The first MMORPG's were firmly based on the foundations provided by Dungeons & Dragons, which was THE pen-and-paper RPG that started it all.
But D&D was a niche game played by a few hundred thousand.
Tens of millions were playing "computer games" on game cartridge systems and early "consoles" in the 80's and 90's. Most of them were unaware of the existence of D&D, or weren't interested in playing it even if they did know about it.
Those tens of millions came to the MMO world and found that it didn't cater to their needs. So they demanded that things must change. And they did.
The "Golden Age of MMORPG's" has past, and we will never see the likes of it again.
1) It was full of animated action, replacing my need for games like Resident Evil and Metal Gear.
2) It was a progression-based game, replacing my need for Final Fantasy and Xenogears.
3) It was a flight simulator, replacing my need for Wing Commander or Decent:Freespace.
4) It was a virtual dollhouse or fishbowl, replacing my need for The Sims.
5) It was a PvP game, replacing my need for Counterstrike.
6) It was a LARP game, replacing my need for GOPHER MUSHs.
7) It was an economic and logistic simulator, replacing my need for 4X games, Sim City and RTS.
Eh specialized games are always going to offer way better individual experiences. Focusing on many things would have completely prevented SWG from offering better action-driven story than MGS, better flight simulation than Freespace 2, better PVP than CS, or better strategy than Strategy/RTS titles.
Certainly it's possible that the game provided better gameplay in a few specific areas you cared about more (specifically the points I didn't mention) but if all you want is the very best flight simulator then you were definitely going to be way better served by Freespace than SWG.
It's the nature of specialization. The more things you do, the worse you do them.
By extension, this is why modern MMORPGs rose to far greater heights than those early games. SWG is an ideal example actually. Releasing around the same time as WOW, it apparently tried to be everything to everyone and met with reasonably tame success. Conversely WOW focused on being the best RPG (story/progression/combat) and met was success that has never been matched.
Much of the problem stems from how much choice players have. If they enjoy PVP and flight simulators, they just buy Counterstrike and Fresspace. The swiss army knife internet search engines that arose early on were replaced by google. Swiss army knives themselves are an example of this trend too -- you certainly don't use one to cut your steak, you use a specialized knife that's just a knife.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Eh specialized games are always going to offer way better individual experiences. Focusing on many things would have completely prevented SWG from offering better action-driven story than MGS, better flight simulation than Freespace 2, better PVP than CS, or better strategy than Strategy/RTS titles.
Certainly it's possible that the game provided better gameplay in a few specific areas you cared about more (specifically the points I didn't mention) but if all you want is the very best flight simulator then you were definitely going to be way better served by Freespace than SWG.
It's the nature of specialization. The more things you do, the worse you do them.
By extension, this is why modern MMORPGs rose to far greater heights than those early games. SWG is an ideal example actually. Releasing around the same time as WOW, it apparently tried to be everything to everyone and met with reasonably tame success. Conversely WOW focused on being the best RPG (story/progression/combat) and met was success that has never been matched.
Much of the problem stems from how much choice players have. If they enjoy PVP and flight simulators, they just buy Counterstrike and Fresspace. The swiss army knife internet search engines that arose early on were replaced by google. Swiss army knives themselves are an example of this trend too -- you certainly don't use one to cut your steak, you use a specialized knife that's just a knife.
This hits the nail on the head.
The jack of all trades is the master of none. Resources, including time, can are finite for any project.
Coincidentally, this is the very reason I've always advocated MMORPG developers should focus on the only thing the genre has that's unique to it: bringing together as many players as possible into unique and fun interactive experiences. Everything else is done to death by other genres and, since they aren't trying to be everything to everyone (as Axehilt pointed out), can do what they're focused on far better than an MMORPG.
The first M is all that separates MMORPGs from any other old online multiplayer game. And the stakes are constantly being raised by non-MMORPGs (Such as the Battlefield franchises 64-player Conquest matches that look and feel much better than PS2's MMOFPS mechanics; PS2 only has the fact that much more than 64 players can battle it out in the same area going for it, comparatively.). As such, I firmly believe that's where the focus should be if developers want to carve their niche out successfully (or maybe even gain some mainstream momentum again).
Coincidentally, this is the very reason I've always advocated MMORPG developers should focus on the only thing the genre has that's unique to it: bringing together as many players as possible into unique and fun interactive experiences. Everything else is done to death by other genres and, since they aren't trying to be everything to everyone (as Axehilt pointed out), can do what they're focused on far better than an MMORPG.
