While I agree with the rest of the list (i.e. there is no 'one true way' to make an MMO), the acronym is still very important. Why? Because unless a label means something, then it is useless.
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer, spelling, and better game examples.
The fact that you're writing an article dedicated to "teaching us things" and "helping us mature" while calling some people "brazen d*ckheads" is well... extremely sad. You need to make peace with the fact that not everyone will possibly agree with you and maybe even the fact that you're not doing things completely right.
This site has really started *venting* at readers because they're not in full accord. No need to write an article every time people don't agree with you... it will not make you THE AUTHORITY in the domain, nor will it make them change their mind
Lets be honest this has been a trend in all forms of media and journalism, it started with the liberal media/news outlets and it is trickling down to all forms of media now. These people who get educated in journalism and writing get brain washed by their liberal professors and they start to buy into the cool aid that they know better. Sad part is they might know how to write but they rarely know much about games, its a joke to watch bill dabble with the developers on some new Elder scrolls content then come here chirping on about how good the game is...he has no clue about what the game really is because you cant possible know it from dabbling for 1 hour every 5th month as you chum around with the developers.
Just last week is was Suzie telling everyone how good Mass effect Andromeda really is because you know suzie has logged maybe 10 hours in the entire series so shes knows best not the actual players who pound their soul into the game putting in hundreds even thousands of hours.
Let's set the record straight here game reviewers know next to nothing about the games they rate, they never play them long enough to truly know the games flaws, they are beholden to the developers so the review is never truly honest (bad review = no more exclusive interviews to make that content the reviewers make their money off writing).
While I can generally get behind all of these, in the end what it truly comes down to is trying to erase the prevailing culture that says "if someone disagrees with me they are wrong and stupid". So much of everywhere we go boils down to this. Disliking something automatically means that some folks feel compelled to enter into a discussion simply to tear down and belittle those who do like it.
Case in point is nearly any game under discussion anywhere on this site. Some people, for instance, love WoW despite its warts and foibles. Others feel it incumbent to enter every single thread about WoW to spew the same old tired hatred just...because.
Disagreements are fine. Rational, non-combative reasonable discussions about why there even is a disagreement should be the norm, not the exception.
That is what really needs to change in gaming...hell in any space on the Internet these days.
You can accomplish by kindness what you cannot by force. ~Publilius Syrus
Its going to be a long road
The attitude that your speaking about has now reached the White House
No it just left the white house and it's still fully saturating the mainstream media.
Sorry but this is impossible. Grumpy pseudo-hardcore/veteran players
have a game in their minds, a perfect game that will only ever exist in
their imagination. A game where everyone is a newbie and lacks
information, i.e: 1999.
Since we don't have a time machine yet,
what is best than a MMO forum to pass the time complaining that all
games are trash and to shut down anyone who likes any current EXISTING
games in favor of a delusion? They have the audacity to think they are enlightened.
I can't wait for Pantheon, it probably will be a nice game and I'll give it a try. But it won't meet the crazy
expectations, that's for sure. Two months after Pantheon release, they will come back in full force to their main game: forums.
Aye, Bill. I've seen people give you some crap lately and your bottom line has certainly crossed my mind a number of times. Feels like the fans of this genre are getting antsy and becoming more critical.
#1 should be SWG is dead and gone and it is never.coming.back. stop trying to make every other game like that game. there was a reason tons of people did not play it.
For once in a lifetime, I actually agree with Bill on this topic...mostly.
However, I will say this much; When gaming subredits such as r/pcmasterrace put MMOs in the same category as a MOBA, I have an issue with that. Especially when they claim 'Overwatch' is an MMO...
The question is though, if people don't debate/argue over these things on the forum, than what really is the point of mmorpg forum lol?
There is really nothing much someone can converse with an unknown stranger that they can't see other than expression of opinions and debate of issues... I mean you won't really jump on the forum asking other people "Hey mate, how's life?" rite? lol
While I agree with the rest of the list (i.e. there is no 'one true way' to make an MMO), the acronym is still very important. Why? Because unless a label means something, then it is useless.
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their boarder social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer and better game examples.
A long long time ago... In a galaxy far far away...
They had RPG's. Then one day people came up with ideas to expand on them. They created MMORPG's and they came in many shapes and sizes.
