Also something I'm noticing lately that ultimately WILL make people disappointed is games still in early development getting articles boasting about their features and dreams.
Sure, great, you have a game in mind that you think people will love. Good for you. Come back and show what you have done when it's close to release, not already attempting to hype your dream game when it's going to take another 2-3+ years for us to play it.
I don't want to say names but I'm sure you know which games I'm talking about.
Hype. People buy into hype then are crushed when it doesn't match reality. Every company in the world paints the rosiest of pictures. However, reality doesn't usually agree. Add a sort of hive mentality that feeds the hype, and you get a large unstoppable beast that is brought down hard when reality sinks in.
Cash shop/ Gambling boxes/ and the developers with no vision other then making money off of people, who cant stop compulsive buying.
F2P monetisation generally means that rather than appealing to a broad audience who individually contribute a little money; you instead only have to find ways to illicit money out of a small number of individuals with little control over their spending habits.
From my own experience, it would be high expectations. No surprise there, I guess. I will save more specific factors till later.
I'd go further and say unrealistic expectations, always hoping the "next game" will be the magic savior for either yourself or everyone else always leads to disillusionment and anger when the title can't live up to the dream.
Watch when SC launches, while many will like it, a large number of folks will hate on it incessantly because it's missing something they wanted.
Couldn't agree enough. Expectations for what is seemingly the majority are so unbelievably high that the game has no chance to actually succeed in their eyes. When games are routinely considered a failure within the first few weeks of launch, and when a hope filled community turns into the torch and pitchfork masses.
Nothing is ever going to be good enough for the majority of the community. The community as a whole will never look at itself as the major problem though.
At d20 all disappointments are the result of unmet expectations, in this case player expectations. Those expectations may have been influenced by hype and or statements by the devs.
I'm going with this (not sure what d20 refers to?) but I have seen, more often than not, players build themselves up to a frenzy when, if they had calmer and more rational minds, they might put things in better perspective.
Additionally, I have seen players take the comments of the devs and just run with them. They pretty much fill i the blanks with their own special narrative.
This is not to say that all developers are angels (because I don't think that at all) but pretty much every mmo that has come out has been pretty close to what I thought it would be.
The only exception was "Aion" and only because that was the first mmo that I had heard about from the start and it was reasonably early in my experience for mmo's (having played Lineage 2 and LOTRO and just trying EQ2 and Wow) and I didn't realize that what the devs said might not actually make it to the game.
That was the game that taught me perspective for mmo development.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The majority of players think that WoW is a good game. Going by the numbers they have the largest group of players that stick with the game. All other games pretty much wish they had that many subs. I've been burnt out on WoW for awhile now but have some good memories of times spent on that game.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Absolutely THIS. If developers AND their super-fans would just stop with all the hype like:
Why my game is important
Why my game is the only hope
Why we are a return to the roots of...
Why we are the "spiritual successor to"...
They wouldn't get as much flack. I currently have a decent amount of money spent on various Kickstarter games that interest me. That very LAST thing I am going to do is shout out how great the game is going to be. I will say why I THINK it could be good, but people get too personally invested in these games. Many times in ones that aren't even out and they haven't even played.
There is no need to hype games that will be ready (?) in 2018 (see recent "SOL Dev journal on this site"). It's silly and we have ALL seen this movie before and know how it tragically ends. Produce a kickass game, OVER deliver to your customers.. and you will have a license to print money. "Over-hype and under-delivery" is a proven way to kill your game. So unless you are interested in a quick pump and dump, there is really no reason to do so.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The only exception was "Aion" and only because that was the first mmo that I had heard about from the start and it was reasonably early in my experience for mmo's (having played Lineage 2 and LOTRO and just trying EQ2 and Wow) and I didn't realize that what the devs said might not actually make it to the game.
That was the game that taught me perspective for mmo development.
For me it was Age of Conan and Warhammer Online. This was in 2008, if I remember correctly. After that, I was not disappointed or suckered again until the infamous ArcheAge Alpha Access package and subsequent changes. That one taught me another lesson about buying early access to games trusting the past reputation of a publisher or developer.
I've been a little disappointed with ESO, but I always have mixed feelings. This game has frustrated me a lot, but at the same time, I've had a lot of fun with it. That one is a case of the game not meeting my expectations. Nevertheless, ESO is a good game for its target audience. I'm still trying to decide if I'm that audience or not.
Finally, Darkfall. Specifically the Darkfall 2010 that was never delivered and the developer of that game, Aventurine. I don't want to say more about it. If you're not familiar with the matter, just check the game-specific forums.
So it looks like we have polarized opinions as usual.
1. Expectations of the players (this needs to go. Companies WILL bold and highlight your nostalgia as a selling point, this doesn't mean a duty nor obligation to provide for your internal battles) 2. Over-promise and under-deliver of the company (like all business) 3. Transparency between publishers/devs to customers needs to happen, ignoring business practices 4. Innovation in this area is scarce, practically zero R&D for coding and the possibilities of it unless someone comes up with a design first (unsure about this one as I don't have specified knowledge on this) 5. History teaches us to fall in line, hence the endless churning of the same genre to avoid disappoint and failure 6. Need people in the industry who are actually affluent at PLAYING games and understanding the META, not just the surface fun.
I think the main factors here are not so much to do with the games/technology themselves. Rather, the business practices and psyche of humans.
This quickly deterioated into a "the game doesnt meet my expectations at release because I didnt do careful enough research and didnt have realistic expectations" complains thread.
I think the real disappointments are from games that you actually enjoy playing. The worst offense being them shutting down. I still miss playing Vanguard.
Global cool down timers Lack of immersive gameplay mechanisms like player housing or poorly made maps Publishers Promises not being kept on launch Poorly coordinated launches Monthly sub fee's for substandard games WOW clones... and WOW Click 1-5 to win style MMO Paywalls Toxic Communities Shallow gameplay that is obviously just trying to cover up a cash grab game Too Easy
Unfortunately
my list covers about every mmo out today, the last MMO I truly enjoyed
was probably ff11 and Vanguard SoH... though vanguard was a kind of
guilty pleasure. I started the game at launch and fell in love with it.
After Brad sold us all out and his programmers nuked the code the game
was an absolute mess... but I still had love for it. Also loved Tabula
Rasa, before Lord Dickish abandoned it to go to space.
The only thing worse than a bad developer, is a developer that can make a great game and destroy it with their ego and or greed.
And yet Vanguard violates multiple entries of your list. Global cooldown was present. Certainly the launch was butchered since it was too early. And its an EQ clone, thus very compareable to WoW.
Just for the record there - if a MMO doesnt have global cooldown, I'm not interested. Global cooldown means the guy with the lower ping (usually me) still stands a chance, and it means the game focuses more on thinking than just reflexes.
I have to first of all expect something from a game to which there has only been a few in the last 10 years. Since there has only been about 2-3 games i expected to be really good i'll focus on the one....FFXIV.
I followed intensely,was disappointed in very single decision they were making and everything i saw,so in a way i was already not expecting much on release.After release all that was left was to see the final product and what i saw was a complete streamlined semi copy of FFXI but in a cheaper rushed way.
They basically took all the bad ideas and continued them while eliminating the good ones,so i was like wtf,who on earth is running this show.Then i saw them toss Tanaka under the bridge,but i knew better,i knew what Tanaka was about,no way was this his work.A few months later the truth comes out,Tanaka was told to let the new guys have their input into the game,he basically was just their to idk be the face but it was most certainly not his game.
Since he has left i have seen this same terrible direction in game design,it is imo total rubbish,the only quality left is their graphics and story and lore but they even went cheap on voice overs.
Every game since then has to me just been a bunch of advertisements on this site and every site, a ton of VERY low quality game yes MUCH worse than FFXIV.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I'm disappointed in the genres inability to evolve past war themed mmos. There's nothing virtual world about it. It's just a million and one ways to defeat your enemies. Fucking tired.
