to flip) and if they had a GOOD city defense // sacking system instead of what they had, then Warhammer might have met that vision. Warhammer was a very good game, except for the above and the inbalance between order and chaos. It also initially did pull quite a large number of people from WoW. They went back once they found out about these problems.
Let's see... why are players starved for something new?
Um, because they've played a Paladin or Paladin-like character in every game that has come out? (Insert your favorite class here, because odds are you always play it no matter what title the game is).
Um, because they've acquired gear and replaced gear ad nauseam in every game that has come out?
Um, because they've seen or killed giant scorpions, spiders, rats, bears, yaks, fish, humans, undead, not-so-undead, demons, and dragons ad nauseam in every game that has come out?
Um, because they've wielded a staff, sword, dagger, bow, rifle, shield, mace, gun, or talisman in every game that has come out?
Um, because they have walked, run, rode, flew, teleported, and otherwise propelled through jungles, deserts, mountains, valleys, seas, lunar moon landings, caves, et al in every game that has come out?
Um, because they have done this and so much more so many times over and over again that you can't put a fresh spin on it no matter how hard you try?
Camelot Unchained... more of the same. Black Desert... more of the same. Shroud of the Avatar... more of the same. Insert any game title you've ever wanted to play... more of the same.
Guy's no matter how many times you play chess... it's still chess. You're starved for something new... and as I have said time and again, none of this stuff is new... it's just recycled with a new coat of paint.
I think some games get so big in their goals they forget the basics, make it fun.
One of the most important things i look for is how well the game flows, of the character looks bad in movement or combat, or casting, its not as good an experience. Most games today have spastic looking combat IMO.
Meaningful PvP is a must also, good rewards or at least make sense as to why I want to fight someone. Sandbox pvp usually just ends in grief killing it seems.
I may be alone in this, but 1 thing about the "end game" is that the early game is usually more fun. The end game is over complex sometimes, such as a character with 20 combat skills that you want to use all at the same time, or crowd control just becomes insane at higher lvls.
Anyone else thing early game is more fun than endgame in most cases?
I also think alot of people don't realize these games take a large commitment of time and participation, you get out of it what you put into it. Some games have moved towards que's and instances so players rely on the system to dictate what they do, instead of taking charge, forming groups and making friends instead of being dropped in with some guy you rush through an instance with and won't speak to again unless you get que'd up together. Better access to PUG's helps the casual player, but also hurts the community at the same time i think, it's a catch 22.
Maybe it's you?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
There is a large player base waiting to support games but the idea that is dying is the QUALITY of game design.We still have massive amounts of games coming out,go figure in a time where designing a game is super costly.pretty much proves these are all cheap budget games trying to cash in on any market they see as currently viable.
We just had the Voxel wave,Moba wave,mobile gaming has already been flooded,not sure what's next but i do know it will be a cheap budget game design.
The really sad part is that with such a huge starving player base,tons of horrible game designs are going to get supported and make money.Then because we have so few quality titles Blizzard just keeps getting rich selling anything because,well because they have a following that buys anything they sell and don't care to go outside the box since they know the quality is just the same.
ALl of these games are not designed to be played like a role playing game living out an adventure in a world,they are designed to follow a path,a laid out path that leads them to some weak end game or just pvp.
A good quality design is one that would allow itself to evolve over time,just as we do in real life.In reality these are all single player game designs just adding in internet and that makes for a very shallow MMORPG.I can deliver a decent single player experience and i am sure that is what the majority find satisfying,but you are not getting a role playing game,you are getting around 150-200 hours of game play,then it's over.That is why so many players are just hopping game to game to game and nothing holds any longevity.
I highly doubt we will see any change in development,every dev is looking for the cheapest possible gimmick to make a sell and to do it in as fast a time as possible with as small a team as possible.The formula means there is no possible way to deliver a Triple A game and that is exactly what we have been receiving,games i would rate anywhere from a E>B-.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The people that say this are older players, it's no different than asking an older person what they think of dubstep or something.
Not all. Some of us oldies do actually enjoy current MMOs. But dubstep does suck
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED