Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
I simply point to all the good old days threads on here where people ask for updated EQ's, WoW legacy servers and the return of interdependency that pop up on here daily. I don't have to speak for the core audience. I can simply use those threads on here for reference. People wanted updated EQ's and UO's and those threads prove my point. As I mentioned Wildstar couldn't even do launch WoW right.
And while you may not like Asian mmos, the Korean mmos are the only ones trying to do something right. Aesthetics don't change the fact of a game being good. Just because I may not like the art of a game doesn't mean the game is bad. Case in point? Ryzom, one of the best sandbox mmos of all time is hurt by its art style, but its an amazing game that is worthy to be copied and presented on a AAA level. Same for a westernized version of ArcheAge Alpha. Same for a westernized version of BDO and a westernized version of FFXIV.
I personally cannot think of a comparable number of western mmos that are equal or better than those right now. But I'd love to hear your suggestions.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
I simply point to all the good old days threads on here where people ask for updated EQ's, WoW legacy servers and the return of interdependency that pop up on here daily. I don't have to speak for the core audience. I can simply use those threads on here for reference. People wanted updated EQ's and UO's and those threads prove my point.
So, the few nostalgic fans make up the entire core audience - and that's your "proof"?
Should give Black Desert a spin. It has kind of an old school feel to it.
A lot of the more popular mmo's badge everyone as a winner just for logging in. Most of the older mmo's didn't.
My first mmo was swg pre cu so according to the majority I was ruined right from the start. A lot of the old games look fantastic through rose tinted glasses..
Have fun in whatever you're doing or find something else to do. Don't stick with something just for the sake of sticking with it.
Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
I simply point to all the good old days threads on here where people ask for updated EQ's, WoW legacy servers and the return of interdependency that pop up on here daily. I don't have to speak for the core audience. I can simply use those threads on here for reference. People wanted updated EQ's and UO's and those threads prove my point.
So, the few nostalgic fans make up the entire core audience - and that's your "proof"?
Ok, sure.
I don't care about what the casuals want. They weren't mmo players, they were WoW players.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
I simply point to all the good old days threads on here where people ask for updated EQ's, WoW legacy servers and the return of interdependency that pop up on here daily. I don't have to speak for the core audience. I can simply use those threads on here for reference. People wanted updated EQ's and UO's and those threads prove my point.
So, the few nostalgic fans make up the entire core audience - and that's your "proof"?
Ok, sure.
I don't care about what the casuals want. They weren't mmo players, they were WoW players.
When i wrote "Good" titles as a thread name, i simply meant those that pass an average mmorpg player criteria, and that are some basic things:
The world is populated - its an mmo game The game itself is playable - no major bugs, not many bots/hackers The game is interesting - It can keep you ocupied for hours The game has updates and content - Devs and Publisher care about players at least a bit
Say ,dont think that looks like much, but funny thing, most games cant pass this criteria by a long shot.
When i wrote "Good" titles as a thread name, i simply meant those that pass an average mmorpg player criteria, and that are some basic things:
The world is populated - its an mmo game The game itself is playable - no major bugs, not many bots/hackers The game is interesting - It can keep you ocupied for hours The game has updates and content - Devs and Publisher care about players at least a bit
Say ,dont think that looks like much, but funny thing, most games cant pass this criteria by a long shot.
Please explain how, picking just for simplicity, major mainstream titles like SWTOR, ESO or GW2 are not passing those checks...
In a nutshell, if you're looking for another game to play, the games that you did play failed to meet your requirements also.
Using everyone's favorite punching bag... WoW... kept a lot of people entertained for 2-3 expansions before starting it's downward trend. In essence, it met your requirements for a time, then fizzled out. During that time, there *could* have been 10,000 other MMOs on the market, of equal quality et al, but you wouldn't have cared because WoW was your one and only.
Fast forward to today and you have <exaggerated> 10,000 <exaggerated> MMOs and none of them hold your attention span any more than another. You are constantly looking for something else. You are constantly hopping games to quash your boredom.
I contend that in addition to the lack of anything meaningful to play there is also MBD at play. Either one of these things will keep you from ever finding that game again.
BTW, MBD is MMO Burnout Disorder. It's a new phenom with many names that no one can agree on... but it's real, and you're living with it.
HAHAH MR.Burns do the Evil Pyramid of Contemplation with your hands
U made me laugh in a good way as i understand exactly what you speak of, but im not one of those WoW-Only people.
Had alot of free time on my hands and played about 10-20 titles, some of them several times, Tera 3, Archeage 2, Aion 2 ,RF Online 2, etc each of them i enjoyed to a point, Tera untill Awakening/Liberation affair, might return to it yet, its still ok if any active servers Planetside 2-awesome game, played it untill they messed up the UI and pop went down drastically RF Online - heh it was always p2w but didnt bother me much while i was younger, what did is low pop Archeage -after reporting a certain hacker for the 6th time and recieving no response from Trion i decided to yolo my gear, and my gear went up -.- ,couldnt even rage-quit properly
plenty others, almost each turned bad couse of something, except Rift for example, it just went empty.
I had much fun for a time, but hm ,almost a year now, and i see no alternative titles.
Tried Skyforge- instanced, low pop. Heard Wildstar is nearly empty -tho its rethorical, if people dont join
it of course its gonna stay empty, why it is not populated much is
another matter. Still playing Path of Exile Sometimes GW2 but spent too much time already, bored of it Gonna give Blade&Soul a shot prolly. And thats about all, cornered to Blade&Soul, since, well its new&populated, i should play it right.
Much like the silence of those who have gathered around a table and are digging in to a satisfying meal.
Seriously, what innate insecurity is it that causes one to think if there aren't 5-10 MMORPG titles coming out every year the genre must be dead? The very idea of a MMORPG is that of a massive, evolving world. Divide a finite number of players into a ever growing number of worlds, and what are you left with?
Couldn't the "Silence" you point out be that of people who have found exactly what they are looking for, and are no longer clamoring for the Next Great Thing(tm)?
/2c
edit: I'll tell you about my favorite game if you want, but there are so many great MMORPGs out there. I can only conclude it must be laziness not to find one worth playing. And you know what? That's okay! MMORPGs don't have to be for "everyone".
Sorry for the rant. After having played one (yes, one!) MMORPG for 12 years, I just get tired of click-baity titles like this. It seems to be some kind of pandemic, and I suspect patient zero is from Reddit.
If you can find find an mmorpg you can enjoy ,that can solely mean you have very low standards, which is fine, if you can enjoy a game with neglecting its many flaws that can make it enjoyable.
I can not play games if there is much frustration related to playing them.
Personally i can not find more than 5 titles that do not have High Lag/P2W/Underpopulation or any other gamebreaking flaw on them.
And those 5, trust me ,ive been playing them for years.
And for years as well, i have been waiting for alternative that, never came.
I don't think finding a game I've enjoyed for over a decade is because I have "very low standards" (although, as a 35 year old working professional, you may have a point about me); in fact, I'm very particular about what I like.
To me, a MMORPG is less about whether it takes place on land or in space, whether it includes a human avatar or not, and more about its server architecture. It's funny that you call SC a MMORPG, but not Eve; to me, this is flipped.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
It's not for everyone, but I challenge anyone to find a title with a better virtual world on the market today.
Any title with a seamless world where you play a character and not a spaceship?
Yeah, yeah, got it, no avatars, EVE bad.
What other titles have good seamless worlds these days? BDO caught my eye, I just have to overcome my personal aversion to action combat. ( I'm old and slow) O.o
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
When i wrote "Good" titles as a thread name, i simply meant those that pass an average mmorpg player criteria, and that are some basic things:
The world is populated - its an mmo game The game itself is playable - no major bugs, not many bots/hackers The game is interesting - It can keep you ocupied for hours The game has updates and content - Devs and Publisher care about players at least a bit
Say ,dont think that looks like much, but funny thing, most games cant pass this criteria by a long shot.
