That really didn't counter anything Brainy said in the post you quoted.
Rather, that was quite the straw man.
Dunno how often people need to note they aren't arguing against the notion of people making a game for their desired niche. The reality is simply that one is talking about a niche.
Albion's PvP model is not the same as the more successful PvP models of the lobby shooters, MOBAs, etc. You can't point at those games and expect Ablion to pull the same kind of numbers as them as a consequence. It's just not going to happen.
It serves it's niche fine enough, but one has to be conscious of the differences in models and what it means for the resulting product.
This is part of why Albion works, because it's not trying to be overly ambitious in serving it's niche. Aside from the fact it already relies on a perpetual churn of free players, it also focuses down a lot on simple design and meta and managing their overhead. If they tried to do more, they'd probably go under as a company because they just won't be able to afford it.
Because they are selling to a niche that won't magically grow with their budget expenditure. They have wiggle room in the context of pulling fans from other titles, but you're now trying to pull players from one investment to another and that takes a lot of effort.
What is your problem? Are you shareholder? No. People play Albion, have fun. The game makes money. Niche or not, it does not matter. If you do not enjoy it, do not play, it is so easy. What makes me angry is your attitude. And you are not alone. There are a lot of people like you, who attack every new game, demanding to be like the old ones. This attitude changes nothing - literally. Publishers do not care about your opinion, they simply do not want to take risks. But what you do creates toxic environment in the fan base. Obviously many MMORPG players do not like existing MMORPGs. They may play and pay, but it is a fact that million jump on the hype for every new game. Still many ask for the same over and over again. Do you know what is the definition of stupidity? To do the same thing expecting different results. And stupidity is toxic.
You'd be better off not making things up to attack others. Nothing you just wrote applies to reality.
By all means, show where anyone said you can't do something different. Show where I have talked about whether or not I personally enjoy the subject.
Fact is that's not the argument being made, no matter how many times you lie about what others are saying. Calling others stupid over nonsense YOU made up is nothing but a rude tangent that at best only serves to avoid addressing the actual subject.
You want to talk about toxicity? Toxicity is people who use fallacy after fallacy to attack others, like your post happens to do. Toxicity is people who take offense to problems they make up in their own head and project onto others, as your post has done.
Your projections, assumptions, and ad hominems do not make good conversation. It's dishonest and it's rude, nothing more.
If you want to respond to what you quoted instead of some make believe argument, feel free. As is, all you have done is yell at a straw man.
You'd be better off not making things up to attack others. Nothing you just wrote applies to reality.
By all means, show where anyone said you can't do something different. Show where I have talked about whether or not I personally enjoy the subject.
Fact is that's not the argument being made, no matter how many times you lie about what others are saying. Calling others stupid over nonsense YOU made up is nothing but a rude tangent that at best only serves to avoid addressing the actual subject.
You want to talk about toxicity? Toxicity is people who use fallacy after fallacy to attack others, like your post happens to do. Toxicity is people who take offense to problems they make up in their own head and project onto others, as your post has done.
Your projections, assumptions, and ad hominems do not make good conversation. It's dishonest and it's rude, nothing more.
If you want to respond to what you quoted instead of some make believe argument, feel free. As is, all you have done is yell at a straw man.
You are the one who...
Yeah, no.
Having experience with something and being able to corroborate it by linking to rundowns of the game's mechanic that prove what I said is the opposite of lying.
In reality, that's called an empirical truth.
You making claims and then backing it by nothing but random personal anecdote is antithetical to that, and you stacking that with ad hominems and straw men does nothing to further the subject and instead makes your statements all the more counterproductive.
Point in case, the fact you're talking about something that doesn't even have to do with the current topic or what you've quoted above. You're taking animosity about being proven wrong in a different conversation and using it as justification to dismiss and make personal attacks here.
I feel that companies do make compromises and they get flayed by the fans for making changes and it can be for the better or it can spell a decline. Everything about a successful threshold is balanced on a knife's edge in this genre. It always spirals down cascading because any loss of players leads to more loss and often unstoppable decline. This is why this genre is such a bitch to work with. You never quite know what can lead to players losing interest.
I wish games (in general) would build on a "foundation of features" that will not change. Try changing a foundation of a building and it will fall down, eventually.