The only exception was "Aion" and only because that was the first mmo that I had heard about from the start and it was reasonably early in my experience for mmo's (having played Lineage 2 and LOTRO and just trying EQ2 and Wow) and I didn't realize that what the devs said might not actually make it to the game.
That was the game that taught me perspective for mmo development.
For me it was Age of Conan and Warhammer Online. This was in 2008, if I remember correctly. After that, I was not disappointed or suckered again until the infamous ArcheAge Alpha Access package and subsequent changes. That one taught me another lesson about buying early access to games trusting the past reputation of a publisher or developer.
I've been a little disappointed with ESO, but I always have mixed feelings. This game has frustrated me a lot, but at the same time, I've had a lot of fun with it. That one is a case of the game not meeting my expectations. Nevertheless, ESO is a good game for its target audience. I'm still trying to decide if I'm that audience or not.
Finally, Darkfall. Specifically the Darkfall 2010 that was never delivered and the developer of that game, Aventurine. I don't want to say more about it. If you're not familiar with the matter, just check the game-specific forums.
So it looks like we have polarized opinions as usual.
Like with anything, the truth is probably somewhere in between, in most cases.
Don't get me wrong, I'm highly disappointed in ESO. Highly.
But that's only because they didn't make the game I would have liked. Not because I think they made a bad game.
I don't blame hype on the devs at all provided they are telling the truth. Meaning, what you see in the game are the features that the devs said would be in the game.
If they use a lot of adjectives then I discount them as that is subjective. I don't blame them for describing things as exciting as possible as long as the bullet points are all there.
I feel it's the players' fault for internalizing those adjectives with their own flavor. Essentially telling their own narrative.
I've used this example for before but there was a point when one of the devs said that SWToR would have epic combat. A player on this forum railed against that as he didn't think the combat was "epic".
Well what does that really mean? When I played SWToR it was EXACTLY the game I thought it would be.
But epic combat? Well that can mean anything. The combat is SWToR is flashy and the animations are fast and well done for the most part. It's certainly more exciting than having two avatars take slow swings at each other.
Is that epic? To some I'm sure but to others they might look to other factors. But that's subjective. Clearly the devs felt they were making epic combat based upon certain factors.
It's up to the players to bring those li'l brains of theirs and realize that you can't buy into subjective statements. You can buy into the bullet points for features and then evaluate those features on whether or not they do what is said they will do.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
if the game looks even remotely like yet another wow copy, be it design choice or combat system is what makes me immediately turn off an mmo and/or when the main gameplay consist of non-stop mindless grinding with no goal
Virtual world has been tried in games like The Second Life, and that is not anywhere close to be as successful as combat centric games. Look at LoL .. it is nothing but jump in and combat.
The only games that have some virtual world feel are the survival ones. Other than that, i think you probably won't see much of virtual world.
In fact, if you look at combat centric games .. they are increasingly LESS virtual world (from EQ to WOW to focused convenient combat games like warframe or Marvel Heroes).
Virtual world has been tried in games like The Second Life, and that is not anywhere close to be as successful as combat centric games. Look at LoL .. it is nothing but jump in and combat.
The only games that have some virtual world feel are the survival ones. Other than that, i think you probably won't see much of virtual world.
In fact, if you look at combat centric games .. they are increasingly LESS virtual world (from EQ to WOW to focused convenient combat games like warframe or Marvel Heroes).
Why so black and white? A virtual world can also be combat centric. You can make up a setting that includes any feature from nowadays themepark MMO's and put them in a virtual world. A sandbox can have quests (no matter if you make your own or are handed one by talking to some npc) and can evolve around combat. Just in a virtual world, you expect non combat activities and roles too for it to be convincing. Still, the world can all be about some war between realms or planets or whatever.
One of the things I have noticed is that when you make everyone a winner, winning has no meaning.
That basic concept is what I think causes such.
There is an old software development concept that goes like this "You don't give your client what they want, you give them what they need". This is a key element of establishing proper requirements. The point is, most clients don't know exactly how to communicate properly what it is they need and some think they want something, but when they get it, they realize that wasn't it. This leads to a circular development cycle resulting in the disappointment of the client and the demoralization of the developer.
