Why MMOs changed to what it is today; it is OUR doing.

JohnP0100

It is always fun to watch fanboys do mental gymnastics to try and justify whatever their favourite game/company is doing. The announcement of 'WoW: Legion' (Aka, WoW BC version 2.0) was one such event as fanboys tried to justify why bringing back a 9 year old raid boss in Illidan made sense. Course this prompted the other kind in that 'hang on a sec, I killed him and I've got his weapon to prove it. WTF?!' and thus 'lily-run' was born. (Illidan run -> Illy run -> lily run)
Just a bunch of old WoW players going 'lets go to BT and kill him again!'.
Suffice to say the 'lily-run' never really got off the ground and there's one picture that crystalized why. It is a screenshot of a facebook feed where the person uploaded a photo of his son with the remark of 'he stood up!' The one above is him going 'when's lily run?'. 

There's been lots of topics here on how 'everything is too easy / solo focused' etc. Well, I'd say the above is a perfect example on why that is.
Here are some facts to back this up.
The average gamer age at the moment is 31 years old (1).
According to the CDC (USA) the mean average age of when a person has a first born baby is 26 years old. (2)
ONS (UK) has most over 30 when they have their first born (3)


1 - http://venturebeat.com/2014/04/29/gaming-advocacy-group-the-average-gamer-is-31-and-most-play-on-a-console/
2- http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/births.htm
3 - http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/vsob1/characteristics-of-Mother-1--england-and-wales/2013/stb-characteristics-of-mother-1--2013.html


As with any generalisation with numbers, they will be outliers. Maybe you personally are 40 single with no kids and don't plan on changing that.
Maybe you are a teenager where you can't even understand what 30 is like etc. The above wouldn't apply to you in that case but for the majority of people, they will.

In conclusion, keep on railing that the 'MMO is dead!'. The majority it seems made a life choice to prioritise their kids over MMOs and as a parent myself, I don't disagree with choice.

moonbound

Uhh almost every adult I know who has kids wants the game to be challenging, just because some people cannot learn how to play an mmorpg casually does not mean they want dumbed down easy max level in a few days content.

Allot of adults actually prefer to work for a reward the instant gratification is for kids not adults lol, so this is a load of nonsense.

vonryan123

we just had a "it's all your fault" post it's getting old we don't make the games we play them....at the end of the day the game devs (most of the time) don't even make the "calls" it's CEO's/CFO's and share holders meetings..... so qq and blame us/you all you want still won't change who makes the real calls that change games.

nariusseldon

JohnP0100 said:

It is always fun to watch fanboys do mental gymnastics to try and justify whatever their favourite 

In conclusion, keep on railing that the 'MMO is dead!'. The majority it seems made a life choice to prioritise their kids over MMOs and as a parent myself, I don't disagree with choice.

They may also be prioritizing other entertainment, and games over MMOs. MMO is just one kind of games.

Azaron_Nightblade

The devs will always focus where the money is. Or at least the large development studios will.
And considering where the money seems to be... yes, it is the players that drove those changes to a large degree.

Obviously not all of them, considering how many of them rage against today's MMOs on here, but definitely enough of them to make the difference. Not to mention the ones screaming on here about what an MMO should be, and how today's MMOs are "death" are a minority compared to the millions of other gamers playing them.

nariusseldon

Azaron_Nightblade said:

The devs will always focus where the money is. Or at least the large development studios will.
And considering where the money seems to be... yes, it is the players that drove those changes to a large degree.

Obviously not all of them, considering how many of them rage against today's MMOs on here, but definitely enough of them to make the difference. Not to mention the ones screaming on here about what an MMO should be, and how today's MMOs are "death" are a minority compared to the millions of other gamers playing them.

Of course .. .otherwise MMO sites and reviewers would not be broadening the term to include games like MOBAs ... and yes you guess it .. they follow the money too.

Alders

I don't understand this nonsense about having less time somehow means i want simpler games that require less time commitment. It's almost as ridiculous as the players that once loved the complexity and now rail against it because they now have families and less time.  

It's hilarious how that opinion quickly changes as circumstances do as well. I may not have anywhere near the time i used to but i'll be damned if i ever allow that to factor into what i consider enjoyment. I'm an outlier and proud of it.

nariusseldon

Alders said:

I don't understand this nonsense about having less time somehow means i want simpler games that require less time commitment. It's almost as ridiculous as the players that once loved the complexity and now rail against it because they now have families and less time.  