The first M is all that separates MMORPGs from any other old online multiplayer game. And the stakes are constantly being raised by non-MMORPGs (Such as the Battlefield franchises 64-player Conquest matches that look and feel much better than PS2's MMOFPS mechanics; PS2 only has the fact that much more than 64 players can battle it out in the same area going for it, comparatively.). As such, I firmly believe that's where the focus should be if developers want to carve their niche out successfully (or maybe even gain some mainstream momentum again).
That is the problem.
The thing that the genre can be unique too .. lots of people together in one place .. is just not that fun to many.
For pve, many prefers small group or solo experiences.
For pvp, there are BG, arena, e-sports .. which are never massive, and the occasionally big battle game (PS2).
And note that you do not need the first M to have an open world ... GTV, SKYRIM all do it as single player game. So that is not what set MMO apart.
If what separate MMORPG from other online game is not that compelling, either the genre will wither away, or the "massively" characteristic will be minimized (like use the cities as a lobby) or forgotton (no need for a public zone in MMOs) and people will start ignoring it.
Which is exactly what is happening .... so do it still with the MMO label (World of Tanks), some will just forget the genre (like all the BLizz new games).
The label discussion wasn't even the argument of my post. Nor was open world vs. instancing.
And again with the doom calling because Blizzard pulled the plug on competing with itself?
Quit trying to derail the discussion at hand. Only a couple sentences of your post even dealt with what I had posted. The rest were all misdirection to bring up the same points you've been talking in every thread over the past few weeks. Do I need to start responding to your every post with pictures of you beating Ole Fontleroy again? I know exactly where I buried him.
Originally posted by MadFrenchie This again? Give that horse a rest.
The label discussion wasn't even the argument of my post. Nor was open world vs. instancing.
And again with the doom calling because Blizzard pulled the plug on competing with itself?
Quit trying to derail the discussion at hand. Only a couple sentences of your post even dealt with what I had posted. The rest were all misdirection to bring up the same points you've been talking in every thread over the past few weeks. Do I need to start responding to your every post with pictures of you beating Ole Fontleroy again? I know exactly where I buried him.
If you notice Nariusseldon has 22k posts. You can't make that many posts without being repetitive. There are only so many mmorpg topics and certain people around here love the circle-jerk instead of actually playing video games....
Originally posted by MadFrenchie This again? Give that horse a rest.
yes that again. Those are the only horses here. Heck, this whole topic is a rehash of "MMOs are dying" or "where is my MMO coming back" topics.
and i notice you did not even try to rebuttal my argument that "massively" is not fun for many ... hence its decline, or broadening .. depending on which camp you are in. Do you have any thoughts on that .. or you just think that I am right?
Originally posted by ArtificeVenatus Still... Waiting...
If you dont say what type of MMORPG you are waiting on then you will be doomed to wait indefinitely.
"Possibly we humans can exist without actually having to fight. But many of us have chosen to fight. For what reason? To protect something? Protect what? Ourselves? The future? If we kill people to protect ourselves and this future, then what sort of future is it, and what will we have become? There is no future for those who have died. And what of those who did the killing? Is happiness to be found in a future that is grasped with blood stained hands? Is that the truth?"
Originally posted by nariusseldonyes that again. Those are the only horses here. Heck, this whole topic is a rehash of "MMOs are dying" or "where is my MMO coming back" topics.and i notice you did not even try to rebuttal my argument that "massively" is not fun for many ... hence its decline, or broadening .. depending on which camp you are in. Do you have any thoughts on that .. or you just think that I am right?
No, because after saying that, you basically proved my point. At the very best, your post amounts to, "Yea, but tit'll never be the most popular genre out there!" At worst, you perfectly illustrated the usefulness of focusing on that first M:
Originally posted by nariusseldonFor pvp, there are BG, arena, e-sports .. which are never massive, and the occasionally big battle game (PS2).
Wonder why PS2 has carved out its niche among all the other FPS/PvP games out there, despite being decidedly last-gen? Graphics? Nah, it's pretty far behind there, naturally.
Gunplay? Nope, I don't think anyone would seriously contend it does gunplay better than the CoD or BF franchises.
Sci-Fi? BF4 has a sci-fi expansion pack (hover tanks ahoy!), and the latest CoD release is decidedly sci-fi.
Vehicles? Nope, BF4, again, does that just as well (if not better).
Classes? Nope, all FPSs have classes these days, whether preset or built by the player.
