PFO died on the vine because it was a terrible game in every aspect aside from what was promised. Yet it still managed to raise a couple million dollars.
The argument I'm making has nothing to do with if another game can raise 100 million dollars through Crowdfunding like Star Citizen.
The argument I'm making is that you have games like SWTOR that spent 200 million+ dollars on development without raising a single dime through crowdfunding only to make WoW with voice acting and Star Wars IP, and still be completely overshadowed by WoW.
That's many times the money you would need to create a good sandbox MMO that has taken the time to learn from the mistake of other failed sandboxes and perfect the recipe. And then you don't rely on Crowdforging to make your money. You rely on the fact that you're the first decent sandbox to hit the market since EVE, and go about making money the way any other AAA game would. Subscription/premium fees with a cash shop on the side.
If you can make 100 million on the promise of a good sandbox... maybe... in a few years. Imagine what you could make on a fully finished / quality product.
Passionate users don't have to the power to do something like that. A first rate game development company does.
That's the point, though, the evidence isn't there to suggest that you could make $100 million on your investment. Remember that a publisher is probably looking to make double their money back at minimum, so when you say a game could make $100 million and the game took $100 million to create, their target is a minimum $200 million. That's no small feat. After you factor in salaries, expenses, etc., you would need to be making upwards of $100 million annually to see a $50 million annual return, which would get you to re-coop your investment in 2 years, but you'd need to see that level of revenues beyond 2 years to actually realize any return.
On top of that, it should be noted that EVE has seen a decline in revenues year-over-year since 2012. This also persisted through expansions. Sure, it's still healthy, in the context of MMORPGs, but when it's the second most popular subscription-based MMORPG (based on subscriptions alone), and it's making $50 million annually in revenues, that's not really something that a publisher is going to be motivated to replicate. That's like your top-level, best case. So
What I will agree with is that Star Citizen COULD at least make publishers take another look at doing something innovative. However, there's another, similar, case with Elite: Dangerous. Sure, it was crowdfunded, but the majority ($80 million+) came after that when they went public in order to secure enough funding to make the game. After an initial spike, their stock has been on a stead decline ever since. With a whopping $25 million in revenues and $1.5 million in net income, investors simply aren't getting out of bed for this type of investment just yet.
All these factors being considered should be throwing up red flags like crazy!!! and it is. That's why we aren't likely to see another AAA MMORPG. We'll see things with MMORPG "elements" like Destiny, Red Dead Redemption 2? GTA V. However, I think we'll see much more in the way of integrating MMORPG elements into solid games opposed to the creation of a new AAA MMORPG.
You actually bring up another interesting problem with your example of SWTOR. It's almost impossible for an MMORPG to escape comparison to WoW, which actually hurts games. If you can't see any innovation in SWTOR, if you can't appreciate the differences between SWTOR and WoW then I'm not sure what your expectations are. However, the continual comparison of other MMORPGs to WoW is definitely a problem. Wildstar is another that had significant changes but ultimately died because it got tagged as "WoW in Space".
On a positive noted, there are some games in the chute that could very well prove me wrong. Camelot Unchained and Pantheon are both coming up soon, and strong, and they both come from a good pedigree that have an existing fan-base in the industry. I think that these games, even more than Star Citizen, could determine the fate of the MMORPG as we know it today (no pressure Mark and Brad). If they get a lukewarm response, then how could a publisher EVER justify spending 10, 15, 20 times what they spent on development, or more, to earn less than just putting their money in a high-interest savings account?
PFO died on the vine because it was a terrible game in every aspect aside from what was promised. Yet it still managed to raise a couple million dollars.
The argument I'm making has nothing to do with if another game can raise 100 million dollars through Crowdfunding like Star Citizen.
The argument I'm making is that you have games like SWTOR that spent 200 million+ dollars on development without raising a single dime through crowdfunding only to make WoW with voice acting and Star Wars IP, and still be completely overshadowed by WoW.
That's many times the money you would need to create a good sandbox MMO that has taken the time to learn from the mistake of other failed sandboxes and perfect the recipe. And then you don't rely on Crowdforging to make your money. You rely on the fact that you're the first decent sandbox to hit the market since EVE, and go about making money the way any other AAA game would. Subscription/premium fees with a cash shop on the side.
If you can make 100 million on the promise of a good sandbox... maybe... in a few years. Imagine what you could make on a fully finished / quality product.
Passionate users don't have to the power to do something like that. A first rate game development company does.
So your recipe for success is a sandbox game where they're going to charge a sub fee? You realize there is probably a good reason why companies dont go that route...
The point is that the succes of their Kickstarters shows that there is an untapped market.
Which MMO kickstarter was successful? Did I miss soemthing?
Fanboys think raising money means success, they really don't look at the actual game. Kickstarter is about selling a fantasy and getting paid to "develop" games while having no real accountability to anyone. It's mostly a scam that people are slowly starting to catch on to as one game after another gets endlessly delayed and constantly changed from the original concepts they promised. Crowdfunding has been a total failure for MMORPG's so far.
The point is that the succes of their Kickstarters shows that there is an untapped market.
Which MMO kickstarter was successful? Did I miss soemthing?
Fanboys think raising money means success, they really don't look at the actual game. Kickstarter is about selling a fantasy and getting paid to "develop" games while having no real accountability to anyone. It's mostly a scam that people are slowly starting to catch on to as one game after another gets endlessly delayed and constantly changed from the original concepts they promised. Crowdfunding has been a total failure for MMORPG's so far.
I would agree with you with regards to MMORPGs specifically. However, on the whole crowdfunding has proven itself as a viable funding mechanism for many games. Additionally, I feel like it promotes accountability rather than a lack thereof. There are hundreds of games on steam that would disagree with you that it's a scam.
Also, it should be noted that Wasteland 3 is now allowing people to ACTUALLY invest (and get a return on their money). So for all those people complaining about their "investment", there is now a means of actually investing and getting a monetary return. I think it's a positive development for sure.
The point is that the succes of their Kickstarters shows that there is an untapped market.
Which MMO kickstarter was successful? Did I miss soemthing?
The kickstarter gets funded that shows that there is interest for MMO's that do something different.
Funded does not mean released. Cant make it any more clear.
And give me a break you cant say SWTOR did something new with a straight face. Adding voice, "branching" story doesnt change how the game is being played. Those are extremely superficial changes. Overall it doesnt change the experience in a meaningful way. You are still killing 10 rats.
Thats the whole point behind wanting innovation. It is not about adding a twist to your combat system or adding a voice to characters. Or increasing the amount of polygons.
Its about creating an experience that is unique to your world on a fundamental level.
Regardless I strongly disagree that there is no market for succesful MMO's. Someone will come along with a fresh pair of eyes and new tech solutions. It will capture the imagination of its players while providing an alternative reality where players can live out a game fantasy. Once again seperating the genre from simple multiplayer titles. At the core of the MMO genre is the desire to live in a virtual reality.
And then big money will take note and spend another 10 years of trying to mimic the succesful format.
So your recipe for success is a sandbox game where they're going to charge a sub fee? You realize there is probably a good reason why companies dont go that route...
A sandbox mmo charging a sub fee was what worked in the old days, now idk.
The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
We don't need an innovator in the MMORPG genre, we need a solid disruptor which goes hand in hand with the OPs video.
By design disruptors identify and target an underserved market or need, capture it and push the walls outwards until they overcome the original providers.
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
You actually bring up another interesting problem with your example of SWTOR. It's almost impossible for an MMORPG to escape comparison to WoW, which actually hurts games. If you can't see any innovation in SWTOR, if you can't appreciate the differences between SWTOR and WoW then I'm not sure what your expectations are. However, the continual comparison of other MMORPGs to WoW is definitely a problem. Wildstar is another that had significant changes but ultimately died because it got tagged as "WoW in Space".
I'm sorry but SWTOR is the poster child for a WoW clone.
I'm describing a game:
1. You start out by picking a server based on your PvP and roleplaying preferences. 2. You then pick from one of two factions. 3. After that you select a race and class you will be locked into. 4. You then proceed to do a tutorial in starter are based on your race/class pick. 5. From there you level by killing monsters and doing quests with the occasional dungeon of PvP area thrown in. 6. At some point you pick a sub-class. You used to get skillpoints that you put into skill trees, but now you don't, you just pick a skilltree and the game specs for you. 7. Once you hit max level you switch focus from leveling to getting higher grades of gear. This is mainly done by raids or PvP arenas depending on if you want PvE or PvP gear. 8. That gear is separated by colors of rarity. Gear colors is a really big deal especially in the end game. 9. There is also crafting. You gather materials then use them to execute recipes. It's all timer based. There is really nothing to crafting but watching timers for the most part. 10. If you picked a PvP server you get to fight with the other faction you didn't pick at the start of the game in contested areas. Ultimately your actions on behalf of your faction through either PvP or PvE don't affect the greater world though. 11. The game uses tab targeting with skill bars. You get more abilities as you level up. They have affects such as stuns, DoTs, daze, knockdowns, disruptions etc. 12. There are mailboxes 13. There are auction houses 14. There are group / raid / dungeon finders. 15. There are soulbound items.
I could keep going on.
What game am I talking about? WoW or SWTOR? Both. All these items are the same in both games. Additionally most of these items apply to Rift, ArcheAge, LOTRO, Aion etc. etc. etc.
"That's most MMO's you just described!"
Sure. I mean it doesn't describe EVE, Runescape, or most indie MMOs very well but you're right. That's like 90% of AAA MMO's right there.
Which is the problem. There are no purple cows.
When you start thinking WoW and SWTOR have a significant and meaningful difference, it's clear that WoW clones are far too dominant in the MMO market.
So basically people are tired of the same old thing. Didn't have to listen to a motivational speaker to know this.
Also, the idea that people don't have less time is fallacious. Some people have chosen to spend (or rather waste) their time doing various things like social media and trying to juggle multiple hobbies versus engaging in just one. That does not mean they have "less time".
You rely on the fact that you're the first decent sandbox to hit the market since EVE, and go about making money the way any other AAA game would. Subscription/premium fees with a cash shop on the side.
So your recipe for success is a sandbox game where they're going to charge a sub fee? You realize there is probably a good reason why companies dont go that route...
Depending on the hype levels for your game you launch with or without a subscription fee to play at all. Basically if you launch with sub fee / box price you are capitalizing on huge hype and avoiding a catastrophic server meltdown as a result from going F2P for a hugely hyped game on day 1.
Once you go F2P you are actually going Freemium. You can play for free forever but your F2P is essentially a free trial and gates or reduces access to a lot of content and features of the game.
Finally you have a cash shop that sells cosmetic items or maybe even permanent access to some of the features that require a premium subscription such as premium races, quest packs. Etc.
Sound familiar? That's because it's the standard for AAA MMOs. It's what ESO, LotRO, SWTOR and many other AAA titles have gone. That's one thing I wouldn't change too much aside from tailoring the cash shop and freemium options to the content of my game.
i agree with the OP, but it seems that even themepark mmos that try to offer something slightly different, might fall short when they do not deliver on important fundamentals.
for example combat, pvp, open world, raids, housing, mini games, end game content, in game events, quality of life features, quality story, different kinds of questings ( could be seen as something among the mini games), character creation with races and classes and good options, dynamic environment with day night cycles
a game now it needs to have all those thing and at good quality to be something that a person would attempt to try from the mass market.
So it takes a lot of time nd money to put all those things, and once that happens they decide to bloat their game with things like static world, and repetitve quests, and even a long winded story.
And it seems when they try to for example make the lvling shorter, then it reflects more on evertything else. How good the combat is, pvp, open world, environment, raids, and pve fights being interesting. Normaly with such a design of little story its naturally a sand box, but a nice highbrid can exist, and may be that is niche or may be that is smart business, but then i feel the pve element will require a very dynamic world.
Many games have not successfully done that. I think once we have AI and proper dynamic environments in games we can have more niche games otherwise it will be themeparks with simple instanced programming compared to a whole system of programming.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
I would like to see everyone come together to make an actual bullet point list of features and solutions to the true MMO that everyone wants to see. All I've been seeing is these kinds of vague opinions/ideas:
"A well done "Niche MMO""
"you still have to make a solid in depth game"
"They need to attract their own core of players"
"be as close to as a WoW killer as possible"
"comes up with a smarter way of creating content and worlds"
"Hundreds of things have to come together in just the right way to make a great game"
"MMO's must evolve on interaction with the world"
"Its about creating an experience that is unique to your world on a fundamental level. "
"we need a solid disruptor which goes hand in hand with the OPs video"
These things have been said over and over again. It's way too easy to say what everyone has been saying for years. What I want to see is, an actual bullet point list of actual ways you can solve these problems. No more of this "not a WoW clone"(if i had a dollar every time that was said), "not like everything else", "not like this", "not like that", "not like that game", "need something new", "need a WoW killer", "need something different". Someone please list out ACTUAL features like: "Take away quests and replace with a main story line where you find books and have to read and research to solve puzzles and problems", or "create larger worlds with 100x more villages and many more weapons and armor shops to find unique items at", or "a world where you and your guild can purchase new towns and claim them and defend them". Stuff along that line where you have a solution to a problem. I've read somewhere before that you don't have a problem unless you have a solution. So think of this as your first day on the job at a game design company and you are coming up with features for your "new and innovative" MMO that has never been done before.
So think of this as your first day on the job at a game design company and you are coming up with features for your "new and innovative" MMO that has never been done before.
You actually bring up another interesting problem with your example of SWTOR. It's almost impossible for an MMORPG to escape comparison to WoW, which actually hurts games. If you can't see any innovation in SWTOR, if you can't appreciate the differences between SWTOR and WoW then I'm not sure what your expectations are. However, the continual comparison of other MMORPGs to WoW is definitely a problem. Wildstar is another that had significant changes but ultimately died because it got tagged as "WoW in Space".
I'm sorry but SWTOR is the poster child for a WoW clone.
I'm describing a game:
1. You start out by picking a server based on your PvP and roleplaying preferences. 2. You then pick from one of two factions. 3. After that you select a race and class you will be locked into. 4. You then proceed to do a tutorial in starter are based on your race/class pick. 5. From there you level by killing monsters and doing quests with the occasional dungeon of PvP area thrown in. 6. At some point you pick a sub-class. You used to get skillpoints that you put into skill trees, but now you don't, you just pick a skilltree and the game specs for you. 7. Once you hit max level you switch focus from leveling to getting higher grades of gear. This is mainly done by raids or PvP arenas depending on if you want PvE or PvP gear. 8. That gear is separated by colors of rarity. Gear colors is a really big deal especially in the end game. 9. There is also crafting. You gather materials then use them to execute recipes. It's all timer based. There is really nothing to crafting but watching timers for the most part. 10. If you picked a PvP server you get to fight with the other faction you didn't pick at the start of the game in contested areas. Ultimately your actions on behalf of your faction through either PvP or PvE don't affect the greater world though. 11. The game uses tab targeting with skill bars. You get more abilities as you level up. They have affects such as stuns, DoTs, daze, knockdowns, disruptions etc. 12. There are mailboxes 13. There are auction houses 14. There are group / raid / dungeon finders. 15. There are soulbound items.
I could keep going on.
What game am I talking about? WoW or SWTOR? Both. All these items are the same in both games. Additionally most of these items apply to Rift, ArcheAge, LOTRO, Aion etc. etc. etc.
"That's most MMO's you just described!"
Sure. I mean it doesn't describe EVE, Runescape, or most indie MMOs very well but you're right. That's like 90% of AAA MMO's right there.
Which is the problem. There are no purple cows.
When you start thinking WoW and SWTOR have a significant and meaningful difference, it's clear that WoW clones are far too dominant in the MMO market.
Did you ever think that maybe people don't want to eat a purple cow? There is no evidence that people care about a purple cow, and they probably would prefer NOT to eat one.
I get the feeling that you want evolution to happen immediately. One generation, we have apes, then all of a sudden two apes have a baby and it comes out hairless and walking upright. You see it as a problem with people who can see a meaningful difference between something like WoW and SWTOR. I think it's a problem with people who DON'T see the meaningful difference between the two. I mean, shit, they spend what, probably, amounted to the entire WoW budget on voice acting and you fail to acknowledge that as an advancement in gaming. Unfortunately, when you fail to acknowledge positive advancements in a genre, especially ones that are so glaring, it actually retards to evolution of games in the genre. So, thank you for your contribution.
Again. Crowdfunding success proves people DO want a purple cow. People don't throw millions of dollars at developers promising to create something they do not want. If that isn't proof enough I've spent probably 90%+ of my time playing MMOs playing indie sandboxes, and while they certainly don't boast WoW like numbers I see thousands of other people suffering through bug ridden games with poor graphics and horrible balancing issues because they'd rather not play MMOs at all then do the WoW clone song and dance once more time. But the love the idea of a living world filled with other players enough they'd rather play a crap quality sandbox than a MOBA or something.
I'm sorry. Voice acting is your meaningful difference? Voice acting means squat when you'd rather not be questing at all. I maxed a character in early SWTOR and I skipped the majority of dialogue in quests from level 30ish on so how is that improving my gameplay experience? Voice acting is what made SWTOR the most expensive MMO of all time. Replacing quests with player driven interaction actually makes the MMO cheaper to develop because you're replacing scripted content with features like territorial control and city building that provide thousands of hours of entertainment.
You act like evolution is a linear process. It is not. Not in life, and not in gaming. There are thousands upon thousands of other species on this planet. And if I want to go play a single player or non-massively multiplayer there are RTSs, turn based strategy, platformers, infantry based FPSes, fighter and vehicle based shooters, flight simulators, turn based RPGS, action RPGs, adventure games, puzzle games, sports games, racing games, city builders, freaking farm simulators, and the damn Sims.
If you want to play a major MMO made in the last few years, you have a great selection of games where you level up and then gear grind. All of them WoW clones. Mainly tab-targeted though action combat is starting to catch on a tiny bit. That level of lack of variety in MMOs is something that you won't see in almost any other industry. It's astounding it's gone on here as long as it has.
You talk about meaningful advancement in MMOs like SWTOR but look at your signature:
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US If these games are such meaningful advancements on the WoW clone genre, why are you maxing out 5 separate characters on WoW instead of playing them? You're kind of living proof that people who want to play WoW clones, are already playing WoW.
