I would place both Everquest and FFXI as my top games from my gaming experience. One is Western the other Eastern. I don't play games because they come from some place, I play a good game.
If the West continues to make crappy shit they will not get me to play. If Eastern developers manage better games I will play them.
Plus I am Asian so I have always played just the games I think are good and I have never really paid much attention to where they come from.
I think there's a big difference in design, quality, and monetization between Japanese created MMOs such as FFXI, FXIV vs those made in S Korea or China with many Western gamers finding more value in the first vs the other two.
I don't play games based on where they are made however for whatever reason none of the handful of MMORPGs I've played long term (1 yr plus) are Asian made.
Longest ones were Lineage 1 and 2, got about 6 months out of each, but that was a very long time ago
Lost Ark was my most recent attempt, 3 months and I was done with it.
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 would place both Everquest and FFXI as my top games from my gaming experience. One is Western the other Eastern. I don't play games because they come from some place, I play a good game.
If the West continues to make crappy shit they will not get me to play. If Eastern developers manage better games I will play them.
Plus I am Asian so I have always played just the games I think are good and I have never really paid much attention to where they come from.
I think there's a big difference in design, quality, and monetization between Japanese created MMOs such as FFXI, FXIV vs those made in S Korea or China with many Western gamers finding more value in the first vs the other two.
I don't play games based on where they are made however for whatever reason none of the handful of MMORPGs I've played long term (1 yr plus) are Asian made.
Longest ones were Lineage 1 and 2, got about 6 months out of each, but that was a very long time ago
Lost Ark was my most recent attempt, 3 months and I was done with it.
I agree but I am not the one who made the sweeping generalizations. So within the topic I picked the Eastern MMO that I considered a classic.
A lot of people still play Lineage 1 and that is a Korean game. Many posters on this board are Lineage veterans and I dare say some are Westerners.
So these types of dubious attempts at division should be more about quality not origin.
That depends largely on the players. The more we support domestically made MMORPGs the more lucrative they are to maintain and attractive to develop.
We are complaining about eastern influence while doing down anything CF that comes out. The question is how much graphics and solid game systems are we willing to sacrifice to have an old or at least old/new school feel? Not much/many it seems; the CF games are restrained by their budget, but we expect a game as solidly well rounded as WoW or Lotro.
Exactly so, contributing to the largely self-imposed dearth of options complained about by many. If you're open to hardly anything your options will be next to nothing.
If people want new things they must demonstrate a willingness to embrace them. Otherwise you'll keep getting much the same or little of anything if such is generally no longer seen as profitable to provide.
It is a hard sell though, I recognise how critical of everything from SotA to Embers I have been, others on here have acknowledged this as well. But this is the devil and the deep blue sea, you either drop graphical and gaming system standards or accept a gameplay based around monetarization. Is either the right choice, I just can't say. Even in games where newer MMOs had gaming systems we did not like (from lotro to ESO) we did it our way to mitigate the changes. In other words, the guild saw systems it did not like and said no, we will do this our way as a guild.
So we could say, these new CF MMOs are not at the standard we expect but at least our way of playing is a good fit, we don't have to worry guild members will be disadvantaged by doing it our way. This discussion has occurred, some have gone to an Embers sort of MMO, for most like me it was too much of a leap.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
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
That depends largely on the players. The more we support domestically made MMORPGs the more lucrative they are to maintain and attractive to develop.
We are complaining about eastern influence while doing down anything CF that comes out. The question is how much graphics and solid game systems are we willing to sacrifice to have an old or at least old/new school feel? Not much/many it seems; the CF games are restrained by their budget, but we expect a game as solidly well rounded as WoW or Lotro.
Exactly so, contributing to the largely self-imposed dearth of options complained about by many. If you're open to hardly anything your options will be next to nothing.
If people want new things they must demonstrate a willingness to embrace them. Otherwise you'll keep getting much the same or little of anything if such is generally no longer seen as profitable to provide.