If you build your MMO around PvP (as a foundation), make every part of the game add to that foundation. If your MMORPG has four foundations, for example combat, crafting, guilds, and quests STICK to those foundations and make the rest of the game adhere, or add to those foundations. Any upcoming changes should keep those foundations in place with only a nudge here or there.
Making these online games are a huge investment and we must not forget it is also an investment for us players so choose wisely what you decide your game should be. Developers are extremely conscious of the short window of time to make their games a success these days simply because there are too many options and players can drop your game quickly.
I believe this is the wrench in the works. It is a tough tight-rope to walk trying to balance what made your game fun and trying to entice new players. I've seen this happen in every MMORPG/MMO I've played for any length of time. Each and every one has "added" something to attract new players which piss off the core player base. I blame "big businesses" take over of the genre. Big business has a motto built of, "MORE! MORE! MORE!"
I do not envy game company's roads they travel. And developers get the raw end of the stick, by far. I pray for them all and try not to take out my frustrations on the developers
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Uwakionna said: If you want to respond to what you quoted instead of some make believe argument, feel free. As is, all you have done is yell at a straw man.
This is why this poster has the top slot on my "block list." I have encountered them many times over and they seem incapable of coherent thoughts, but they'll stick to their points like a pit bull latching on to its kill
It's not for me to decide, but I'd suggest ignoring this poster altogether. They add nothing to a discussion
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I never played WoW. If I claim something about WoW and someone who played says - no, this is not right, I will agree. If I do not I will be simply stupid.
This is a very perplexing way to discuss things.
1) You feel like you should make claims about something you dont know anything about. 2) when called out about that and they counter your point you say you now agree?
How can you agree, if you dont know if what they are saying is right?
In both cases shouldnt you just refrain from making judgements on things you have NO CLUE about. You should neither agree or disagree about things you havent got enough information about.
This explains alot about your way of commenting. Just for reference, when you dont know something, its ok not to have an opinion LOL. Try that sometime, it will save alot of these back and forth fights.
I believe this is the wrench in the works. It is a tough tight-rope to walk trying to balance what made your game fun and trying to entice new players. I've seen this happen in every MMORPG/MMO I've played for any length of time. Each and every one has "added" something to attract new players which piss off the core player base. I blame "big businesses" take over of the genre. Big business has a motto built of, "MORE! MORE! MORE!"
Interesting your perspective on this. Obviously if you like the original and it changes to something you dont like, thats not good for you (personally).
My real question here is this, when these devs are changing the game from the core to some new base are they REALLY getting more people? People are saying they are doing this for more people but are they REALLY getting more? Back in the old days the MMO's were changing and they were seeing year over year increases in subs.
Even if I dont like the change, I can definetely respect a dev for changing the game to capture more customers. They are in business to make money after all.
What I have found in the last 10+ years is that they actually have gotten substantially less customers. This I cant respect at all. This is stupid. Why would bother to change something to end up with less people, that to me is moronic.
The only MMO I can think of in the last 10 years that has grown its customer base is FFXIV. I personally dont like the game, (too many cutscenes). But I totally respect their position because after all they are seeing growth. So from a business model I understand that I am just not their target customer and can live with that.
I dont care about some guy in a van down by the river that likes a super Niche MMO that dies shortly after release.
What is the problem with Super Niche MMO's? Why does an MMO have to be Super Ultra Mainstream supported by the mentally deficient (the masses)? Isn't that the problem that is being discussed?
No thats not the problem at all. If their were MMO's that were mainstream then they would be popular. If MMO's were popular they wouldnt be a niche genre and the genre wouldnt be in trouble.
So the fact that the genre is in trouble describes a problem.
There are plenty of niche MMO's. 1k players is not going to save this genre. I had more people in my high school graduation class than that.
Many people would say the entire MMO genre is Niche. I dont know why we need to celebrate games that are so utterly bad that they cant even get 1k players to play. So no I dont think this genre needs any more of those kind of games.
I dont dispute peoples right to build them, but I dont think its good for the genre. Even in entertainment, you think we should be encouraging movies that can only gross about 100k revenue? LOL thats going to be a pretty bad movie, and if there were too many of those it would CRUSH the movie theaters.