People love the feeling of success. They love to win and all of the rewards that comes with such. Thing is, winning has no meaning if there is no challenging obstacle to succeed against. It is failure that makes winning worth it. This is what is lacking in MMOs and even games today. There is no "game" to the games, there is only entertainment, only the attempt to provide the reward without the effort. There are no obstacles, challenges, or consistency of failure which make the winning have meaning.
It is a concept of reality. When we think back to the events in our lives, we don't think back on how wonderful it was to be handed that win without effort. We think back to the times where we conquered our fears, succeeded against difficult odds, and savored the finish after a long and difficult journey. That is... we don't find enjoyment in the win itself, but the winning "against" a challenge. This is what games today get wrong.
Games today lack any sort of challenge. There is no "game over", no "try again", no "you lose", etc... There are no obstacles, no challenges, no victories. All that exists is showing up, standing in line and waiting for your reward to be handed out.
If game developers are really interested in making games that people enjoy, then they need to stop worrying about appealing to every reflexive "want" and start looking at what these players are actually seeking, what they truly need. This means, you don't develop features that ruin game play. If there is no real loss, there is no real win and it isn't a game as much as it is mundane entertainment.
People remember how rewarding the win is, but only if the loss was real, or the effort was serious. People don't look back to a game and say "Ah, I remember getting that gear item, it was a lot of fun... I went out, did a couple of easy 5 min dungeons and turned in my tokens to get that item, it was a really fun day", just like people don't reminisce about easy events that required no effort, or had any significance in completion. I mean, how many share the details of how they did a quick sweeping of their kitchen floor after dinner? This is the problem, adversity has been removed from games, all that is left is the win (the reward) and as I said, when everyone is a winner, then winning has no meaning.
Put the "game" back into the entertainment. Don't be afraid to tell people "you lose", make them earn their moments of victory with effort and reward them properly when they do. Make people wait, make them set goals, plan for success and strive for that win, to actually win and not simply be handed a participation trophy. Don't give people want they want, give them what they really need.
I guess to experience disappointment I will have to play it for a bit. What usually makes me stop playing a game that passed my initial requirements to play in the first place is either overly complicated in-game systems such as crafting, skills, etc. I don't like feeling overwhelmed and having to research extensively for hours before I can make a decision or figure out how to do something at all. Another thing is a game I think I could like only to find out it's open world pvp with no pve server. Games that have shops including items that make you more powerful or don't let you play as much as you want without spending far more than the cost of a monthly sub.
One of the things I have noticed is that when you make everyone a winner, winning has no meaning.
That basic concept is what I think causes such.
There is an old software development concept that goes like this "You don't give your client what they want, you give them what they need". This is a key element of establishing proper requirements. The point is, most clients don't know exactly how to communicate properly what it is they need and some think they want something, but when they get it, they realize that wasn't it. This leads to a circular development cycle resulting in the disappointment of the client and the demoralization of the developer.
People love the feeling of success. They love to win and all of the rewards that comes with such. Thing is, winning has no meaning if there is no challenging obstacle to succeed against. It is failure that makes winning worth it. This is what is lacking in MMOs and even games today. There is no "game" to the games, there is only entertainment, only the attempt to provide the reward without the effort. There are no obstacles, challenges, or consistency of failure which make the winning have meaning.
It is a concept of reality. When we think back to the events in our lives, we don't think back on how wonderful it was to be handed that win without effort. We think back to the times where we conquered our fears, succeeded against difficult odds, and savored the finish after a long and difficult journey. That is... we don't find enjoyment in the win itself, but the winning "against" a challenge. This is what games today get wrong.
Games today lack any sort of challenge. There is no "game over", no "try again", no "you lose", etc... There are no obstacles, no challenges, no victories. All that exists is showing up, standing in line and waiting for your reward to be handed out.
If game developers are really interested in making games that people enjoy, then they need to stop worrying about appealing to every reflexive "want" and start looking at what these players are actually seeking, what they truly need. This means, you don't develop features that ruin game play. If there is no real loss, there is no real win and it isn't a game as much as it is mundane entertainment.