Out of these 4 criteria, 3 are relatively objective, comparisons can be made to other games / the genre in general and can scored.
However, "The game is interesting".......
This is purely subjective. What you find interesting and I find interesting is likely to vary immensely. PvP vs PvE (I'd never play an MMO without pvp for example), Action vs Traditional combat, themepark vs sandbox, classes vs freeform, horizontal vs vertical progression, instanced vs open world.....
So, you're four basic things are not objective, therefore cannot be measured, quantified and ranked with a definitive result.
Hopefully that makes sense and also explains why people are disagreeing with you so much. There are a lot of MMORPGs on the market that fulfil your 4 criteria depending on your definition of "interesting".
For the record, there are no mmorpgs on the market that meet my criteria either, but at least I recognise my criteria as being mine, rather than insisting that my criteria is the same as everyone elses.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Should give Black Desert a spin. It has kind of an old school feel to it.
A lot of the more popular mmo's badge everyone as a winner just for logging in. Most of the older mmo's didn't.
My first mmo was swg pre cu so according to the majority I was ruined right from the start. A lot of the old games look fantastic through rose tinted glasses..
Have fun in whatever you're doing or find something else to do. Don't stick with something just for the sake of sticking with it.
Im split between BD and B&S, thought about Wildstar but after numerous claims that it has nearly empty empty servers wont give in.
Am uncertain tho since both BD and B&S have good graphics but B&S maybe have more advanced combat, but than again BD is sandbox, oh the pain xD
When i wrote "Good" titles as a thread name, i simply meant those that pass an average mmorpg player criteria, and that are some basic things:
The world is populated - its an mmo game The game itself is playable - no major bugs, not many bots/hackers The game is interesting - It can keep you ocupied for hours The game has updates and content - Devs and Publisher care about players at least a bit
Say ,dont think that looks like much, but funny thing, most games cant pass this criteria by a long shot.
Out of these 4 criteria, 3 are relatively objective, comparisons can be made to other games / the genre in general and can scored.
However, "The game is interesting".......
This is purely subjective. What you find interesting and I find interesting is likely to vary immensely. PvP vs PvE (I'd never play an MMO without pvp for example), Action vs Traditional combat, themepark vs sandbox, classes vs freeform, horizontal vs vertical progression, instanced vs open world.....
So, you're four basic things are not objective, therefore cannot be measured, quantified and ranked with a definitive result.
Hopefully that makes sense and also explains why people are disagreeing with you so much. There are a lot of MMORPGs on the market that fulfil your 4 criteria depending on your definition of "interesting".
For the record, there are no mmorpgs on the market that meet my criteria either, but at least I recognise my criteria as being mine, rather than insisting that my criteria is the same as everyone elses.
Aye ,well i just said interesting Didnt say interesting to me at all. I dont see many players playing dumbed down, or overly complex games, it simply isnt general oppinion. Also severely dated games, tend to have only handfull of players.
If it was me id make the list with at least 10 requirements, but its not.
Simple, if a certain game is dull ,playerbase will try it, and most of them will get repulsed since its known what players search in mmorpg's ,and that is either addiction, depth, fun or similar.
I think, when people say there are many great MMOs out - they really mean there are many MMOs out that they, personally, enjoy and are satisfied with.
At least I hope that's what they're saying.
Huh? Of course that is what they are saying, 'good' is completely subjective.
I think, when people say there are no great MMOs out, they really mean there are many MMOs out that they, personally, do not enjoy and are unsatisfied with.
Same coin, different sides really. Those people are just as right as you are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Are you going to deny that millions of gamers would play WoW 2 if it came out?
Deny it? Hard for me to do that since it's just a fantasy in your head. They did cancel Titan and turned its assets into a MOBA didn't they?
Ask the Blizzard bean counters why they did it. Do you think its because it would attract another 100 milion players and they don't want that?