It is a hard sell though, I recognise how critical of everything from SotA to Embers I have been, others on here have acknowledged this as well. But this is the devil and the deep blue sea, you either drop graphical and gaming system standards or accept a gameplay based around monetarization. Is either the right choice, I just can't say. Even in games where newer MMOs had gaming systems we did not like (from lotro to ESO) we did it our way to mitigate the changes. In other words, the guild saw systems it did not like and said no, we will do this our way as a guild.
So we could say, these new CF MMOs are not at the standard we expect but at least our way of playing is a good fit, we don't have to worry guild members will be disadvantaged by doing it our way. This discussion has occurred, some have gone to an Embers sort of MMO, for most like me it was too much of a leap.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
Change requires openness to it.
If I seem harsh on a game, it's usually because the game doesn't meet my standards. Change is good if it is a positive, high-quality change. Change towards a lower standard isn't evolution, it's dysgenic.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I dont think the West will seriously invest in mmorpgs going forward outside of a few outliers, simply because the west is too dominated by the idea of maximum profits with minimal investment. I'm sure many think "well most businesses operate like that" but not exactly since 'investment' means different things to not just different businesses but different cultures as well.
To better understand this idea, it would be better to single out who people really mean when they refer to the 'east' which are Korean developers. For years, the Korean market has utilized students to help develop games, which is why they could get away with Free-to-play and such for so long since they have some free developers on staff. The 'west' doesn't really do this (or not to the degree as Korean developers do). Taking that into account would explain why you see so many Korea games boom at least since the 'real beginning' of the free-to-play area.
I believe the only quality 'eastern' developers in the markets right now are ones that originate from Japan, simply because of how their culture operates ('honor' and such, though SE has been caught doing several 'unhonorable' things over the years). However, I would say that only really applies to well-known IPs, like Final Fantasy/Dragon's Quest/Dragon's Dogma/etc. It explains why SE almost went backrupt on several projects over the years to save certain titles (FF13 and 14 to be specific, I guess 15 as well?).
So really 'success' or 'popularity' can honestly be dictated by a society's culture more so than anything and since the west tends to have a lot of things either change or condition people to believe things have to be a certain way, it kind of creates the dynamic we are in today (with paid betas and cash shops associated with not just mmos but single player games as well becoming the norm) to potentially other things becoming normalized as well (NFTs, crypto, etc and I know people think those things have failed, but honestly look at the other things and track how long it took for them to become normalized).
I think one consequence is that eastern MMOs will adopt western elements. FFXIV is an example of an MMO whose design closely follows the WoW model. I think eastern MMOs will shift some design choices to mimic western titles If they find there is no more room for growth with p2w and random elements that were designed to fleece players. Consumers can only compulsively spend on digital goods for so long before they start to wear out. On the flip side, we see western MMOs adopting some eastern monetization methods, like Diablo Immortal (if you can call that an MMO). Hopefully, we get some titles in the future that blend the best of both worlds while maintaining a level of integrity.
That depends largely on the players. The more we support domestically made MMORPGs the more lucrative they are to maintain and attractive to develop.
We are complaining about eastern influence while doing down anything CF that comes out. The question is how much graphics and solid game systems are we willing to sacrifice to have an old or at least old/new school feel? Not much/many it seems; the CF games are restrained by their budget, but we expect a game as solidly well rounded as WoW or Lotro.
Exactly so, contributing to the largely self-imposed dearth of options complained about by many. If you're open to hardly anything your options will be next to nothing.
If people want new things they must demonstrate a willingness to embrace them. Otherwise you'll keep getting much the same or little of anything if such is generally no longer seen as profitable to provide.
It is a hard sell though, I recognise how critical of everything from SotA to Embers I have been, others on here have acknowledged this as well. But this is the devil and the deep blue sea, you either drop graphical and gaming system standards or accept a gameplay based around monetarization. Is either the right choice, I just can't say. Even in games where newer MMOs had gaming systems we did not like (from lotro to ESO) we did it our way to mitigate the changes. In other words, the guild saw systems it did not like and said no, we will do this our way as a guild.