Again. Crowdfunding success proves people DO want a purple cow. People don't throw millions of dollars at developers promising to create something they do not want. If that isn't proof enough I've spent probably 90%+ of my time playing MMOs playing indie sandboxes, and while they certainly don't boast WoW like numbers I see thousands of other people suffering through bug ridden games with poor graphics and horrible balancing issues because they'd rather not play MMOs at all then do the WoW clone song and dance once more time. But the love the idea of a living world filled with other players enough they'd rather play a crap quality sandbox than a MOBA or something.
I'm sorry. Voice acting is your meaningful difference? Voice acting means squat when you'd rather not be questing at all. I maxed a character in early SWTOR and I skipped the majority of dialogue in quests from level 30ish on so how is that improving my gameplay experience? Voice acting is what made SWTOR the most expensive MMO of all time. Replacing quests with player driven interaction actually makes the MMO cheaper to develop because you're replacing scripted content with features like territorial control and city building that provide thousands of hours of entertainment.
You act like evolution is a linear process. It is not. Not in life, and not in gaming. There are thousands upon thousands of other species on this planet. And if I want to go play a single player or non-massively multiplayer there are RTSs, turn based strategy, platformers, infantry based FPSes, fighter and vehicle based shooters, flight simulators, turn based RPGS, action RPGs, adventure games, puzzle games, sports games, racing games, city builders, freaking farm simulators, and the damn Sims.
If you want to play a major MMO made in the last few years, you have a great selection of games where you level up and then gear grind. All of them WoW clones. Mainly tab-targeted though action combat is starting to catch on a tiny bit.
You talk about meaningful advancement in MMOs like SWTOR but look at your signature:
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US If these games are such meaningful advancements on the WoW clone genre, why are you maxing out 5 separate characters on WoW instead of playing them? You're kind of living proof that people who want to play WoW clones, are already playing WoW.
I'm not sure what you think that crowdfunding has proven. There have been exactly zero crowdfunded MMORPG games which have sold well. I wouldn't be using crowdfunding as an example of how people want different MMORPGs. In fact, Shards Online does a LOT of things you seem to be interested in, and it failed to raise $50,000 in their first Kickstarter. In fact, they just made it with their second. SotA had a successful Kickstarter, but has sold few copies through Steam. I'm not sure what crowdfunding project you think is proving your point, and I'm a fan of crowdfunding, so please explain!
Story is the basis of RPGs. Its sad that you decided to skip it. Kinda like removing the RP from RPG. So, I guess gg on your G. Voice acting isn't the only part in SWTOR that was innovative, though. Light/Dark decisions was another. Choice in dialogue. Companions. That being said, it definitely did remove a lot of the MM from MMORPG. I think that's well documented. However, there were significant changes (including that it was much more solo-centric) that set it apart from WoW.
While I'd like to agree with you that player-driven content is the be-all and end-all, times have changed. We live in a time where YouTube views and Twitch viewers are highly dependent on players being assholes or ruining others enjoyment of games. So I don't think that the nostalgic atmosphere you're looking for will ever be enjoyed by more than a few hundred, or thousand, people. That certainly isn't something that a AAA developer is interested in.
You make the assumption based on my signature that I'm playing WoW, yet they are level 90 characters. Maybe you might make the assumption, instead, that I'm just too lazy to update my signature. I've played plenty of MMOs from EVE to WoW and EQ to ESO and enough Asian MMOs to make any Westerner cry. What I'm telling you is that there isn't a market segment large enough to support the game you think you want. You've quoted Kickstarter as evidence that people want these games, but there are fewer than 20,000 people backing these games. Furthermore, from what has been released, MMORPGs show much much worse attachment rates than most other KS projects, based on SotA's performance. Like I just don't know what else you want me to tell you.
Honestly, the best thing for the genre are smaller, well-developed, incremental changes that people adapt to, gaining a larger following. As it stands right now, implementing the game that you're describing is studio suicide.
Someone mentioned Pathfinder Online in this topic. I kickstarted into that game so I'll go ahead and use PFO to show how the argument that people not buying kickstarted games once they released is quite frankly an idiotic way to try and pretend like there is not considerable interests in MMOs that don't fit the WoW clone mold.
Pathfinder Online's 2nd Kickstarter raised slightly over a million dollars to get the game made. One player summarized the features of the game's extensive blogs into a list of features they featured on their main kickstarter page:
1. No Grinding- Pathfinder Online uses a skill training system like that of EVE Online. You train skills by choosing what skill you want to train and allowing the time required to elapse. You don't train any faster by farming mobs or spamming your abilities than you do exploring the world, role playing with your friends, or even being offline. You will need to complete certain achievements to complete a skill and open up new avenues of training.
2. No Classes- Unlike other games that give you a narrow range of abilities as you train your class, in Pathfinder you gain levels in different Roles based off what you have trained.
3. Player Structures- Build your own homes, taverns, farms, and even cities! The Pathfinder Online world will be filled with places players can use to build and customize their own homes, businesses and communities.
4. More Than A Gankfest- Unlike other Open World PVP MMO's currently on the market, Pathfinder Online actively discourages meaningless PVP. A meaningful alignment system that actually offers mechanical advantages to lawful and good aligned organizations, and a functional bounty system that allows the player to choose which players and organizations can collect the bounties they set discourages random and meaningless killing. Beyond this, the admins are taking a hard stance against 'griefing', in which players specifically seek to ruin the experience of other players, often through using game mechanics in ways that weren't intended. Griefing in PFO can be a bannable offence.
5. All Players are Useful- This won't be like games where a new player has 49 health and a veteran has 49,000. The attacks from that new player won't automatically miss the veteran. A new player will be weaker, but still able to make a meaningful contribution to combat. As a sandbox where group sizes aren't limited, this means all players are useful, and don't have to segregate themselves by level.
6. Trade is Meaningful- In Pathfinder Online players must manually transport items to their intended destination. Most shops are player-run, and there will be goods more abundant in or even exclusive to certain regions. Merchants, traders, and even auctioneers are all viable professions.
When the game game out it turned out that:
1. "Certain achievements" was grindy crap like kill 500 goblins. It ended up being the time based progression of EVE with massive grinding to actually unlock your skills. The worst of both worlds and absolutely not what was promised.