And yes, the masses flirting with MMOs when it was cool and trendy to do that was exactly what spiked the numbers and prompted every Tom, Dick and Harry to start developing WOW clones 'cause they wanted some of that. Worked out well for them didn't it?
So, you don't agree that millions would play a WoW 2?
Nothing like the number that played WOW because, once again, the masses are now playing MOBAs and other quickie games and the core, true mmorpg audience has many more current ones to choose from.
And what exactly would this "WOW 2" in your head look like? More easy, casual, quick matches while standing around Stormwind waiting for the queue to pop?
The reality is all around you if you just open your eyes. Aiming for 500k concurrent players is the realistic mmorpg target just like it was before WOW.
The core true mmorpg audience didn't ask for WoW styled themeparks which most of the genre is filled with nowadays, so I'd have to disagree with. The core audience who was there prior to WoW wanted something more akin to Pantheon, Vanguard, a better City of Heroes and an updated 3D UO which ArcheAge during Alpha hit perfectly before the devs went stupid.
The current genre is NOT what the core ever wanted or asked for, worse yet, nobody has even gotten WoW Vanilla right and made a comparable game to its 2004 launch still to this day.
You speak for the entire core audience?
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
I simply point to all the good old days threads on here where people ask for updated EQ's, WoW legacy servers and the return of interdependency that pop up on here daily. I don't have to speak for the core audience. I can simply use those threads on here for reference. People wanted updated EQ's and UO's and those threads prove my point.
So, the few nostalgic fans make up the entire core audience - and that's your "proof"?
Ok, sure.
I don't care about what the casuals want. They weren't mmo players, they were WoW players.
And the casuals do not care about you, some minority on a high horse with a false sense of superiority. And guess what? The casuals won, big time even.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I think, when people say there are many great MMOs out - they really mean there are many MMOs out that they, personally, enjoy and are satisfied with.
At least I hope that's what they're saying.
Huh? Of course that is what they are saying, 'good' is completely subjective.
I think, when people say there are no great MMOs out, they really mean there are many MMOs out that they, personally, do not enjoy and are unsatisfied with.
Same coin, different sides really. Those people are just as right as you are.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
I'm glad we agree, but I'm afraid a lot of people don't. Seems to me that many people struggle with what you're saying - and they seem to be under the illusion that their opinions are objective in some way.
Certainly, it seems some are trying hard to tell others what to think about games.
It's long passed the time of the "One Game to Rule Them All" and now we have a buffet of games to choose from. I'm not interested in spending all my time in one place, just like I'd get sick of mac and cheese (I know, heathen talk) if that's all I ever ate.
It's long passed the time of the "One Game to Rule Them All" and now we have a buffet of games to choose from. I'm not interested in spending all my time in one place, just like I'd get sick of mac and cheese (I know, heathen talk) if that's all I ever ate.
Some people enjoy going from girl to girl, too. Personally, I like to commit and invest.
Not saying one is better than the other, but I sure do miss having one game to focus on and invest in.
For me, having a buffet of derivative titles isn't an improvement at all.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
It's long passed the time of the "One Game to Rule Them All" and now we have a buffet of games to choose from. I'm not interested in spending all my time in one place, just like I'd get sick of mac and cheese (I know, heathen talk) if that's all I ever ate.
Some people enjoy going from girl to girl, too. Personally, I like to commit and invest.
Not saying one is better than the other, but I sure do miss having one game to focus on and invest in.
For me, having a buffet of derivative titles isn't an improvement at all.
Comparing women to video games... I can't help to think "maybe you need a real woman" when I read such stuff.
i recently wrote somewhat similar comment comparing games to other things, hey why not, check it out ,hope u have fun
"MMO's are like food or beverage, they are MANY, some are recognised by quality and some simply by marketing. Some are almost the same but in different package.
People do weirdest of things, instead of making them more healthy, they make them near poisonous, but in shiny package, and when other people look at a package they believe and buy it.
Why u say?
Simple, poison comes cheap. Quality does not.