This is what these extremely niche MMO's are doing to this genre, people are losing faith in MMO's because there is literally so much garbage.
The issue here is not just lack of experience. It is lack of basic comprehensive understanding. I never played WoW. If I claim something about WoW and someone who played says - no, this is not right, I will agree. If I do not I will be simply stupid.
....
To show you are smart and I'm wrong, write something smart, based on your experience on the topic, do not argue with me.
So the fact you've accused random statements multiple times of being "WoW" things means you not only are talking about things you admit you don't even know anything about, but you also contradict yourself here by claiming if you say someone calls you on it that you'd correct yourself.
So guess that's another lie. Your entire tangent about others making no sense and lying really goes up in flames when you reduce you position to brazen lies.
As for the last statement, that's what the comment you attacked without ever acknowledging or responding to still is. Feel free to acknowledge your mistakes at any time and respond to the actual subject instead of derail with nonsensical personal attacks.
Conflating all PvP as the same kind of thing is very simply a dishonest and illogical argument. Just because a lobby shooter is wildly successful, does not mean a open world PvP game with full loot is going to pull the same numbers. There's been a variety of attempts with a variety of supporting mechanics to establish certain forms of PvP are niche.
And as has been said a million times, niche isn't bad, but it's not going to suddenly stop being niche. The fact you refer to games that meet success by mitigating and offering alternative to the open PvP content just goes to show the fact that such content alone does not sustain live services.
Instead of ever address this, you have either fallen back to generic comments about how PvP is popular, which fails to address the root problem, or you've made personal attacks.
You have yet to address any of this which has been said to you before, even though this was the point made to your prior ramblings. Your continued ad hominems and nonsense only makes it worse.
This demonstrates again the problem people were trying to bring up.
You value the PvP part and think it's great for Albion. But as has been noted before, with that along the game nearly died, so clearly there is an issue there. Pinning it on the PvE, which is a big reason the game still exists along with the F2P move, is a little erroneous given we can see the same pattern of failure across other open PvP focused mmos.
And this does put weight as a player on the meaning of the game being a niche, because it directly affects the scope of the game that can be delivered. Developers do not have infinite budgets, they have to build for what they are capable of supporting. That puts massive importance on the choice of gameplay and features, because they can't develop more content for a game with too few players to pay the devs. That's not a subject of investment, that's a matter of whether or not the game you want to enjoy is capable of existing.
And hence the compromises and changes made. Albion is a niche that survives by catering beyond it's niche. If it stopped doing so, it'd likely wither back to the hundreds and die off.
This doesn't take a crystal ball to know. It's happened time and again with other MMOs and it nearly happened to Albion once already.
It is unfortunate that you consider reason "toxic".
It is always interesting to see what a game does to improve and initially as others pointed out Albion Online was indeed doing poorly. This is one of the things 3 years on has proved to be popular after it was voted down severely on Reddit.
Sorry but quoting a couple of posters trying to rewrite history doesnt really say much. Me and a group of friends went to Albion just before their PVE and Free Switch. The reversal was extremely dramatic.
March 2019 330 concurrent before the group PVE, Free Patch and 6k during the Hype and 7K 1 month later (May 2019).
Then again in 2020 they released more group PVE updates and almost tripled their declining numbers bringing them up to 9k which is their highest point.
Nov 2022 The Solo Content Patch BEYOND THE VEIL, for solo/duo PVP/PVE content only went from 5.9k to 6k. It increased 100 players LOL, then immediately lost them.
Sorry but quoting a couple of posters trying to rewrite history doesnt really say much. Me and a group of friends went to Albion just before their PVE and Free Switch. The reversal was extremely dramatic.
March 2019 330 concurrent before the group PVE, Free Patch and 6k during the Hype and 7K 1 month later (May 2019).
Then again in 2020 they released more group PVE updates and almost tripled their declining numbers bringing them up to 9k which is their highest point.
Nov 2022 The Solo Content Patch BEYOND THE VEIL, for solo/duo PVP/PVE content only went from 5.9k to 6k. It increased 100 players LOL, then immediately lost them.
Going free, adding group PVE, and QOL is what saved this game from certain death. Solo content probably lost them more players than it gained.