2. Hey! They fulfilled one promise. Even if half the classes were pretty much unplayable due to terrible combat mechanics.
3. Build and customize homes businesses and communities? More like slap down some pre-built structures in predesignated areas with no customization beyond that.
4. The game released without any point or consequence to PvP. The territorial conflict, factional warfare and banditry/bounty hunting systems the promised were simply not there. Random ganking was the ONLY kind of PvP.
5. Total bullcrap. The disparity was huge.
6. What trade?
Need someone else's opinion? Check out the MMORPG.com review appropriately titled "A Seed of Potential Planted in Barren Soil." That barren soil being the development studio, not the MMO market.
Needless to say based on the fact that gameplay video was from late alpha, just a tiny bit over three months before they started charging 15$ a month to play, I sold all my accounts and reinvested it into Crowfall and Star Citizen.
Is that proof I don't have an interest in the kind of game they promised? That I wouldn't support a well done sandbox MMO with territorial conflict and meaningful PvP?
No. It's proof I won't pay good money and spend good time on a crap game that was executed terribly and failed to deliver on the vast majority of it's promises. This coming from someone who has at different points had subscriptions to Darkfall, Wurm, and even Mortal Online.
Take a AAA company, give them a 50 million dollar budget (Less than a quarter of SWTOR's budget) and have them build an MMO based on similar promises that actually fulfills them, and I guarantee you that the vast majority of people currently throwing their money at kickstarters for indie sandboxes will buy it, play it, and generate massive profits for them.
Someone mentioned Pathfinder Online in this topic. I kickstarted into that game so I'll go ahead and use PFO to show how the argument that people not buying kickstarted games once they released is quite frankly an idiotic way to try and pretend like there is not considerable interests in MMOs that don't fit the WoW clone mold.
Pathfinder Online's 2nd Kickstarter raised slightly over a million dollars to get the game made. One player summarized the features of the game's extensive blogs into a list of features they featured on their main kickstarter page:
1. No Grinding- Pathfinder Online uses a skill training system like that of EVE Online. You train skills by choosing what skill you want to train and allowing the time required to elapse. You don't train any faster by farming mobs or spamming your abilities than you do exploring the world, role playing with your friends, or even being offline. You will need to complete certain achievements to complete a skill and open up new avenues of training.
2. No Classes- Unlike other games that give you a narrow range of abilities as you train your class, in Pathfinder you gain levels in different Roles based off what you have trained.
3. Player Structures- Build your own homes, taverns, farms, and even cities! The Pathfinder Online world will be filled with places players can use to build and customize their own homes, businesses and communities.
4. More Than A Gankfest- Unlike other Open World PVP MMO's currently on the market, Pathfinder Online actively discourages meaningless PVP. A meaningful alignment system that actually offers mechanical advantages to lawful and good aligned organizations, and a functional bounty system that allows the player to choose which players and organizations can collect the bounties they set discourages random and meaningless killing. Beyond this, the admins are taking a hard stance against 'griefing', in which players specifically seek to ruin the experience of other players, often through using game mechanics in ways that weren't intended. Griefing in PFO can be a bannable offence.
5. All Players are Useful- This won't be like games where a new player has 49 health and a veteran has 49,000. The attacks from that new player won't automatically miss the veteran. A new player will be weaker, but still able to make a meaningful contribution to combat. As a sandbox where group sizes aren't limited, this means all players are useful, and don't have to segregate themselves by level.
6. Trade is Meaningful- In Pathfinder Online players must manually transport items to their intended destination. Most shops are player-run, and there will be goods more abundant in or even exclusive to certain regions. Merchants, traders, and even auctioneers are all viable professions.
When the game game out it turned out that:
1. "Certain achievements" was grindy crap like kill 500 goblins. It ended up being the time based progression of EVE with massive grinding to actually unlock your skills. The worst of both worlds and absolutely not what was promised.
2. Hey! They fulfilled one promise. Even if half the classes were pretty much unplayable due to terrible combat mechanics.
3. Build and customize homes businesses and communities? More like slap down some pre-built structures in predesignated areas with no customization beyond that.
4. The game released without any point or consequence to PvP. The territorial conflict, factional warfare and banditry/bounty hunting systems the promised were simply not there. Random ganking was the ONLY kind of PvP.
5. Total bullcrap. The disparity was huge.
6. What trade?
Need someone else's opinion? Check out the MMORPG.com review appropriately titled "A Seed of Potential Planted in Barren Soil." That barren soil being the development studio, not the MMO market.
Needless to say based on the fact that gameplay video was from late alpha, just a tiny bit over three months before they started charging 15$ a month to play, I sold all my accounts and reinvested it into Crowfall and Star Citizen.
Is that proof I don't have an interest in the kind of game they promised? That I wouldn't support a well done sandbox MMO with territorial conflict and meaningful PvP?
No. It's proof I won't pay good money and spend good time on a crap game that was executed terribly and failed to deliver on the vast majority of it's promises. This coming from someone who has at different points had subscriptions to Darkfall, Wurm, and even Mortal Online.
Take a AAA company, give them a 50 million dollar budget (Less than a quarter of SWTOR's budget) and have them build an MMO based on similar promises that actually fulfills them, and I guarantee you that the vast majority of people currently throwing their money at kickstarters for indie sandboxes will buy it, play it, and generate massive profits for them.
PFO is a great example of what I mean. It may have raised $1 million, but that was from 9000 backers, the vast majority of which didn't allow the game to materialize.
I'm not here to argue with you. It's a fact that the type of game you're talking about has not been proven to be sustainable. Period. You can guarantee things until you're blue in the face, but I guarantee that if you had $50 million in your bank account, you certainly wouldn't spend it to make the game you're talking about.
you don't need to take my word for it, though, Pantheon and Camelot Unchained are on the horizon. So if they start making hundreds of millions of dollars a year after their release, you come look me up and tell me I'm wrong. However, I guarantee that won't be the case.