As time went on somebody who liked to make shooters thought "Hey some of that MMORPG shit is pretty cool" and they incorporated some of it. Next thing you know we start getting the early versions of MMOFPS's
As far as:
" 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMO's (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'. "
goes...
Right now I'd argue that MMORPG's have pretty much ended up being focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" whereas MMOFPS's are pretty much starting out focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" So we can hope that in their evolution they can go in the direction of "broader social experience and larger worlds to explore"
Really, what does it matter if we have MMORPG's, MMOFPS's, MMORTS's MMOact/adv's etc. ect. ect.
IMHO we'll have no problems being able to differentiate between them
Disclaimer: I believe you meant "broader" instead of "boarder" I took the liberty of making the spell correction in my quote. My apologies if I was in error.
For once in a lifetime, I actually agree with Bill on this topic...mostly.
However, I will say this much; When gaming subredits such as r/pcmasterrace put MMOs in the same category as a MOBA, I have an issue with that. Especially when they claim 'Overwatch' is an MMO...
Agree, which is why #1 on the OP list should be removed. The rest can stay or go or whatever, because they are not what defines a genre, they only define the play (or pay) style associated with the game itself. The acronym MMO has a meaning. It defines something. It's not "just because I wanted to call it an MMO". If I say something is "Made in the U.S.A.", what do you expect when you read that?
While I can generally get behind all of these, in the end what it truly comes down to is trying to erase the prevailing culture that says "if someone disagrees with me they are wrong and stupid". So much of everywhere we go boils down to this. Disliking something automatically means that some folks feel compelled to enter into a discussion simply to tear down and belittle those who do like it.
Case in point is nearly any game under discussion anywhere on this site. Some people, for instance, love WoW despite its warts and foibles. Others feel it incumbent to enter every single thread about WoW to spew the same old tired hatred just...because.
Disagreements are fine. Rational, non-combative reasonable discussions about why there even is a disagreement should be the norm, not the exception.
That is what really needs to change in gaming...hell in any space on the Internet these days.
You can accomplish by kindness what you cannot by force. ~Publilius Syrus
Its going to be a long road
The attitude that your speaking about has now reached the White House
No it just left the white house and it's still fully saturating the mainstream media.
While I agree with the rest of the list (i.e. there is no 'one true way' to make an MMO), the acronym is still very important. Why? Because unless a label means something, then it is useless.
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their boarder social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer and better game examples.
A long long time ago... In a galaxy far far away...
They had RPG's. Then one day people came up with ideas to expand on them. They created MMORPG's and they came in many shapes and sizes.
As time went on somebody who liked to make shooters thought "Hey some of that MMORPG shit is pretty cool" and they incorporated some of it. Next thing you know we start getting the early versions of MMOFPS's
As far as:
" 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMO's (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'. "
goes...
Right now I'd argue that MMORPG's have pretty much ended up being focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" whereas MMOFPS's are pretty much starting out focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" So we can hope that in their evolution they can go in the direction of "broader social experience and larger worlds to explore"
Really, what does it matter if we have MMORPG's, MMOFPS's, MMORTS's MMOact/adv's etc. ect. ect.
IMHO we'll have no problems being able to differentiate between them
Disclaimer: I believe you meant "broader" instead of "boarder" I took the liberty of making the spell correction in my quote. My apologies if I was in error.
I think it flew straight over your head. The focus is on "MMO", as in, massively multiplayer. Doesn't matter if it's fps, strategy, rpg what matters in this context is how are those players handled in the world, how are they interacting. Destiny did not have MMO characteristics because people did not play in the same world at the same time as everyone else. I'm not sure where acidblood was going with his last paragraph, but the rest was spot on IMO.
While I agree with the rest of the list (i.e. there is no 'one true way' to make an MMO), the acronym is still very important. Why? Because unless a label means something, then it is useless.
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their boarder social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer and better game examples.
A long long time ago... In a galaxy far far away...
They had RPG's. Then one day people came up with ideas to expand on them. They created MMORPG's and they came in many shapes and sizes.