What's left? Oh, it has massive battles not seen even in the BF franchise. Crazy. Yet you mention it like an afterthought because, oh I don't know, it proves my point. Also:
EDIT- By the way:
Originally posted by MadFrenchie
"Yea, but tit'll never be the most popular genre out there!"
Originally posted by SlyLoK I do miss MMOs with classic RPG elements. So many MMOs today are just action games with exp / skill levels tacked on..
what classic RPG elements? EQ is essentially a hack & slash with worse, slow combat.
Action games with progression are what CRPGs are today, or at least a lot of them.
Maybe me saying DnD elements would make you feel better?
Are you sure you are even playing CRPGs? Or even know what they are? Doesnt sound like it.
What D&D elements? Last time I play D&D with my son, i don't remember standing all night waiting for a mob to pop up in thin air so we can beat on it. There was actually a story, and stuff other than combat.
In short, a revitalized action/adventure, RTS (MOBA) and building simulator culture gives your entertainment consumer much better experiences than the MMO. It is like every other genre gives you the Bellagio, while MMOs offer you a couple of rigged slots in a gas station outside of Reno.
I agree, but I think with rare exceptions MMOs have become cheap cash shop games, that cannot help when they try to compete with other games that have stolen some of their gameplay elements. You listed a lot of factors for SWG, no MMO even tries to put all those in and has not for several years now.
I agree, but I think with rare exceptions MMOs have become cheap cash shop games, that cannot help when they try to compete with other games that have stolen some of their gameplay elements. You listed a lot of factors for SWG, no MMO even tries to put all those in and has not for several years now.
Just like MMOs are "stolen" from sp games by putting in solo content?
In fact, it is a good thing. I love that devs can steal good ideas from each other. If a game element makes some other game fun, why not?
Nothing wrong with games trying to mix ideas and genres (stolen was not the right word to pick) but that's not always a success. PS2 is a good example of how you can successfully make a MMO and FPS hybrid. I remember Warhammer bought in mini games because that's what was happening then, you had to have mini games. But the WH mini games were better than the game, highlighting the games drawbacks. Its does not always work.
Originally posted by Scot Nothing wrong with games trying to mix ideas and genres (stolen was not the right word to pick) but that's not always a success. PS2 is a good example of how you can successfully make a MMO and FPS hybrid. I remember Warhammer bought in mini games because that's what was happening then, you had to have mini games. But the WH mini games were better than the game, highlighting the games drawbacks. Its does not always work.
obvious whether it works need to be judge on a case by case basis. For example, RPG FPS combo works greatly in borderlands.
If you mean when will a company dump millions of dollars into a game to outdo classic WoW (which has very populated classic (private) servers), hopefully never, since waste is unpleasant to see. Did people really think good MMORPGs would be made forever, even as production costs rose higher and higher, and they were being replaced every few years by another? If all you want is shiny new things, you are following the wrong crowd. Wildstar is that way--or has it folded up already? No genre has survived in integrity beyond ten or so years. MMORPGs are no different. Support classic servers for the ones that were great, or move on. It seems to me that people just want to play with a huge crowd on launch day, but fail to recognize that those huge crowds are the problems themselves. Those days are waning, though, it looks like; not only will there be no more huge crowds to follow around on launch day, but no more bad games to follow them into and then leave shortly after, while the game and millions spent on it sink into nothingness. Truly an illogical indulgence that, apparently, has made many addicts out of it; but people will have to adjust, and set more realistic expectations for the future. For one thing, this next round of Kickstart games (if they are ever made) is going to be much more niche than any MMORPGs before, from what I have read, which means a much more limited experience and audience. Indeed, it will likely be the same thing they could play right now on a classic server, only with more people. People are getting their expectations too high, IMO. It is highly unlikely that anyKickstarter game will outdo games like FFXI, EQ2, and WoW. These games were not niche, and were made by established companies.
Originally posted by Yanocchi Many people are fed up with current games but fortunately some western developers are fed up with them too and are genuinely attempting to make new and very different triple AAA games as we speak. The MMORPG genre will re-emerge in 2017-2020.
You mean MOBAs, card games and shooter like what Blizz is developing?
Or like the Japanese companies all going to mobile (even Nintendo is talking about that)?
You are right about projects of really big and established corporations and publishers but the gaming industry is also showing signs of very innovative newcomers.