Not simpler .. more convenient and focused. Combat is actually much more complex with CDs to watch for, different spatial elements, buffs to keep track of, and stuff like that.

But if people don't want to run around the wilderness looking for NPCs, take that away. Looking for NPCs (or objective), slow travel, waiting for boats ... none of these things are really that complex .. just annoying and inconvenient for many .. hence taken away.

JohnP0100

vonryan123 said:

we just had a "it's all your fault" post it's getting old we don't make the games we play them....at the end of the day the game devs (most of the time) don't even make the "calls" it's CEO's/CFO's and share holders meetings..... so qq and blame us/you all you want still won't change who makes the real calls that change games.

I don't care what title you have, whether it is CEO or Chairman or w/e.
$$$$ rules over all.

iridescence

If everybody who complains about WoW (or whatever game) would actually unsub and support a game with features they like the industry might actually change and see more niche games get made. So yeah, it is because of players but really because players who say they don't like the changes keep right on paying.


If you were running a game company I think you would look at your sub data to decide which direction to take your game rather than reading forums and shit. 

nariusseldon

iridescence said:

If everybody who complains about WoW (or whatever game) would actually unsub and support a game with features they like the industry might actually change and see more niche games get made. So yeah, it is because of players but really because players who say they don't like the changes keep right on paying.

Or those who complains are in the extreme minority and they don't matter.

I don't see anyone is paying for, or wasting time on, games they do not like. Do you play games you don't like and complain about?

I surely don't. 

Axehilt

1. The rising popularity of the genre was driven because the genre shifted to better deliver what RPG players were interested in from the start.  That is: MMORPGs which are more RPG-like, and not necessarily world-like. World-building elements certainly add to the experience, but it's the core RPG gameplay which matters most, judging by which games have become popular.
2. So MMORPGs which were more RPG-like did better. Companies saw this and produced more MMORPGs which were more RPG-like.
3. Therefore it was 'our' collective doing. But it wasn't an age thing, it was simply that more gamers had always been interested in gameplay-heavy timesink-lite games. Gamers are like anyone else: they can tell when their time is being wasted, and they tend to avoid games that do that (which explains the very limited success of early MMORPGs compared with later ones.)

evgen88

I stopped reading at "fanboys"
Why use a derogatory term for someone who likes something you don't?

nariusseldon

ShaniaReborn said:

This is EXACTLY why it is a bad idea for MMORPG companies to be owned by the EAs of the world.  Profitable or not, EA axed all their MMORPGs except SWTOR.  There needs to be a way companies can get the money they need to develop AAA games without having to sign over everything to the deep pockets.

There is .. they don't have to make MMORPGs.

Gestankfaust

evgen88 said:

I stopped reading at "fanboys"
Why use a derogatory term for someone who likes something you don't?

^This

And no it isn't our fault

TatsuyaHiroki

ShaniaReborn said:

vonryan123 said:

we just had a "it's all your fault" post it's getting old we don't make the games we play them....at the end of the day the game devs (most of the time) don't even make the "calls" it's CEO's/CFO's and share holders meetings..... so qq and blame us/you all you want still won't change who makes the real calls that change games.

This is EXACTLY why it is a bad idea for MMORPG companies to be owned by the EAs of the world.  Profitable or not, EA axed all their MMORPGs except SWTOR.  There needs to be a way companies can get the money they need to develop AAA games without having to sign over everything to the deep pockets.

Trust me, EA axed basically any franchise they could get their grubby hands on

azarhal

nariusseldon said:

I don't see anyone is paying for, or wasting time on, games they do not like. Do you play games you don't like and complain about?

I surely don't. 

I've seen plenty of people who do so. Playing hours of a game (and even replaying them if they are SP) than saying don't buy it because it is a bad game. I also have a friend who needs to finish every game he start, he played through all the difficulty levels of Diablo 2 and a few years later told me it was terribly boring.

cameltosis

I always feel this is one of those chicken-and-egg conundrums that is impossible to answer with enough evidence to back you up. 