As time went on somebody who liked to make shooters thought "Hey some of that MMORPG shit is pretty cool" and they incorporated some of it. Next thing you know we start getting the early versions of MMOFPS's
As far as:
" 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMO's (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'. "
goes...
Right now I'd argue that MMORPG's have pretty much ended up being focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" whereas MMOFPS's are pretty much starting out focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" So we can hope that in their evolution they can go in the direction of "broader social experience and larger worlds to explore"
Really, what does it matter if we have MMORPG's, MMOFPS's, MMORTS's MMOact/adv's etc. ect. ect.
IMHO we'll have no problems being able to differentiate between them
Disclaimer: I believe you meant "broader" instead of "boarder" I took the liberty of making the spell correction in my quote. My apologies if I was in error.
You are right, there are many sub-genres of MMO, and they don't all have to be RPGs, or even contain RPG elements (even though they do lend themselves well to this). However, just as there are many subgenres of FPS (Quake (pure) vs. Destiny (shared online with RPG elements)), it is the common trait of having a first person view and gameplay consisting primarily of shooting things that make them an FPS. So, just like FPS, MMO by itself still needs to stand for something, and 'multiplayer loot grinds' are not what makes an MMO an MMO, regardless of if most (or even all) of them contain such gameplay.
Also I hope you are right, and I hope games with similar base gameplay to Destiny (possibly even Destiny 2, though I wouldn't be on it) can evolve into proper MMOs with large open worlds, and mass communitcation and interaction within the player base.
PS. And yes, I did mean "broader", thanks for picking that up.
Just last week is was Suzie telling everyone how good Mass effect Andromeda really is because you know suzie has logged maybe 10 hours in the entire series so shes knows best not the actual players who pound their soul into the game putting in hundreds even thousands of hours.
Let's set the record straight here game reviewers know next to nothing about the games they rate, they never play them long enough to truly know the games flaws, they are beholden to the developers so the review is never truly honest (bad review = no more exclusive interviews to make that content the reviewers make their money off writing).
Hmmm....500 hours in ME3 (1&2 probably another 100 or so) and 100 in Andromeda? M'kay. You're right -- I've hardly bothered putting in any hours into the series.
While I agree with the rest of the list (i.e. there is no 'one true way' to make an MMO), the acronym is still very important. Why? Because unless a label means something, then it is useless.
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their boarder social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer and better game examples.
A long long time ago... In a galaxy far far away...
They had RPG's. Then one day people came up with ideas to expand on them. They created MMORPG's and they came in many shapes and sizes.
As time went on somebody who liked to make shooters thought "Hey some of that MMORPG shit is pretty cool" and they incorporated some of it. Next thing you know we start getting the early versions of MMOFPS's
As far as:
" 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMO's (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'. "
goes...
Right now I'd argue that MMORPG's have pretty much ended up being focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" whereas MMOFPS's are pretty much starting out focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" So we can hope that in their evolution they can go in the direction of "broader social experience and larger worlds to explore"
Really, what does it matter if we have MMORPG's, MMOFPS's, MMORTS's MMOact/adv's etc. ect. ect.
IMHO we'll have no problems being able to differentiate between them
Disclaimer: I believe you meant "broader" instead of "boarder" I took the liberty of making the spell correction in my quote. My apologies if I was in error.
I think it flew straight over your head. The focus is on "MMO", as in, massively multiplayer. Doesn't matter if it's fps, strategy, rpg what matters in this context is how are those players handled in the world, how are they interacting. Destiny did not have MMO characteristics because people did not play in the same world at the same time as everyone else. I'm not sure where acidblood was going with his last paragraph, but the rest was spot on IMO.
If a game like STO with
"Instances have player limits, although the limit depends on the type of instance and how many players Cryptic decided should be the maximum. For instance, Deep Space Encounters are typically set to a 5 player limit, whereas the Earth Spacedock has a player limit of 50 per instance. Cryptic sets these limits based upon the amount of strain that multiple players will cause, both on the server, and user computer, in each individual instance."
Just last week is was Suzie telling everyone how good Mass effect Andromeda really is because you know suzie has logged maybe 10 hours in the entire series so shes knows best not the actual players who pound their soul into the game putting in hundreds even thousands of hours.