As long as you keep buying it, we will keep making it. "
"That said, i believe MMO Market will grow as long as internet and world population does
What some players might be pointing out is one branch of MMO, called MMORPG which is having some difficulties.
The now established F2P model is pushing P2P/B2P out of the way, microtransactions seem smaller investments than giving out 50$ outright on purchase, and publishers like that.
Why would Publishers like giving something free rather than getting those 50$ right away you say?
Microtransactions/Cash Shop, consider it like a bank loan, when you start playing, you notice you need this or that, which you really like, you might not have time on hand to farm it ingame, so you pay, and every other day you pay again,
before you know it you went over the 50$ mark but you are happy with your new costume ,armor, gun, sword, mount or whatever, and for Publisher it is important ,that you are happy
Enables escapism. Balances progression of doing and being. "Doing" is the capacity and variety of content to run characters through - PvE, PvP, Raiding - and "Being" is the capacity and variety of what your character looks like, how it moves, etc. Doing must challenge and satisfy the desire to be competent and effective. Being must challenge and satisfy the desire to relate to others and the world around them through who they are and what they can make. That is the basis of who we are as humans and what we want out of life, which will either be enabled and exemplified through where the game succeeds or diminished through where it falls short.
That takes care of the player, but what of the world. Needs to be more than just a reflection of the character and game itself to aid in suspension of belief. Needs to allow for change by the hands of the character and by the hands of NPCs for depth. Needs to restrict enough that players can learn the rules, but allow for enough freedom to allow players ample illusion of control. Needs to be relevant in different ways depending on who and where you are in your character's life to allow for dimension. Needs to allow for progress: childhood - learning the ropes, adulthood (endgame), old age (veteran/elder status) and rebirth (new game+, alts, etc). Needs to allow for different foci - competitive (pvp/gvg/rvr with meaningful rewards for both character and world), cooperative (PvE with a purpose, Raiding, etc) and creative (crafting and player-based world building).
It will never appeal to everyone because its not supposed to. It will never last forever because its not supposed to. With solid enough technical systems (instancing, intellegent UI, upgradable object oriented design), enough creativity (solid and appealing artwork and music, immersive stories) and fruits of the marriage of concepts above, a compelling MMORPG could be made that has something for most everyone and can appeal to the most consumers.
That said, I hope to one day see this MMO. It may be after the trend of money soaked titles dies down and the player base most drawn to this variety of game comes together, compelled by what they originally fell in love with, to make a great and fun game. It will never be a perfect game and after so many have played through and burned out with dated systems based on similar concepts, it will need to harken to the old but come from a fresh direction. Perhaps with the advent of VR, we'll see a return to the market focus of what makes gaming great. Perhaps with the rise of mobile phone games, more game titles will blur the lines between the things that happen around us in our world and the worlds we escape to. The future is only a bleak place to those without vision of what can be, or might be in the hands of those who are understanding and capable.
What I could really go for right now is for someone to come out with a steampunk based true MMORPG with twitch based action, split-game design for balanced PVE/PVP (changes based on target) in an original graphically-pleasing partially-player-atlering world. but thats me...
Comments
What a joke.
I started with MUDs - and I never wanted a pointless grind like EQ or Vanguard. While I do appreciate aspects of those games - I'd definitely prefer WoW if that's all there is to it.
No, I wanted an evolution of UO - where the world simulation coupled with player empowerment was the primary focus. But it wasn't ArcheAge during alpha. Not only is the engine in AA terrible, they also completely neglected the PvE part of the game - and it's full of terrible JRPG tropes. No matter what they did post-release, it was never going to be what I wanted.
No, I always wanted a sandbox world full of compelling content, not an empty space where I had to imagine everything myself.
And while you may not like Asian mmos, the Korean mmos are the only ones trying to do something right. Aesthetics don't change the fact of a game being good. Just because I may not like the art of a game doesn't mean the game is bad. Case in point? Ryzom, one of the best sandbox mmos of all time is hurt by its art style, but its an amazing game that is worthy to be copied and presented on a AAA level. Same for a westernized version of ArcheAge Alpha. Same for a westernized version of BDO and a westernized version of FFXIV.