For example, there is a next-gen project in the making by western developers who were lead developers of Auto Assault, Rift and some projects at Blizzard and Electronic Arts. Their company is working on Star Citizen but they have also initiated a project and dedicated a team of developers to making a triple AAA dark fantasy horror MMORPG that is supposed to revive the MMORPG genre. They've named the project Revival to reflect this goal. They had worked for big corporations and were lead developers on Rift, Auto Assault and some other game projects but they left disappointed how original visions changed through compromises of big companies.
The Revival project has been only six months in real development but throughout this whole time the lead developers and company's CEO have been extremely open with the community about all aspects of the project. They have grown disappointed in MMORPGs and have decided to solve the question of when MMORPG genre will reemerge by starting to work on such a project themselves.
Time will tell if they succeed or fail but at least now you know that there are some western developers out there who are not happy about the current situation themselves and want to do something about it.
If their project becomes a huge success, maybe expect MMORPG genre to reemerge as MEOW.
Since their game will be quite different from MMORPGs, they've coined a new acronym to reflect the nature of their project, a Multiplayer Evolving Online World.
In any case, I believe that MMORPG genre will reemerge not through the work of conservative, corporate money-making developers, but through the work of developers who dare to stay true to their uncompromising vision and who truely understand the situation and how games feel from the gamers' side and who have finances and technical know-how to develop a project that breaks status quo.
While I am a fan of Revival, and will definitely give it a go, among their good ideas are a number of bad decisions including aim based combat (falsely referred to as "skill based") and a F2P model. I am under no illusion that they have a real grasp on what makes for a good mmorpg regardless if they seem to understand a few of the finer points like the need for dynamic content and a persistent world.
"A core concept, whether it’s desired or not, of the traditional MMO playspace is the idea that time means success. This makes sense from the business side of the industry, doesn’t it? The longer one spends in your game the more likely they are to spend money on it (or if they are paying a subscription, the longer they keep paying)... RPG style stats play their part in Revival, but they are not the great equalizer as they would be in other, less sophisticated, MMOs. Instead, Revival is a game that rewards skill." More rhetoric. What games don't require or reward at least some skill? Their game tenets and philosophy are filled with strawmen of that sort trying to justify twitch combat over traditional combat systems (all of which require as much or more skill than aiming with a mouse).
"The currency players can buy [with Real Life money] is called the SP, or Standing Point. As you might expect, you can use SP in lieu of in-game gold when needed, but that’s not really what SP is for. As the name suggests, SP is a way to track who is invested in the world: People with SP are people who have a standing in Theleston and care about its future.
Maybe that’s a bit of a hard sell, considering that people can buy SP with real money, but maybe that’s just a matter of perspective (oh please). After all, people who invest real money to purchase SP have, in their case literally, invested in the world of Theleston, haven’t they?
Oh come now. That screams scam louder than AA's marketplace. Somehow its bad for time and devotion to the game/character (and thus subscription) to determine who the top players are, but its ok for RL money to enter the equation directly? Sell that shit to somebody else.
I remember how many people complained that Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have aim-based combat like Skyrim does, so the question here is whether they alienate fans of auto-target combat or fans of aim-based combat.
I don't see any reason to be concerned about the plans with SP. People will fall into three categories in regard to SP.
1. Players gaining SP with time and devotion. They will afford sometimes either to participate in a storytelling event or protect themselves temporarily from PvP (roughly 1/3 or 1/4 of their gaming time if they spend all SP on protection against PvP).
2. Casual players paying real money to gain SP and using it on the same things as category 1 players.
3. Hardcore players gaining SP with time and devotion, and paying real money to get even more SP. This category will consist of people who are focused on PvE or role-playing more than other players. They will be able to participate in storytelling events or protect themselves from PvP more often than others. However, there will be limitations applied to this category of players to avoid things like someone being PvP immune all the time.
It's also very possible (as stated by developers themselves on the game's forums) that shrines granting SP blessings will be destroyable.
The game is going to be much tougher than an average MMORPG for casual and pay-to-win players in any case. Players owning houses bought for real money will have to log in regulary to take care of their property in fear of loosing it: protecting houses from burglars and thieves, earning gold to pay city taxes and house insurance fees. House taxes and insurance fees will have to be paid with in-game gold and the developers have planned many ways to make the game impossible for bots and extremely harsh for gold sellers.
Comments
The first MMORPG's were firmly based on the foundations provided by Dungeons & Dragons, which was THE pen-and-paper RPG that started it all.
But D&D was a niche game played by a few hundred thousand.
Tens of millions were playing "computer games" on game cartridge systems and early "consoles" in the 80's and 90's. Most of them were unaware of the existence of D&D, or weren't interested in playing it even if they did know about it.