I would like to see everyone come together to make an actual bullet point list of features and solutions to the true MMO that everyone wants to see. All I've been seeing is these kinds of vague opinions/ideas:
"A well done "Niche MMO""
"you still have to make a solid in depth game"
"They need to attract their own core of players"
"be as close to as a WoW killer as possible"
"comes up with a smarter way of creating content and worlds"
"Hundreds of things have to come together in just the right way to make a great game"
"MMO's must evolve on interaction with the world"
"Its about creating an experience that is unique to your world on a fundamental level. "
"we need a solid disruptor which goes hand in hand with the OPs video"
These things have been said over and over again. It's way too easy to say what everyone has been saying for years. What I want to see is, an actual bullet point list of actual ways you can solve these problems. No more of this "not a WoW clone"(if i had a dollar every time that was said), "not like everything else", "not like this", "not like that", "not like that game", "need something new", "need a WoW killer", "need something different". Someone please list out ACTUAL features like: "Take away quests and replace with a main story line where you find books and have to read and research to solve puzzles and problems", or "create larger worlds with 100x more villages and many more weapons and armor shops to find unique items at", or "a world where you and your guild can purchase new towns and claim them and defend them". Stuff along that line where you have a solution to a problem. I've read somewhere before that you don't have a problem unless you have a solution. So think of this as your first day on the job at a game design company and you are coming up with features for your "new and innovative" MMO that has never been done before.
Go!
1> There is no such thing as "true mmo". That is just something used by BS Artists.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
...I guarantee that if you had $50 million in your bank account, you certainly wouldn't spend it to make the game you're talking about.
I can pretty much promise you that a large chunk of that money would be used for that exact purpose because I know I would make that money back severalfold, and have an amazing MMO to play at the end of it.
Comments
That's the point, though, the evidence isn't there to suggest that you could make $100 million on your investment. Remember that a publisher is probably looking to make double their money back at minimum, so when you say a game could make $100 million and the game took $100 million to create, their target is a minimum $200 million. That's no small feat. After you factor in salaries, expenses, etc., you would need to be making upwards of $100 million annually to see a $50 million annual return, which would get you to re-coop your investment in 2 years, but you'd need to see that level of revenues beyond 2 years to actually realize any return.
On top of that, it should be noted that EVE has seen a decline in revenues year-over-year since 2012. This also persisted through expansions. Sure, it's still healthy, in the context of MMORPGs, but when it's the second most popular subscription-based MMORPG (based on subscriptions alone), and it's making $50 million annually in revenues, that's not really something that a publisher is going to be motivated to replicate. That's like your top-level, best case. So
What I will agree with is that Star Citizen COULD at least make publishers take another look at doing something innovative. However, there's another, similar, case with Elite: Dangerous. Sure, it was crowdfunded, but the majority ($80 million+) came after that when they went public in order to secure enough funding to make the game. After an initial spike, their stock has been on a stead decline ever since. With a whopping $25 million in revenues and $1.5 million in net income, investors simply aren't getting out of bed for this type of investment just yet.
All these factors being considered should be throwing up red flags like crazy!!! and it is. That's why we aren't likely to see another AAA MMORPG. We'll see things with MMORPG "elements" like Destiny, Red Dead Redemption 2? GTA V. However, I think we'll see much more in the way of integrating MMORPG elements into solid games opposed to the creation of a new AAA MMORPG.
You actually bring up another interesting problem with your example of SWTOR. It's almost impossible for an MMORPG to escape comparison to WoW, which actually hurts games. If you can't see any innovation in SWTOR, if you can't appreciate the differences between SWTOR and WoW then I'm not sure what your expectations are. However, the continual comparison of other MMORPGs to WoW is definitely a problem. Wildstar is another that had significant changes but ultimately died because it got tagged as "WoW in Space".
On a positive noted, there are some games in the chute that could very well prove me wrong. Camelot Unchained and Pantheon are both coming up soon, and strong, and they both come from a good pedigree that have an existing fan-base in the industry. I think that these games, even more than Star Citizen, could determine the fate of the MMORPG as we know it today (no pressure Mark and Brad). If they get a lukewarm response, then how could a publisher EVER justify spending 10, 15, 20 times what they spent on development, or more, to earn less than just putting their money in a high-interest savings account?
Sorry...... that was long.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I would agree with you with regards to MMORPGs specifically. However, on the whole crowdfunding has proven itself as a viable funding mechanism for many games. Additionally, I feel like it promotes accountability rather than a lack thereof. There are hundreds of games on steam that would disagree with you that it's a scam.
Also, it should be noted that Wasteland 3 is now allowing people to ACTUALLY invest (and get a return on their money). So for all those people complaining about their "investment", there is now a means of actually investing and getting a monetary return. I think it's a positive development for sure.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Whether or not they like the finished product is a different story.
The kickstarter gets funded that shows that there is interest for MMO's that do something different.
Funded does not mean released. Cant make it any more clear.
And give me a break you cant say SWTOR did something new with a straight face. Adding voice, "branching" story doesnt change how the game is being played. Those are extremely superficial changes. Overall it doesnt change the experience in a meaningful way. You are still killing 10 rats.
Thats the whole point behind wanting innovation. It is not about adding a twist to your combat system or adding a voice to characters. Or increasing the amount of polygons.
Its about creating an experience that is unique to your world on a fundamental level.
Regardless I strongly disagree that there is no market for succesful MMO's. Someone will come along with a fresh pair of eyes and new tech solutions. It will capture the imagination of its players while providing an alternative reality where players can live out a game fantasy. Once again seperating the genre from simple multiplayer titles. At the core of the MMO genre is the desire to live in a virtual reality.
And then big money will take note and spend another 10 years of trying to mimic the succesful format.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
By design disruptors identify and target an underserved market or need, capture it and push the walls outwards until they overcome the original providers.
"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
I'm describing a game:
1. You start out by picking a server based on your PvP and roleplaying preferences.
2. You then pick from one of two factions.
3. After that you select a race and class you will be locked into.
4. You then proceed to do a tutorial in starter are based on your race/class pick.
5. From there you level by killing monsters and doing quests with the occasional dungeon of PvP area thrown in.
6. At some point you pick a sub-class. You used to get skillpoints that you put into skill trees, but now you don't, you just pick a skilltree and the game specs for you.
7. Once you hit max level you switch focus from leveling to getting higher grades of gear. This is mainly done by raids or PvP arenas depending on if you want PvE or PvP gear.