For example, when I used to play lotro, sometimes around 2nd expansion the devs came out and said that approximately 10% of the community pvped on a regular basis (at least once a week) and that less than 5% of the community raided on a regular basis.


So, at face value, this data indicates that the community didn't care about pvp and raiding and so the devs focused future development on solo content. 

However, the data doesn't say WHY the community didn't pvp or raid, and this is the conundrum. Did 90% of the community avoid pvp because they dont like pvp in general? Or did they not like lotro's pvp specifically?

If you believe, like me, that the answer is the latter and that the community avoids features because of the specific implementation, rather than the idea behind it, then the next step is to try to find a solution. Going back to the lotro pvp question, one solution might have been to develop instanced pvp, such as battlegrounds or arenas. However, that development would have cost money and the result would be uncertain, so it becomes too much of a risk for the developers to make. 



Back to the OP, I don't believe it is our fault that the MMO industry has ended up in its current state. I think its purely a business decision: play it safe and continue to develop content that you know will get played, rather than take big risks developing new types of content. 

Flyte27

cameltosis said:

I always feel this is one of those chicken-and-egg conundrums that is impossible to answer with enough evidence to back you up. 


For example, when I used to play lotro, sometimes around 2nd expansion the devs came out and said that approximately 10% of the community pvped on a regular basis (at least once a week) and that less than 5% of the community raided on a regular basis.


So, at face value, this data indicates that the community didn't care about pvp and raiding and so the devs focused future development on solo content. 

However, the data doesn't say WHY the community didn't pvp or raid, and this is the conundrum. Did 90% of the community avoid pvp because they dont like pvp in general? Or did they not like lotro's pvp specifically?

If you believe, like me, that the answer is the latter and that the community avoids features because of the specific implementation, rather than the idea behind it, then the next step is to try to find a solution. Going back to the lotro pvp question, one solution might have been to develop instanced pvp, such as battlegrounds or arenas. However, that development would have cost money and the result would be uncertain, so it becomes too much of a risk for the developers to make. 



Back to the OP, I don't believe it is our fault that the MMO industry has ended up in its current state. I think its purely a business decision: play it safe and continue to develop content that you know will get played, rather than take big risks developing new types of content. 

I'm not a big fan of the having things segregated so much in games.  That is not the way it was originally.  People could observe and interact with people who were raiding or PvPing.

In EQ I never participated in everything.  I found that something like gathering large amounts of people together was not enjoyable for me.  I still admired those that were able to accomplish these feats.  I just had no desire to participate.  I always found that anything group oriented was a lot of pressure to hang around without taking any breaks.  When playing long sessions and sitting in one spot it's important to be able take breaks once in a while IMO. 

I'm sure raiding and PvP could be made accessible to everyone, but why would you want to?  It's supposed to be for those few who are dedicated to accomplishing it.  Not every game in life can be completed by everyone.

I still think the point of MMOs is lost though.  It's so structured that it is no longer a single game, but broken up into multiple activities that for the most part work very similar to other MMOs.  None of it really makes sense as in a fantasy book you don't see any segregated PvP or raiding.  It is all interconnected into one world.  There are no specific events that are instanced off for specific groups.  For me this makes the game less of an adventure and more of a group of mini game events.  It's at the point where an MMO is less about being an adventure and more about bringing these specific mini games/events that people are used to.  It's kind of like playing chess instead of being engrossed in a fantasy/sci fi world.  The story becomes somewhat irrelevant to the players.

Fractal_Analogy

Moral of the story. Children do not stop playing Chess once they have their own children.


Taking two unrelated things and using them to provide a statistical analogy is pointless. Data can mean a lot of things, income level has more to do with Gaming, than having children.

JohnP0100

I used to play chess. Now though? Nope.
A chess game can last anywhere between 5mins to one hour.
That isn't possible for me. Hence why i don't play.
No matter my fondness of chess or whatever game, 
My children comes first hence why i can't play many games and pay for them even less.
That's my choice and looking at the stats, majority agrees. Hence this thread.

Boneserino

nariusseldon said:

iridescence said:

If everybody who complains about WoW (or whatever game) would actually unsub and support a game with features they like the industry might actually change and see more niche games get made. So yeah, it is because of players but really because players who say they don't like the changes keep right on paying.

Or those who complains are in the extreme minority and they don't matter.