Let's set the record straight here game reviewers know next to nothing about the games they rate, they never play them long enough to truly know the games flaws, they are beholden to the developers so the review is never truly honest (bad review = no more exclusive interviews to make that content the reviewers make their money off writing).
Hmmm....500 hours in ME3 (1&2 probably another 100 or so) and 100 in Andromeda? M'kay. You're right -- I've hardly bothered putting in any hours into the series.
Guess again.
These reviewers should get a life. They spend all their time in video games. Get a life Suzie! It's not like this is your job!!
Oh wait a minute...
Post edited by ConstantineMerus on
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Voting with your wallet doesn't work, it just leaves you more money to spend on something else.
The company doesn't know why sales might have a small dip, so you have to tell them what the problem is. That doesn't mean yell at other people on the forums, you have to specifically contact the makers of the game you have a problem with and let them know clearly and specifically what you don't like, and do it politely or it's either getting tossed/deleted, or sent down to legal !
I'm not talking online petition, those are often rated low since all it takes is one person to put it up, and a bunch of people to click on a button. It's like handing out free tickets at the movies and then trying to claim ticket sales are up, it doesn't carry real weight with a lot of people.
Email is common, but it's better than the online petition, but still low value.
For high value, it depends on the company, but the next one is usually a phone call, but the poor person answering the phone is just a customer service rep, and you really don't know if the message will get to the right people.
You aren't going to like this, but go for the old dead tree format snail mail. Yes, an old fashioned letter. That is a physical object that cost money to send. Even if they don't admit it, it has an impact on them, especially in these days of ignoring the tweets. To a company, a measely 100 letters from different people has far more impact than 10,000 or more emails, or 100,000 in an online petition!
Remember, be polite, clearly and concisely state your specific issue, don't make any threats or mentions of lawyers or legal actions. Do that and they might listen, especially if you can get a lot of other people to do the same. Also, don't use a form letter, that just causes them to think someone has the time to hit kinkos/fed ex copy shop and that it's just a mindless drone.
Another small point, actual customers have a lot more weight in the complaints department than someone that hasn't bought the product, and probably never will.
Comments
To put it another way, if we are to call games such as Destiny ‘Massively Multiplayer Online’, then what are we to call games such as EverQuest, EvE or even vanilla WoW; Large World Extra Social Super Massively Multiplayer Online? And where do we draw the line; is Dark Souls an ‘MMO’ too, because you know, it has lots of players connected to the same server that can potentially play together (in small groups)? In short, these may all be ‘online games’, but the play experience is very different, and they need to be labelled differently if those labels are going to be at all useful.
To illustrate this with an example, if someone told you they like FPS games, you wouldn't have much trouble recommending the likes of Doom, Wolfenstein, or even Destiny. And if they said they like RTS games then StarCraft 2, Age of Empires, or even the Total War games would be a safe bet. But now if someone says they like 'MMOs', your next question needs to be 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMOs (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'.
Edit: For grammer, spelling, and better game examples.
Buy to play with sub and cash shop and early access to alpha game that never finishes is the new monetization scheme.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Seaspite
Playing ESO on my X-Box
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Twitter Facebook RantOnRob Youtube
Lets be honest this has been a trend in all forms of media and journalism, it started with the liberal media/news outlets and it is trickling down to all forms of media now. These people who get educated in journalism and writing get brain washed by their liberal professors and they start to buy into the cool aid that they know better. Sad part is they might know how to write but they rarely know much about games, its a joke to watch bill dabble with the developers on some new Elder scrolls content then come here chirping on about how good the game is...he has no clue about what the game really is because you cant possible know it from dabbling for 1 hour every 5th month as you chum around with the developers.
Just last week is was Suzie telling everyone how good Mass effect Andromeda really is because you know suzie has logged maybe 10 hours in the entire series so shes knows best not the actual players who pound their soul into the game putting in hundreds even thousands of hours.
Let's set the record straight here game reviewers know next to nothing about the games they rate, they never play them long enough to truly know the games flaws, they are beholden to the developers so the review is never truly honest (bad review = no more exclusive interviews to make that content the reviewers make their money off writing).
No it just left the white house and it's still fully saturating the mainstream media.
Since we don't have a time machine yet, what is best than a MMO forum to pass the time complaining that all games are trash and to shut down anyone who likes any current EXISTING games in favor of a delusion? They have the audacity to think they are enlightened.