8. That gear is separated by colors of rarity. Gear colors is a really big deal especially in the end game.
9. There is also crafting. You gather materials then use them to execute recipes. It's all timer based. There is really nothing to crafting but watching timers for the most part.
10. If you picked a PvP server you get to fight with the other faction you didn't pick at the start of the game in contested areas. Ultimately your actions on behalf of your faction through either PvP or PvE don't affect the greater world though.
11. The game uses tab targeting with skill bars. You get more abilities as you level up. They have affects such as stuns, DoTs, daze, knockdowns, disruptions etc.
12. There are mailboxes
13. There are auction houses
14. There are group / raid / dungeon finders.
15. There are soulbound items.
I could keep going on.
What game am I talking about? WoW or SWTOR? Both. All these items are the same in both games. Additionally most of these items apply to Rift, ArcheAge, LOTRO, Aion etc. etc. etc.
"That's most MMO's you just described!"
Sure. I mean it doesn't describe EVE, Runescape, or most indie MMOs very well but you're right. That's like 90% of AAA MMO's right there.
Which is the problem. There are no purple cows.
When you start thinking WoW and SWTOR have a significant and meaningful difference, it's clear that WoW clones are far too dominant in the MMO market.
Also, the idea that people don't have less time is fallacious. Some people have chosen to spend (or rather waste) their time doing various things like social media and trying to juggle multiple hobbies versus engaging in just one. That does not mean they have "less time".
Once you go F2P you are actually going Freemium. You can play for free forever but your F2P is essentially a free trial and gates or reduces access to a lot of content and features of the game.
Finally you have a cash shop that sells cosmetic items or maybe even permanent access to some of the features that require a premium subscription such as premium races, quest packs. Etc.
Sound familiar? That's because it's the standard for AAA MMOs. It's what ESO, LotRO, SWTOR and many other AAA titles have gone. That's one thing I wouldn't change too much aside from tailoring the cash shop and freemium options to the content of my game.
for example combat, pvp, open world, raids, housing, mini games, end game content, in game events, quality of life features, quality story, different kinds of questings ( could be seen as something among the mini games), character creation with races and classes and good options, dynamic environment with day night cycles
a game now it needs to have all those thing and at good quality to be something that a person would attempt to try from the mass market.
So it takes a lot of time nd money to put all those things, and once that happens they decide to bloat their game with things like static world, and repetitve quests, and even a long winded story.
And it seems when they try to for example make the lvling shorter, then it reflects more on evertything else. How good the combat is, pvp, open world, environment, raids, and pve fights being interesting. Normaly with such a design of little story its naturally a sand box, but a nice highbrid can exist, and may be that is niche or may be that is smart business, but then i feel the pve element will require a very dynamic world.
Many games have not successfully done that. I think once we have AI and proper dynamic environments in games we can have more niche games otherwise it will be themeparks with simple instanced programming compared to a whole system of programming.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
These things have been said over and over again. It's way too easy to say what everyone has been saying for years. What I want to see is, an actual bullet point list of actual ways you can solve these problems. No more of this "not a WoW clone"(if i had a dollar every time that was said), "not like everything else", "not like this", "not like that", "not like that game", "need something new", "need a WoW killer", "need something different". Someone please list out ACTUAL features like: "Take away quests and replace with a main story line where you find books and have to read and research to solve puzzles and problems", or "create larger worlds with 100x more villages and many more weapons and armor shops to find unique items at", or "a world where you and your guild can purchase new towns and claim them and defend them". Stuff along that line where you have a solution to a problem. I've read somewhere before that you don't have a problem unless you have a solution. So think of this as your first day on the job at a game design company and you are coming up with features for your "new and innovative" MMO that has never been done before.
Go!
If the guy said in the video is true, you don't need AAA budget.
http://harbingerhideout.enjin.com/forum/m/39251331/viewforum/7479163
Did you ever think that maybe people don't want to eat a purple cow? There is no evidence that people care about a purple cow, and they probably would prefer NOT to eat one.
I get the feeling that you want evolution to happen immediately. One generation, we have apes, then all of a sudden two apes have a baby and it comes out hairless and walking upright. You see it as a problem with people who can see a meaningful difference between something like WoW and SWTOR. I think it's a problem with people who DON'T see the meaningful difference between the two. I mean, shit, they spend what, probably, amounted to the entire WoW budget on voice acting and you fail to acknowledge that as an advancement in gaming. Unfortunately, when you fail to acknowledge positive advancements in a genre, especially ones that are so glaring, it actually retards to evolution of games in the genre. So, thank you for your contribution.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I'm sorry. Voice acting is your meaningful difference? Voice acting means squat when you'd rather not be questing at all. I maxed a character in early SWTOR and I skipped the majority of dialogue in quests from level 30ish on so how is that improving my gameplay experience? Voice acting is what made SWTOR the most expensive MMO of all time. Replacing quests with player driven interaction actually makes the MMO cheaper to develop because you're replacing scripted content with features like territorial control and city building that provide thousands of hours of entertainment.
You act like evolution is a linear process. It is not. Not in life, and not in gaming. There are thousands upon thousands of other species on this planet. And if I want to go play a single player or non-massively multiplayer there are RTSs, turn based strategy, platformers, infantry based FPSes, fighter and vehicle based shooters, flight simulators, turn based RPGS, action RPGs, adventure games, puzzle games, sports games, racing games, city builders, freaking farm simulators, and the damn Sims.
If you want to play a major MMO made in the last few years, you have a great selection of games where you level up and then gear grind. All of them WoW clones. Mainly tab-targeted though action combat is starting to catch on a tiny bit. That level of lack of variety in MMOs is something that you won't see in almost any other industry. It's astounding it's gone on here as long as it has.
You talk about meaningful advancement in MMOs like SWTOR but look at your signature:
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
If these games are such meaningful advancements on the WoW clone genre, why are you maxing out 5 separate characters on WoW instead of playing them? You're kind of living proof that people who want to play WoW clones, are already playing WoW.
A successful leader doesn't complain about problems ... they solve them.