People remember how rewarding the win is, but only if the loss was real, or the effort was serious. People don't look back to a game and say "Ah, I remember getting that gear item, it was a lot of fun... I went out, did a couple of easy 5 min dungeons and turned in my tokens to get that item, it was a really fun day", just like people don't reminisce about easy events that required no effort, or had any significance in completion. I mean, how many share the details of how they did a quick sweeping of their kitchen floor after dinner? This is the problem, adversity has been removed from games, all that is left is the win (the reward) and as I said, when everyone is a winner, then winning has no meaning.
Put the "game" back into the entertainment. Don't be afraid to tell people "you lose", make them earn their moments of victory with effort and reward them properly when they do. Make people wait, make them set goals, plan for success and strive for that win, to actually win and not simply be handed a participation trophy. Don't give people want they want, give them what they really need.
I've been thinking the same thing myself.
What is a journey if you take certain negatives out of it that are part of a journey?
I don't even understand how you can have fun without suffering a bit at times first.
I believe this is what turns me off when I jump into and MMO and why I don't play them anymore. I start playing and there are extremely limited choices on where I can go and what I can do. I am directed places and given the right equipment. The choices I have to make for my class have little overall impact on how effective I am. It's just another flavor of the same effectiveness. Leveling up is fairly quick and easy. I'm told exactly where to go and what to do when I get there. The mobs are all balanced to be beaten easily. Getting lost or killed is almost impossible. There isn't much I would call a journey or adventure inside all of this. It's just some mini games that revolve around specific segregated things like group, raid, solo, or PvP.
I generally don't find it entertaining. I usually play single player games as they at least have good cinematics and story. It all just feels to artificial and not enough like a living and breathing world. Even old games were better at accomplishing that feat. Even the characters feel really generic. The villains aren't bad enough. The good guys have no flaws. There isn't a random drunk sitting in the bar with something amusing to say. I remember RPGs on Nintendo that delved into deeper subjects than most MMOs. I think this is possible part of the masses effect again. No one wants to offend anyone with potential sensitive topics or jokes.
The problem is 2-fold, players with expectations that don't match the game spec, and developers who design to reward constantly and to aim for every demographic known to man.
Theres great mmorpg out there that millions enjoy, so really the latter can be avoided sovit boils down to players making poor choices and blaming the world for these choices.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Comments
Sure, great, you have a game in mind that you think people will love. Good for you. Come back and show what you have done when it's close to release, not already attempting to hype your dream game when it's going to take another 2-3+ years for us to play it.
I don't want to say names but I'm sure you know which games I'm talking about.
I self identify as a monkey.
F2P monetisation generally means that rather than appealing to a broad audience who individually contribute a little money; you instead only have to find ways to illicit money out of a small number of individuals with little control over their spending habits.
I agree that this is ruining games.
Nothing is ever going to be good enough for the majority of the community. The community as a whole will never look at itself as the major problem though.
Additionally, I have seen players take the comments of the devs and just run with them. They pretty much fill i the blanks with their own special narrative.
This is not to say that all developers are angels (because I don't think that at all) but pretty much every mmo that has come out has been pretty close to what I thought it would be.
The only exception was "Aion" and only because that was the first mmo that I had heard about from the start and it was reasonably early in my experience for mmo's (having played Lineage 2 and LOTRO and just trying EQ2 and Wow) and I didn't realize that what the devs said might not actually make it to the game.
That was the game that taught me perspective for mmo development.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
- Why my game is important
- Why my game is the only hope
- Why we are a return to the roots of...
- Why we are the "spiritual successor to"...
They wouldn't get as much flack. I currently have a decent amount of money spent on various Kickstarter games that interest me. That very LAST thing I am going to do is shout out how great the game is going to be. I will say why I THINK it could be good, but people get too personally invested in these games. Many times in ones that aren't even out and they haven't even played.There is no need to hype games that will be ready (?) in 2018 (see recent "SOL Dev journal on this site"). It's silly and we have ALL seen this movie before and know how it tragically ends. Produce a kickass game, OVER deliver to your customers.. and you will have a license to print money. "Over-hype and under-delivery" is a proven way to kill your game. So unless you are interested in a quick pump and dump, there is really no reason to do so.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
I've been a little disappointed with ESO, but I always have mixed feelings. This game has frustrated me a lot, but at the same time, I've had a lot of fun with it. That one is a case of the game not meeting my expectations. Nevertheless, ESO is a good game for its target audience. I'm still trying to decide if I'm that audience or not.