I personally cannot think of a comparable number of western mmos that are equal or better than those right now. But I'd love to hear your suggestions.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
Ok, sure.
A lot of the more popular mmo's badge everyone as a winner just for logging in. Most of the older mmo's didn't.
My first mmo was swg pre cu so according to the majority I was ruined right from the start. A lot of the old games look fantastic through rose tinted glasses..
Have fun in whatever you're doing or find something else to do. Don't stick with something just for the sake of sticking with it.
Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
The world is populated - its an mmo game
The game itself is playable - no major bugs, not many bots/hackers
The game is interesting - It can keep you ocupied for hours
The game has updates and content - Devs and Publisher care about players at least a bit
Say ,dont think that looks like much, but funny thing, most games cant pass this criteria by a long shot.
U made me laugh in a good way
Had alot of free time on my hands and played about 10-20 titles, some of them several times, Tera 3, Archeage 2, Aion 2 ,RF Online 2, etc each of them i enjoyed to a point,
Tera untill Awakening/Liberation affair, might return to it yet, its still ok if any active servers
Planetside 2-awesome game, played it untill they messed up the UI and pop went down drastically
RF Online - heh it was always p2w but didnt bother me much while i was younger, what did is low pop
Archeage -after reporting a certain hacker for the 6th time and recieving no response from Trion i decided to yolo my gear, and my gear went up -.- ,couldnt even rage-quit properly
plenty others, almost each turned bad couse of something, except Rift for example, it just went empty.
I had much fun for a time, but hm ,almost a year now, and i see no alternative titles.
Tried Skyforge- instanced, low pop.
Heard Wildstar is nearly empty -tho its rethorical, if people dont join it of course its gonna stay empty, why it is not populated much is another matter.
Still playing Path of Exile
Sometimes GW2 but spent too much time already, bored of it
Gonna give Blade&Soul a shot prolly.
And thats about all, cornered to Blade&Soul, since, well its new&populated, i should play it right.
To me, a MMORPG is less about whether it takes place on land or in space, whether it includes a human avatar or not, and more about its server architecture. It's funny that you call SC a MMORPG, but not Eve; to me, this is flipped.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
What other titles have good seamless worlds these days? BDO caught my eye, I just have to overcome my personal aversion to action combat. ( I'm old and slow) O.o
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
However, "The game is interesting".......
This is purely subjective. What you find interesting and I find interesting is likely to vary immensely. PvP vs PvE (I'd never play an MMO without pvp for example), Action vs Traditional combat, themepark vs sandbox, classes vs freeform, horizontal vs vertical progression, instanced vs open world.....
So, you're four basic things are not objective, therefore cannot be measured, quantified and ranked with a definitive result.
Hopefully that makes sense and also explains why people are disagreeing with you so much. There are a lot of MMORPGs on the market that fulfil your 4 criteria depending on your definition of "interesting".
For the record, there are no mmorpgs on the market that meet my criteria either, but at least I recognise my criteria as being mine, rather than insisting that my criteria is the same as everyone elses.
Am uncertain tho since both BD and B&S have good graphics but B&S maybe have more advanced combat, but than again BD is sandbox, oh the pain xD
I would say what sets them most apart is BDO being more like traditional MMO and B&S is a lot about instanced content and arena competitive PVP.
Since B&S is F2P, just try it out for yourself first.
Didnt say interesting to me at all.
I dont see many players playing dumbed down, or overly complex games, it simply isnt general oppinion.
Also severely dated games, tend to have only handfull of players.
If it was me id make the list with at least 10 requirements, but its not.
Simple, if a certain game is dull ,playerbase will try it, and most of them will get repulsed since its known what players search in mmorpg's ,and that is either addiction, depth, fun or similar.
I think, when people say there are no great MMOs out, they really mean there are many MMOs out that they, personally, do not enjoy and are unsatisfied with.