I'm not sure what you think that crowdfunding has proven. There have been exactly zero crowdfunded MMORPG games which have sold well. I wouldn't be using crowdfunding as an example of how people want different MMORPGs. In fact, Shards Online does a LOT of things you seem to be interested in, and it failed to raise $50,000 in their first Kickstarter. In fact, they just made it with their second. SotA had a successful Kickstarter, but has sold few copies through Steam. I'm not sure what crowdfunding project you think is proving your point, and I'm a fan of crowdfunding, so please explain!
Story is the basis of RPGs. Its sad that you decided to skip it. Kinda like removing the RP from RPG. So, I guess gg on your G. Voice acting isn't the only part in SWTOR that was innovative, though. Light/Dark decisions was another. Choice in dialogue. Companions. That being said, it definitely did remove a lot of the MM from MMORPG. I think that's well documented. However, there were significant changes (including that it was much more solo-centric) that set it apart from WoW.
While I'd like to agree with you that player-driven content is the be-all and end-all, times have changed. We live in a time where YouTube views and Twitch viewers are highly dependent on players being assholes or ruining others enjoyment of games. So I don't think that the nostalgic atmosphere you're looking for will ever be enjoyed by more than a few hundred, or thousand, people. That certainly isn't something that a AAA developer is interested in.
You make the assumption based on my signature that I'm playing WoW, yet they are level 90 characters. Maybe you might make the assumption, instead, that I'm just too lazy to update my signature. I've played plenty of MMOs from EVE to WoW and EQ to ESO and enough Asian MMOs to make any Westerner cry. What I'm telling you is that there isn't a market segment large enough to support the game you think you want. You've quoted Kickstarter as evidence that people want these games, but there are fewer than 20,000 people backing these games. Furthermore, from what has been released, MMORPGs show much much worse attachment rates than most other KS projects, based on SotA's performance. Like I just don't know what else you want me to tell you.
Honestly, the best thing for the genre are smaller, well-developed, incremental changes that people adapt to, gaining a larger following. As it stands right now, implementing the game that you're describing is studio suicide.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Pathfinder Online's 2nd Kickstarter raised slightly over a million dollars to get the game made. One player summarized the features of the game's extensive blogs into a list of features they featured on their main kickstarter page:
1. No Grinding- Pathfinder Online uses a skill training system like that of EVE Online. You train skills by choosing what skill you want to train and allowing the time required to elapse. You don't train any faster by farming mobs or spamming your abilities than you do exploring the world, role playing with your friends, or even being offline. You will need to complete certain achievements to complete a skill and open up new avenues of training.
2. No Classes- Unlike other games that give you a narrow range of abilities as you train your class, in Pathfinder you gain levels in different Roles based off what you have trained.
3. Player Structures- Build your own homes, taverns, farms, and even cities! The Pathfinder Online world will be filled with places players can use to build and customize their own homes, businesses and communities.
4. More Than A Gankfest- Unlike other Open World PVP MMO's currently on the market, Pathfinder Online actively discourages meaningless PVP. A meaningful alignment system that actually offers mechanical advantages to lawful and good aligned organizations, and a functional bounty system that allows the player to choose which players and organizations can collect the bounties they set discourages random and meaningless killing. Beyond this, the admins are taking a hard stance against 'griefing', in which players specifically seek to ruin the experience of other players, often through using game mechanics in ways that weren't intended. Griefing in PFO can be a bannable offence.
5. All Players are Useful- This won't be like games where a new player has 49 health and a veteran has 49,000. The attacks from that new player won't automatically miss the veteran. A new player will be weaker, but still able to make a meaningful contribution to combat. As a sandbox where group sizes aren't limited, this means all players are useful, and don't have to segregate themselves by level.
6. Trade is Meaningful- In Pathfinder Online players must manually transport items to their intended destination. Most shops are player-run, and there will be goods more abundant in or even exclusive to certain regions. Merchants, traders, and even auctioneers are all viable professions.
When the game game out it turned out that:
1. "Certain achievements" was grindy crap like kill 500 goblins. It ended up being the time based progression of EVE with massive grinding to actually unlock your skills. The worst of both worlds and absolutely not what was promised.
2. Hey! They fulfilled one promise. Even if half the classes were pretty much unplayable due to terrible combat mechanics.
3. Build and customize homes businesses and communities? More like slap down some pre-built structures in predesignated areas with no customization beyond that.
4. The game released without any point or consequence to PvP. The territorial conflict, factional warfare and banditry/bounty hunting systems the promised were simply not there. Random ganking was the ONLY kind of PvP.
5. Total bullcrap. The disparity was huge.
6. What trade?
Need someone else's opinion? Check out the MMORPG.com review appropriately titled "A Seed of Potential Planted in Barren Soil." That barren soil being the development studio, not the MMO market.
Or take a look at the gameplay yourself.
Needless to say based on the fact that gameplay video was from late alpha, just a tiny bit over three months before they started charging 15$ a month to play, I sold all my accounts and reinvested it into Crowfall and Star Citizen.
Is that proof I don't have an interest in the kind of game they promised? That I wouldn't support a well done sandbox MMO with territorial conflict and meaningful PvP?
No. It's proof I won't pay good money and spend good time on a crap game that was executed terribly and failed to deliver on the vast majority of it's promises. This coming from someone who has at different points had subscriptions to Darkfall, Wurm, and even Mortal Online.
Take a AAA company, give them a 50 million dollar budget (Less than a quarter of SWTOR's budget) and have them build an MMO based on similar promises that actually fulfills them, and I guarantee you that the vast majority of people currently throwing their money at kickstarters for indie sandboxes will buy it, play it, and generate massive profits for them.
PFO is a great example of what I mean. It may have raised $1 million, but that was from 9000 backers, the vast majority of which didn't allow the game to materialize.
I'm not here to argue with you. It's a fact that the type of game you're talking about has not been proven to be sustainable. Period. You can guarantee things until you're blue in the face, but I guarantee that if you had $50 million in your bank account, you certainly wouldn't spend it to make the game you're talking about.
you don't need to take my word for it, though, Pantheon and Camelot Unchained are on the horizon. So if they start making hundreds of millions of dollars a year after their release, you come look me up and tell me I'm wrong. However, I guarantee that won't be the case.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
1> There is no such thing as "true mmo". That is just something used by BS Artists.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"