Finally, Darkfall. Specifically the Darkfall 2010 that was never delivered and the developer of that game, Aventurine. I don't want to say more about it. If you're not familiar with the matter, just check the game-specific forums.
So it looks like we have polarized opinions as usual.
(Expectations: Blame Consumer)------------------------------------------------(Hype: Blame Devs)
Like with anything, the truth is probably somewhere in between, in most cases.
2. Over-promise and under-deliver of the company (like all business)
3. Transparency between publishers/devs to customers needs to happen, ignoring business practices
4. Innovation in this area is scarce, practically zero R&D for coding and the possibilities of it unless someone comes up with a design first (unsure about this one as I don't have specified knowledge on this)
5. History teaches us to fall in line, hence the endless churning of the same genre to avoid disappoint and failure
6. Need people in the industry who are actually affluent at PLAYING games and understanding the META, not just the surface fun.
I think the main factors here are not so much to do with the games/technology themselves. Rather, the business practices and psyche of humans.
This quickly deterioated into a "the game doesnt meet my expectations at release because I didnt do careful enough research and didnt have realistic expectations" complains thread.
I think the real disappointments are from games that you actually enjoy playing. The worst offense being them shutting down. I still miss playing Vanguard.
And yet Vanguard violates multiple entries of your list. Global cooldown was present. Certainly the launch was butchered since it was too early. And its an EQ clone, thus very compareable to WoW.
Just for the record there - if a MMO doesnt have global cooldown, I'm not interested. Global cooldown means the guy with the lower ping (usually me) still stands a chance, and it means the game focuses more on thinking than just reflexes.
Since there has only been about 2-3 games i expected to be really good i'll focus on the one....FFXIV.
I followed intensely,was disappointed in very single decision they were making and everything i saw,so in a way i was already not expecting much on release.After release all that was left was to see the final product and what i saw was a complete streamlined semi copy of FFXI but in a cheaper rushed way.
They basically took all the bad ideas and continued them while eliminating the good ones,so i was like wtf,who on earth is running this show.Then i saw them toss Tanaka under the bridge,but i knew better,i knew what Tanaka was about,no way was this his work.A few months later the truth comes out,Tanaka was told to let the new guys have their input into the game,he basically was just their to idk be the face but it was most certainly not his game.
Since he has left i have seen this same terrible direction in game design,it is imo total rubbish,the only quality left is their graphics and story and lore but they even went cheap on voice overs.
Every game since then has to me just been a bunch of advertisements on this site and every site, a ton of VERY low quality game yes MUCH worse than FFXIV.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
But that's only because they didn't make the game I would have liked. Not because I think they made a bad game.
I don't blame hype on the devs at all provided they are telling the truth. Meaning, what you see in the game are the features that the devs said would be in the game.
If they use a lot of adjectives then I discount them as that is subjective. I don't blame them for describing things as exciting as possible as long as the bullet points are all there.
I feel it's the players' fault for internalizing those adjectives with their own flavor. Essentially telling their own narrative.
I've used this example for before but there was a point when one of the devs said that SWToR would have epic combat. A player on this forum railed against that as he didn't think the combat was "epic".
Well what does that really mean? When I played SWToR it was EXACTLY the game I thought it would be.
But epic combat? Well that can mean anything. The combat is SWToR is flashy and the animations are fast and well done for the most part. It's certainly more exciting than having two avatars take slow swings at each other.
Is that epic? To some I'm sure but to others they might look to other factors. But that's subjective. Clearly the devs felt they were making epic combat based upon certain factors.