Same coin, different sides really. Those people are just as right as you are.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Certainly, it seems some are trying hard to tell others what to think about games.
I'm a MUDder. I play MUDs.
Current: Dragonrealms
Not saying one is better than the other, but I sure do miss having one game to focus on and invest in.
For me, having a buffet of derivative titles isn't an improvement at all.
Perhaps Martin Scorsese can enlighten us this November.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTPxWUs8nXs&list=RDMTPxWUs8nXs#t=12
I see you in pain.
"MMO's are like food or beverage, they are MANY, some are recognised by quality and some simply by marketing. Some are almost the same but in different package.
People do weirdest of things, instead of making them more healthy, they make them near poisonous, but in shiny package, and when other people look at a package they believe and buy it.
Why u say?
Simple, poison comes cheap.
Quality does not.
As long as you keep buying it, we will keep making it.
"That said, i believe MMO Market will grow as long as internet and world population does
What some players might be pointing out is one branch of MMO, called MMORPG which is having some difficulties.
The now established F2P model is pushing P2P/B2P out of the way, microtransactions seem smaller investments than giving out 50$ outright on purchase, and publishers like that.
Why would Publishers like giving something free rather than getting those 50$ right away you say?
Microtransactions/Cash Shop, consider it like a bank loan, when you start playing, you notice you need this or that, which you really like, you might not have time on hand to farm it ingame, so you pay, and every other day you pay again,
before you know it you went over the 50$ mark but you are happy with your new costume ,armor, gun, sword, mount or whatever, and for Publisher it is important ,that you are happy
Enables escapism. Balances progression of doing and being. "Doing" is the capacity and variety of content to run characters through - PvE, PvP, Raiding - and "Being" is the capacity and variety of what your character looks like, how it moves, etc. Doing must challenge and satisfy the desire to be competent and effective. Being must challenge and satisfy the desire to relate to others and the world around them through who they are and what they can make. That is the basis of who we are as humans and what we want out of life, which will either be enabled and exemplified through where the game succeeds or diminished through where it falls short.
That takes care of the player, but what of the world. Needs to be more than just a reflection of the character and game itself to aid in suspension of belief. Needs to allow for change by the hands of the character and by the hands of NPCs for depth. Needs to restrict enough that players can learn the rules, but allow for enough freedom to allow players ample illusion of control. Needs to be relevant in different ways depending on who and where you are in your character's life to allow for dimension. Needs to allow for progress: childhood - learning the ropes, adulthood (endgame), old age (veteran/elder status) and rebirth (new game+, alts, etc). Needs to allow for different foci - competitive (pvp/gvg/rvr with meaningful rewards for both character and world), cooperative (PvE with a purpose, Raiding, etc) and creative (crafting and player-based world building).
It will never appeal to everyone because its not supposed to. It will never last forever because its not supposed to. With solid enough technical systems (instancing, intellegent UI, upgradable object oriented design), enough creativity (solid and appealing artwork and music, immersive stories) and fruits of the marriage of concepts above, a compelling MMORPG could be made that has something for most everyone and can appeal to the most consumers.
That said, I hope to one day see this MMO. It may be after the trend of money soaked titles dies down and the player base most drawn to this variety of game comes together, compelled by what they originally fell in love with, to make a great and fun game. It will never be a perfect game and after so many have played through and burned out with dated systems based on similar concepts, it will need to harken to the old but come from a fresh direction. Perhaps with the advent of VR, we'll see a return to the market focus of what makes gaming great. Perhaps with the rise of mobile phone games, more game titles will blur the lines between the things that happen around us in our world and the worlds we escape to. The future is only a bleak place to those without vision of what can be, or might be in the hands of those who are understanding and capable.
What I could really go for right now is for someone to come out with a steampunk based true MMORPG with twitch based action, split-game design for balanced PVE/PVP (changes based on target) in an original graphically-pleasing partially-player-atlering world. but thats me...