So we could say, these new CF MMOs are not at the standard we expect but at least our way of playing is a good fit, we don't have to worry guild members will be disadvantaged by doing it our way. This discussion has occurred, some have gone to an Embers sort of MMO, for most like me it was too much of a leap.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
Change requires openness to it.
If I seem harsh on a game, it's usually because the game doesn't meet my standards. Change is good if it is a positive, high-quality change. Change towards a lower standard isn't evolution, it's dysgenic.
Being harsh on a game is fine so long it is first approached with an open mind. I'm not talking about embracing change solely for the sake of. That is obviously absurd.
But change can't be evaluated if it isn't happening at all and there is little incentive to try when rejection is felt the likely outcome.
That depends largely on the players. The more we support domestically made MMORPGs the more lucrative they are to maintain and attractive to develop.
We are complaining about eastern influence while doing down anything CF that comes out. The question is how much graphics and solid game systems are we willing to sacrifice to have an old or at least old/new school feel? Not much/many it seems; the CF games are restrained by their budget, but we expect a game as solidly well rounded as WoW or Lotro.
Exactly so, contributing to the largely self-imposed dearth of options complained about by many. If you're open to hardly anything your options will be next to nothing.
If people want new things they must demonstrate a willingness to embrace them. Otherwise you'll keep getting much the same or little of anything if such is generally no longer seen as profitable to provide.
It is a hard sell though, I recognise how critical of everything from SotA to Embers I have been, others on here have acknowledged this as well. But this is the devil and the deep blue sea, you either drop graphical and gaming system standards or accept a gameplay based around monetarization. Is either the right choice, I just can't say. Even in games where newer MMOs had gaming systems we did not like (from lotro to ESO) we did it our way to mitigate the changes. In other words, the guild saw systems it did not like and said no, we will do this our way as a guild.
So we could say, these new CF MMOs are not at the standard we expect but at least our way of playing is a good fit, we don't have to worry guild members will be disadvantaged by doing it our way. This discussion has occurred, some have gone to an Embers sort of MMO, for most like me it was too much of a leap.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
Change requires openness to it.
If I seem harsh on a game, it's usually because the game doesn't meet my standards. Change is good if it is a positive, high-quality change. Change towards a lower standard isn't evolution, it's dysgenic.
Being harsh on a game is fine so long it is first approached with an open mind. I'm not talking about embracing change solely for the sake of. That is obviously absurd.
But change can't be evaluated if it isn't happening at all and there is little incentive to try when rejection is felt the likely outcome.
There're things to evaluate from recent past gaming experiences. A game doesn't have to try something "cold."
The biggest one that strikes me is the big power gaps that cause so much trouble in MMORPGs since EQ. (Division, restrictions, etc.)
Look at Balder's Gate. It was a very big hit. But there were so many complaints about being restricted where you could go in Balder's Gate I that they changed that in II.
And look at Skyrim and then ESO. Skyrim, a huge hit, was open world and players could go where they wanted. ESO comes out and players couldn't go anywhere, so they changed it by adding Scaling.
Other games were made with Scaling too.
The point being is that players really do like that open world to explore. But the problem with Scaling is that it feels wrong, lacking advancement, and meaningless numbers.
So a game that has small numbers (power gaps) yet some obvious advancement, and an open world is not going to be rejected for that. So in fact, giving players what they have proven they want. The rest is up to designing a fun game to play.
You can also look at previous games for fun things that gamers liked for what you put into your game, to make it fun.
Edit to add, a game doesn't have to be completely open. Just open enough that players are happy with the exploration aspects. Dungeons should have levels of depth that get tougher, to help this out. A relatively lower leveled/skilled character should be able to go into those depths, realize they aren't powerful enough, and leave without usually dying. And they should be able to go there with more powerful guildmates and survive well enough. Except in extreme cases.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
That logic works with food.
Games, not so much.