It's up to the players to bring those li'l brains of theirs and realize that you can't buy into subjective statements. You can buy into the bullet points for features and then evaluate those features on whether or not they do what is said they will do.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
The only games that have some virtual world feel are the survival ones. Other than that, i think you probably won't see much of virtual world.
In fact, if you look at combat centric games .. they are increasingly LESS virtual world (from EQ to WOW to focused convenient combat games like warframe or Marvel Heroes).
That basic concept is what I think causes such.
There is an old software development concept that goes like this "You don't give your client what they want, you give them what they need". This is a key element of establishing proper requirements. The point is, most clients don't know exactly how to communicate properly what it is they need and some think they want something, but when they get it, they realize that wasn't it. This leads to a circular development cycle resulting in the disappointment of the client and the demoralization of the developer.
People love the feeling of success. They love to win and all of the rewards that comes with such. Thing is, winning has no meaning if there is no challenging obstacle to succeed against. It is failure that makes winning worth it. This is what is lacking in MMOs and even games today. There is no "game" to the games, there is only entertainment, only the attempt to provide the reward without the effort. There are no obstacles, challenges, or consistency of failure which make the winning have meaning.
It is a concept of reality. When we think back to the events in our lives, we don't think back on how wonderful it was to be handed that win without effort. We think back to the times where we conquered our fears, succeeded against difficult odds, and savored the finish after a long and difficult journey. That is... we don't find enjoyment in the win itself, but the winning "against" a challenge. This is what games today get wrong.
Games today lack any sort of challenge. There is no "game over", no "try again", no "you lose", etc... There are no obstacles, no challenges, no victories. All that exists is showing up, standing in line and waiting for your reward to be handed out.
If game developers are really interested in making games that people enjoy, then they need to stop worrying about appealing to every reflexive "want" and start looking at what these players are actually seeking, what they truly need. This means, you don't develop features that ruin game play. If there is no real loss, there is no real win and it isn't a game as much as it is mundane entertainment.
People remember how rewarding the win is, but only if the loss was real, or the effort was serious. People don't look back to a game and say "Ah, I remember getting that gear item, it was a lot of fun... I went out, did a couple of easy 5 min dungeons and turned in my tokens to get that item, it was a really fun day", just like people don't reminisce about easy events that required no effort, or had any significance in completion. I mean, how many share the details of how they did a quick sweeping of their kitchen floor after dinner? This is the problem, adversity has been removed from games, all that is left is the win (the reward) and as I said, when everyone is a winner, then winning has no meaning.
Put the "game" back into the entertainment. Don't be afraid to tell people "you lose", make them earn their moments of victory with effort and reward them properly when they do. Make people wait, make them set goals, plan for success and strive for that win, to actually win and not simply be handed a participation trophy. Don't give people want they want, give them what they really need.
I've been thinking the same thing myself.
What is a journey if you take certain negatives out of it that are part of a journey?
I don't even understand how you can have fun without suffering a bit at times first.
I believe this is what turns me off when I jump into and MMO and why I don't play them anymore. I start playing and there are extremely limited choices on where I can go and what I can do. I am directed places and given the right equipment. The choices I have to make for my class have little overall impact on how effective I am. It's just another flavor of the same effectiveness. Leveling up is fairly quick and easy. I'm told exactly where to go and what to do when I get there. The mobs are all balanced to be beaten easily. Getting lost or killed is almost impossible. There isn't much I would call a journey or adventure inside all of this. It's just some mini games that revolve around specific segregated things like group, raid, solo, or PvP.
I generally don't find it entertaining. I usually play single player games as they at least have good cinematics and story. It all just feels to artificial and not enough like a living and breathing world. Even old games were better at accomplishing that feat. Even the characters feel really generic. The villains aren't bad enough. The good guys have no flaws. There isn't a random drunk sitting in the bar with something amusing to say. I remember RPGs on Nintendo that delved into deeper subjects than most MMOs. I think this is possible part of the masses effect again. No one wants to offend anyone with potential sensitive topics or jokes.
Theres great mmorpg out there that millions enjoy, so really the latter can be avoided sovit boils down to players making poor choices and blaming the world for these choices.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D