I don't see anyone is paying for, or wasting time on, games they do not like. Do you play games you don't like and complain about?

I surely don't. 

I think you missed the point he was trying to make. 

People complain and say they want this game, then some dev goes out and says "we are making the game  you are asking for".

Then the person that complained says "  thats not the game I wanted, it has bugs and the graphics suck and plus I wanted this feature included!!  I will not play your game"

Multiply this many times and eventually people stop trying to make " your game".

Point is, if you want something, support the people trying to give it to you.

nariusseldon

Boneserino said:

Multiply this many times and eventually people stop trying to make " your game".

Point is, if you want something, support the people trying to give it to you.

nah ... i can just choose the stuff i want from the vast market of entertainment. Why "support" anything?

Sure, a game can try to earn my money by being very fun to me. If not, i can do something else. Devs don't owe me a game i like, and I don't owe them my time or money.

Zontas_Hierospirit

So where's the good news?

When I was 16, I began my adventure into MMORPGs. At the time, it was not even possible for me to play a game that required a monthly fee. It was a new thing that none of anyone in my family had ever done before. I had to actually write an agreement with my parents when I did it. Also, an MMORPG was an adult game. It was not a game for kids, or tiny children, who want to explore the world for the first time.

Quite frankly, I question your parental decision to even let your child online with a bunch of adults in video games. That sounds like insanity to me. But we do live in an internet age. I will grant you that. But there can still be standards.

This goes back to square one. MMORPGs were never meant for children in the first place. They were adult games, with adult themes about witches, warlocks, wizards, zombies, skeletons, etc, meant to tease the adult mind who had already matured and learned that ghosts, goblins, and dragons were not real, and that focusing on the dead was out of curiosity, not out of any serious religion or consideration.

I realize that not everyone has to fit into "my" same experience of MMORPGs, or has to fit "my" standard of what MMORPGs are. But neither do I have to fit another person's. Kind of like Halloween, to me, children should enjoy the sweet version, not the scary version of halloween, but it is ultimately your family's choice what you allow your kids to have as a tradition. If you have ever played Dark Age of Camelot, there are some very, VERY scary monsters in that game, as well as quest dialogue. World of Warcraft, too, has some pretty messed up quests. One, I remember, was about a wizard cutting off his apprentice's head to look down into his neck-hole to see if he could find his apprentice's soul and never found it. IS this what you want your kids to grow up on? Maybe off to the side, I can see that happening, when I was a kid I saw Doom 1 and 2 but that was because I had a much older brother than me. It wasn't explicitly for me though, and I knew that what I was seeing wasn't for my age.

I don't have kids, and I probably never will. And I disagree with that being something to be ashamed of, by anyone. Life isn't about having children. All I see in the news is shooters guilt tripped into believing their life is meaningless without a partner. However it (life) is about the living, the living in the future, and the living on the other side of death. The only reason for that, I believe, is because of God. Or another way to look at it, is that this is all just a Matrix Simulation, and 99.9999999% of all life doesn't survive in the first place. I wouldn't design such a simulation in order to punish that percent for failing to survive, nor would a God. That sounds ridiculous. I prefer to believe that survival isn't part of the game at all. Rather, survival is one of the enemies of this game, trying to trick people into thinking that they must hurt other people in order to win. We should still try to survive, mind you, especially if you have kids. Once you have kids, your eggs are in that basket.

Case and point, we have all heard the bad news. That death is always all our fault. But the dragon is the one primarily to blame. I believe in the good news, though, that there is a savior that defeated everything that has to do with death for all who believe in him.

Archlyte

JohnP0100 said:

I used to play chess. Now though? Nope.
A chess game can last anywhere between 5mins to one hour.
That isn't possible for me. Hence why i don't play.
No matter my fondness of chess or whatever game, 
My children comes first hence why i can't play many games and pay for them even less.
That's my choice and looking at the stats, majority agrees. Hence this thread.

No you made a dubious conclusion that confirmed your hypothesis. And what do you want for raising your own kids, a cookie? 

I feel like this post is saying: MMOs are just fine because I got kids now, and I don't play as much. 

JohnP0100

Not sure why the debate is becoming personal when it is more about facts and numbers.
Gamers got old.
If you want to dispute that sources please.