Those tens of millions came to the MMO world and found that it didn't cater to their needs. So they demanded that things must change. And they did.
The "Golden Age of MMORPG's" has past, and we will never see the likes of it again.
Innovation > Regression.
Rather than pining for the past, you should be advocating for something drastically different from the turn of the century.
The genre is "dying" (if it is) because it's stagnant.
wait ... so the MMO industry evolves to entertain more people and that is bad thing?
Why does MMO, or any entertainment, needs to stick to its roots? Isn't it about always evolving and having something new?
Eh specialized games are always going to offer way better individual experiences. Focusing on many things would have completely prevented SWG from offering better action-driven story than MGS, better flight simulation than Freespace 2, better PVP than CS, or better strategy than Strategy/RTS titles.
Certainly it's possible that the game provided better gameplay in a few specific areas you cared about more (specifically the points I didn't mention) but if all you want is the very best flight simulator then you were definitely going to be way better served by Freespace than SWG.
It's the nature of specialization. The more things you do, the worse you do them.
By extension, this is why modern MMORPGs rose to far greater heights than those early games. SWG is an ideal example actually. Releasing around the same time as WOW, it apparently tried to be everything to everyone and met with reasonably tame success. Conversely WOW focused on being the best RPG (story/progression/combat) and met was success that has never been matched.
Much of the problem stems from how much choice players have. If they enjoy PVP and flight simulators, they just buy Counterstrike and Fresspace. The swiss army knife internet search engines that arose early on were replaced by google. Swiss army knives themselves are an example of this trend too -- you certainly don't use one to cut your steak, you use a specialized knife that's just a knife.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
This hits the nail on the head.
The jack of all trades is the master of none. Resources, including time, can are finite for any project.
Coincidentally, this is the very reason I've always advocated MMORPG developers should focus on the only thing the genre has that's unique to it: bringing together as many players as possible into unique and fun interactive experiences. Everything else is done to death by other genres and, since they aren't trying to be everything to everyone (as Axehilt pointed out), can do what they're focused on far better than an MMORPG.
The first M is all that separates MMORPGs from any other old online multiplayer game. And the stakes are constantly being raised by non-MMORPGs (Such as the Battlefield franchises 64-player Conquest matches that look and feel much better than PS2's MMOFPS mechanics; PS2 only has the fact that much more than 64 players can battle it out in the same area going for it, comparatively.). As such, I firmly believe that's where the focus should be if developers want to carve their niche out successfully (or maybe even gain some mainstream momentum again).
That is the problem.
The thing that the genre can be unique too .. lots of people together in one place .. is just not that fun to many.
For pve, many prefers small group or solo experiences.
For pvp, there are BG, arena, e-sports .. which are never massive, and the occasionally big battle game (PS2).
And note that you do not need the first M to have an open world ... GTV, SKYRIM all do it as single player game. So that is not what set MMO apart.
If what separate MMORPG from other online game is not that compelling, either the genre will wither away, or the "massively" characteristic will be minimized (like use the cities as a lobby) or forgotton (no need for a public zone in MMOs) and people will start ignoring it.
Which is exactly what is happening .... so do it still with the MMO label (World of Tanks), some will just forget the genre (like all the BLizz new games).
The label discussion wasn't even the argument of my post. Nor was open world vs. instancing.
And again with the doom calling because Blizzard pulled the plug on competing with itself?
Quit trying to derail the discussion at hand. Only a couple sentences of your post even dealt with what I had posted. The rest were all misdirection to bring up the same points you've been talking in every thread over the past few weeks. Do I need to start responding to your every post with pictures of you beating Ole Fontleroy again? I know exactly where I buried him.
If you notice Nariusseldon has 22k posts. You can't make that many posts without being repetitive. There are only so many mmorpg topics and certain people around here love the circle-jerk instead of actually playing video games....
yes that again. Those are the only horses here. Heck, this whole topic is a rehash of "MMOs are dying" or "where is my MMO coming back" topics.
and i notice you did not even try to rebuttal my argument that "massively" is not fun for many ... hence its decline, or broadening .. depending on which camp you are in. Do you have any thoughts on that .. or you just think that I am right?
what classic RPG elements? EQ is essentially a hack & slash with worse, slow combat.
Action games with progression are what CRPGs are today, or at least a lot of them.
If you dont say what type of MMORPG you are waiting on then you will be doomed to wait indefinitely.