What then do you feel will promote change in lieu of player openness to it?
The formula is simple. People need to buy/support stuff they like, and stop buying stuff they don't like.
Producers will make things if there is demand for it.
What throws this entire equation into whack, is when you buy stuff you don't really like, and support stuff you don't really like but hope they will make a better product later. What a really mixed message you are sending them.
If people are supporting a subpar game and throwing money at a bad design. There is no incentive for devs to spend even more money and risk losing money when they can just pump out a trash product and people will buy it.
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
Anyway, games are a luxury of sorts. Entertainment, to be precise.
If I cant get a good game, there are other forms of entertainment available. Like, I could get creative myself. I can check out movies. I can read books. Etc.
Anyway, games are a luxury of sorts. Entertainment, to be precise.
If I cant get a good game, there are other forms of entertainment available. Like, I could get creative myself. I can check out movies. I can read books. Etc.
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
Western entertainment got too greedy, look at the slime Hollywood, their putting them self's out of business...movie theaters now have only dramas or cartoons, action is too expensive. Next will be pro sports... games, well forget it !!
It is a far different audience today than it was 20+ years ago.
When your first dip in the water is a game like UO or EQ, you were amazed by the possibilities, and you didn't really have any idea what the genre could be. As more games started to come up, the audience grew, and the options to play became greater.
If you look at the forums here, it's simply a microcosm of the gaming audience. Some people like PvE, some like PvP, some want Action Combat, some what Tab/Target. I think that's my the market is ripe for smaller, more niche games that cater to certain audiences, rather than hoping for a one stop shop that attracts everyone.
So are Western MMO's dead? No, I don't think so, I think the audience is fractured, because they have the choices. I think that developers aren't smart enough, and don't have enough funding to really create the true breakthru experiences that take the genre to the next level, so we see an awful lot of rehashing. Plus we've seen a host of co-op style and lobby style games become popular as well. Turns out some people find that's enough interaction with others, and they suit their playstyle than MMO's.
I know my playstyle has changed. Back in the day I spent hours and hours playing UO, and DAoC, and I never minded full-loot, or committing hours and hours to playing. These days, life changes, I value different things, and I suspect that most audiences go thru that.
What I don't think we'll see for awhile is that genre redefining game that is truly the "next WoW" that manages to appeal to multiple niches of people at once. Maybe that puts a cap on development of AAA titles, or means nothing but niche games for awhile. Hell, I hope to be around to see something that pulls everyone to play it in the genre.
I don't know that MMOs are dead, just changed. The MMORPGs that were once the only form of MMO have been replaced by ARPGs, MOBAs, MMOFPS and the like. The Role-Playing elements that were once the domain of MMORPGs and CRPGs have been adapted by almost every other genre, and any game that connects multiple players through the Internet claims to be some variation of the MMO part. Then there's survival, which puts a character in a harsh world where you eat and build things and maybe engage in some (frequently unwanted) PvP. If you look carefully, you can probably find some variation of a CCG that's calling itself an MMO. The only genre that isn't trying to co-opt the MMO title are the horrible mature Adult-only graphic titles.
Everything proclaims themselves an MMO, so they aren't dead. I just don't recognize them anymore.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It may be hard sell but it's the only thing on the shelf.
That logic works with food.
Games, not so much.
What then do you feel will promote change in lieu of player openness to it?
The formula is simple. People need to buy/support stuff they like, and stop buying stuff they don't like.
Producers will make things if there is demand for it.
What throws this entire equation into whack, is when you buy stuff you don't really like, and support stuff you don't really like but hope they will make a better product later. What a really mixed message you are sending them.
If people are supporting a subpar game and throwing money at a bad design. There is no incentive for devs to spend even more money and risk losing money when they can just pump out a trash product and people will buy it.
People already do that for the most part making the state of things not a problem for most people then. Apparently the issue is more contrived than genuine.
Comments
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light
I don't play games based on where they are made however for whatever reason none of the handful of MMORPGs I've played long term (1 yr plus) are Asian made.