I can't wait for Pantheon, it probably will be a nice game and I'll give it a try. But it won't meet the crazy expectations, that's for sure. Two months after Pantheon release, they will come back in full force to their main game: forums.
However, I will say this much; When gaming subredits such as r/pcmasterrace put MMOs in the same category as a MOBA, I have an issue with that. Especially when they claim 'Overwatch' is an MMO...
There is really nothing much someone can converse with an unknown stranger that they can't see other than expression of opinions and debate of issues... I mean you won't really jump on the forum asking other people "Hey mate, how's life?" rite? lol
They had RPG's. Then one day people came up with ideas to expand on them. They created MMORPG's and they came in many shapes and sizes.
As time went on somebody who liked to make shooters thought "Hey some of that MMORPG shit is pretty cool" and they incorporated some of it. Next thing you know we start getting the early versions of MMOFPS's
As far as:
" 'Do you mean like Destiny style MMO's (with their focus on instanced multiplayer loot grinds), or EverQuest style MMOs (with their broader social experience and larger worlds to explore)?'. "
goes...
Right now I'd argue that MMORPG's have pretty much ended up being focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" whereas MMOFPS's are pretty much starting out focused as "multiplayer loot grinds" So we can hope that in their evolution they can go in the direction of "broader social experience and larger worlds to explore"
Really, what does it matter if we have MMORPG's, MMOFPS's, MMORTS's MMOact/adv's etc. ect. ect.
IMHO we'll have no problems being able to differentiate between them
Disclaimer:
I believe you meant "broader" instead of "boarder" I took the liberty of making the spell correction in my quote. My apologies if I was in error.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Also I hope you are right, and I hope games with similar base gameplay to Destiny (possibly even Destiny 2, though I wouldn't be on it) can evolve into proper MMOs with large open worlds, and mass communitcation and interaction within the player base.
PS. And yes, I did mean "broader", thanks for picking that up.
Guess again.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
"Instances have player limits, although the limit depends on the type of instance and how many players Cryptic decided should be the maximum. For instance, Deep Space Encounters are typically set to a 5 player limit, whereas the Earth Spacedock has a player limit of 50 per instance. Cryptic sets these limits based upon the amount of strain that multiple players will cause, both on the server, and user computer, in each individual instance."
http://sto.gamepedia.com/Instances
can be an MMO
I think the doors are pretty wide open, or perhaps we only have a very small hand of MMO's
So.... How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
The world may never know.
I don't believe anything went over my head.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Oh wait a minute...
The company doesn't know why sales might have a small dip, so you have to tell them what the problem is. That doesn't mean yell at other people on the forums, you have to specifically contact the makers of the game you have a problem with and let them know clearly and specifically what you don't like, and do it politely or it's either getting tossed/deleted, or sent down to legal !
I'm not talking online petition, those are often rated low since all it takes is one person to put it up, and a bunch of people to click on a button. It's like handing out free tickets at the movies and then trying to claim ticket sales are up, it doesn't carry real weight with a lot of people.
Email is common, but it's better than the online petition, but still low value.
For high value, it depends on the company, but the next one is usually a phone call, but the poor person answering the phone is just a customer service rep, and you really don't know if the message will get to the right people.
You aren't going to like this, but go for the old dead tree format snail mail. Yes, an old fashioned letter. That is a physical object that cost money to send. Even if they don't admit it, it has an impact on them, especially in these days of ignoring the tweets. To a company, a measely 100 letters from different people has far more impact than 10,000 or more emails, or 100,000 in an online petition!
Remember, be polite, clearly and concisely state your specific issue, don't make any threats or mentions of lawyers or legal actions. Do that and they might listen, especially if you can get a lot of other people to do the same. Also, don't use a form letter, that just causes them to think someone has the time to hit kinkos/fed ex copy shop and that it's just a mindless drone.
Another small point, actual customers have a lot more weight in the complaints department than someone that hasn't bought the product, and probably never will.
Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...
This is just neverending story and because we are humans, it's absolutelly normal!
And this is not only about MMO genre, it's even in real live in sport and other genres...
Just my 2cents.
Ageni