"Possibly we humans can exist without actually having to fight. But many of us have chosen to fight. For what reason? To protect something? Protect what? Ourselves? The future? If we kill people to protect ourselves and this future, then what sort of future is it, and what will we have become? There is no future for those who have died. And what of those who did the killing? Is happiness to be found in a future that is grasped with blood stained hands? Is that the truth?"
Wonder why PS2 has carved out its niche among all the other FPS/PvP games out there, despite being decidedly last-gen? Graphics? Nah, it's pretty far behind there, naturally.
Gunplay? Nope, I don't think anyone would seriously contend it does gunplay better than the CoD or BF franchises.
Sci-Fi? BF4 has a sci-fi expansion pack (hover tanks ahoy!), and the latest CoD release is decidedly sci-fi.
Vehicles? Nope, BF4, again, does that just as well (if not better).
Classes? Nope, all FPSs have classes these days, whether preset or built by the player.
What's left? Oh, it has massive battles not seen even in the BF franchise. Crazy. Yet you mention it like an afterthought because, oh I don't know, it proves my point. Also:
EDIT- By the way:
Lawl.
my typos.
Maybe me saying DnD elements would make you feel better?
Are you sure you are even playing CRPGs? Or even know what they are? Doesnt sound like it.
What D&D elements? Last time I play D&D with my son, i don't remember standing all night waiting for a mob to pop up in thin air so we can beat on it. There was actually a story, and stuff other than combat.
I agree, but I think with rare exceptions MMOs have become cheap cash shop games, that cannot help when they try to compete with other games that have stolen some of their gameplay elements. You listed a lot of factors for SWG, no MMO even tries to put all those in and has not for several years now.
Just like MMOs are "stolen" from sp games by putting in solo content?
In fact, it is a good thing. I love that devs can steal good ideas from each other. If a game element makes some other game fun, why not?
obvious whether it works need to be judge on a case by case basis. For example, RPG FPS combo works greatly in borderlands.
But the point is that devs should try.
If you mean when will a company dump millions of dollars into a game to outdo classic WoW (which has very populated classic (private) servers), hopefully never, since waste is unpleasant to see. Did people really think good MMORPGs would be made forever, even as production costs rose higher and higher, and they were being replaced every few years by another? If all you want is shiny new things, you are following the wrong crowd. Wildstar is that way--or has it folded up already? No genre has survived in integrity beyond ten or so years. MMORPGs are no different. Support classic servers for the ones that were great, or move on. It seems to me that people just want to play with a huge crowd on launch day, but fail to recognize that those huge crowds are the problems themselves. Those days are waning, though, it looks like; not only will there be no more huge crowds to follow around on launch day, but no more bad games to follow them into and then leave shortly after, while the game and millions spent on it sink into nothingness. Truly an illogical indulgence that, apparently, has made many addicts out of it; but people will have to adjust, and set more realistic expectations for the future. For one thing, this next round of Kickstart games (if they are ever made) is going to be much more niche than any MMORPGs before, from what I have read, which means a much more limited experience and audience. Indeed, it will likely be the same thing they could play right now on a classic server, only with more people. People are getting their expectations too high, IMO. It is highly unlikely that anyKickstarter game will outdo games like FFXI, EQ2, and WoW. These games were not niche, and were made by established companies.
I remember how many people complained that Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have aim-based combat like Skyrim does, so the question here is whether they alienate fans of auto-target combat or fans of aim-based combat.
I don't see any reason to be concerned about the plans with SP. People will fall into three categories in regard to SP.
1. Players gaining SP with time and devotion. They will afford sometimes either to participate in a storytelling event or protect themselves temporarily from PvP (roughly 1/3 or 1/4 of their gaming time if they spend all SP on protection against PvP).
2. Casual players paying real money to gain SP and using it on the same things as category 1 players.
3. Hardcore players gaining SP with time and devotion, and paying real money to get even more SP. This category will consist of people who are focused on PvE or role-playing more than other players. They will be able to participate in storytelling events or protect themselves from PvP more often than others. However, there will be limitations applied to this category of players to avoid things like someone being PvP immune all the time.
It's also very possible (as stated by developers themselves on the game's forums) that shrines granting SP blessings will be destroyable.
The game is going to be much tougher than an average MMORPG for casual and pay-to-win players in any case. Players owning houses bought for real money will have to log in regulary to take care of their property in fear of loosing it: protecting houses from burglars and thieves, earning gold to pay city taxes and house insurance fees. House taxes and insurance fees will have to be paid with in-game gold and the developers have planned many ways to make the game impossible for bots and extremely harsh for gold sellers.
* more info, screenshots and videos here