Longest ones were Lineage 1 and 2, got about 6 months out of each, but that was a very long time ago
Lost Ark was my most recent attempt, 3 months and I was done with it.
"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
A lot of people still play Lineage 1 and that is a Korean game. Many posters on this board are Lineage veterans and I dare say some are Westerners.
So these types of dubious attempts at division should be more about quality not origin.
Change requires openness to it.
Now, when it came to toilet paper I definitely bought the sand paper like 1 ply than do without my Charmin.
"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
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
What then do you feel will promote change in lieu of player openness to it?
Being harsh on a game is fine so long it is first approached with an open mind. I'm not talking about embracing change solely for the sake of. That is obviously absurd.
But change can't be evaluated if it isn't happening at all and there is little incentive to try when rejection is felt the likely outcome.
The biggest one that strikes me is the big power gaps that cause so much trouble in MMORPGs since EQ. (Division, restrictions, etc.)
Look at Balder's Gate. It was a very big hit. But there were so many complaints about being restricted where you could go in Balder's Gate I that they changed that in II.
And look at Skyrim and then ESO. Skyrim, a huge hit, was open world and players could go where they wanted. ESO comes out and players couldn't go anywhere, so they changed it by adding Scaling.
Other games were made with Scaling too.
The point being is that players really do like that open world to explore.
But the problem with Scaling is that it feels wrong, lacking advancement, and meaningless numbers.
So a game that has small numbers (power gaps) yet some obvious advancement, and an open world is not going to be rejected for that. So in fact, giving players what they have proven they want.
The rest is up to designing a fun game to play.
You can also look at previous games for fun things that gamers liked for what you put into your game, to make it fun.
Edit to add,
a game doesn't have to be completely open. Just open enough that players are happy with the exploration aspects.
Dungeons should have levels of depth that get tougher, to help this out.
A relatively lower leveled/skilled character should be able to go into those depths, realize they aren't powerful enough, and leave without usually dying.
And they should be able to go there with more powerful guildmates and survive well enough. Except in extreme cases.
Once upon a time....
Producers will make things if there is demand for it.
What throws this entire equation into whack, is when you buy stuff you don't really like, and support stuff you don't really like but hope they will make a better product later. What a really mixed message you are sending them.
If people are supporting a subpar game and throwing money at a bad design. There is no incentive for devs to spend even more money and risk losing money when they can just pump out a trash product and people will buy it.
Okay, we have sushi...
"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
"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
When your first dip in the water is a game like UO or EQ, you were amazed by the possibilities, and you didn't really have any idea what the genre could be. As more games started to come up, the audience grew, and the options to play became greater.
If you look at the forums here, it's simply a microcosm of the gaming audience. Some people like PvE, some like PvP, some want Action Combat, some what Tab/Target. I think that's my the market is ripe for smaller, more niche games that cater to certain audiences, rather than hoping for a one stop shop that attracts everyone.
So are Western MMO's dead? No, I don't think so, I think the audience is fractured, because they have the choices. I think that developers aren't smart enough, and don't have enough funding to really create the true breakthru experiences that take the genre to the next level, so we see an awful lot of rehashing. Plus we've seen a host of co-op style and lobby style games become popular as well. Turns out some people find that's enough interaction with others, and they suit their playstyle than MMO's.
I know my playstyle has changed. Back in the day I spent hours and hours playing UO, and DAoC, and I never minded full-loot, or committing hours and hours to playing. These days, life changes, I value different things, and I suspect that most audiences go thru that.
What I don't think we'll see for awhile is that genre redefining game that is truly the
"next WoW" that manages to appeal to multiple niches of people at once. Maybe that puts a cap on development of AAA titles, or means nothing but niche games for awhile. Hell, I hope to be around to see something that pulls everyone to play it in the genre.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
People already do that for the most part making the state of things not a problem for most people then. Apparently the issue is more contrived than genuine.
Who would have thought.