Not the couple of posters but reading the responses to the thread is the salient part and also comparing it to the previous responses. Of course the OPs are not the ones to read to see what the mood and direction was at one time and how that direction changed.
There is also another good thread on the Albion Forum the one asking for a PvE server and that one is especially entertaining. I agree with the posters that it would indeed bring about a decline to the main servers if they introduced one. I remember when Dark Age of Camelot brought Gaheris it was long after the game's halcyon days and possibly to finally tap into the PvE market.
'' Roam is frustrating way waaaaaaay more often than it is fun. Pvp is plagued by other huge problems other than just zergs too, like ratting and 3rd partying, and all of these things need to be discouraged if PvP is to flourish. Most of the PvE content (excluding only HCE) suffers from being unrewarding, complete lack of any challenge at all, and all of it is boring and repetitive. We also do not currently have a single piece of lethal PvE content in the game. PvE content doesn't have to be super easy and boring/repetitive nor does it have to be risk free and unrewarding . PvP doesn't need to have a monopoly on risk, nor should it. If PvE players dont want to PvP, then fine, but they are still players and they deserve to have fun too, so why not add lethal PvE content in the game that is both fun and challenging to check all of those boxes?''
I do agree the F2P was significant but I was not looking at that part as it was obvious but rather the PvP direction the game actually changed or encouraged. So you see it isn't just PvE games that go solo but PvP games have shifted to that mentality too.
This is an interesting dynamic as far as PvP is concerned because I not being a PvPer have only played in games where I PvP on teams like in a battleground so learning that in full loot PvP games that solo PvP is popular brings me to the opinion that all market has shifted to this change in how players like to play. This is an interesting shift and one has to study why before saying that people want easier games and all the other accusations levied on gamers today.
It is always interesting to see what a game does to improve and initially as others pointed out Albion Online was indeed doing poorly. This is one of the things 3 years on has proved to be popular after it was voted down severely on Reddit.
I am not arguing against your points here, but I would be wary of using social media to tell us what players true feelings are, indeed what the truth is about anything.
It is always interesting to see what a game does to improve and initially as others pointed out Albion Online was indeed doing poorly. This is one of the things 3 years on has proved to be popular after it was voted down severely on Reddit.
I am not arguing against your points here, but I would be wary of using social media to tell us what players true feelings are, indeed what the truth is about anything.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
Yeah I think you give dev teams way way to much credit for knowing what is best for their games. If they did know, then the games would not be stagnanting but seeing year over year large increases. If this game was seeing huge increases in paying customers then maybe your point would have some weight. Right now its just stagnating.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
Stagnation is very good for an MMORPG as far as population goes. I'm sure a lot of them would prefer that to a declining population. Most MMORPGs with the exception of WoW all lose their population within a year so having a stagnant population which you can keep is actually success.
Don't forget Albion Online is a niche game so this is very good for them.
If you read the thread on why a PvE server right now is bad, it has very good points and far better than the UO example because we have far more choices for MMORPGs now so the UO example does not really apply to our current MMORPG environment. Players had way less options then but now it can be detrimental to a thriving PvP game to introduce a PvE server. They also pointed out that the Albion Online PvE content isn't that plentiful nor very good.
To be honest DAoC had bad PvE too it was incredibly boring and my time in Gaheris was shortlived.
Stagnation is very good for an MMORPG as far as population goes. I'm sure a lot of them would prefer that to a declining population. Most MMORPGs with the exception of WoW all lose their population within a year so having a stagnant population which you can keep is actually success.
Don't forget Albion Online is a niche game so this is very good for them.
If you read the thread on why a PvE server right now is bad, it has very good points and far better than the UO example because we have far more choices for MMORPGs now so the UO example does not really apply to our current MMORPG environment. Players had way less options then but now it can be detrimental to a thriving PvP game to introduce a PvE server. They also pointed out that the Albion Online PvE content isn't that plentiful nor very good.
To be honest DAoC had bad PvE too it was incredibly boring and my time in Gaheris was shortlived.
Funny you saying stagnation is good. Yeah I suppose you are right, in the age of trash MMO's the new goalpost is just not losing all your customers LOL.
Back in the golden age of MMO's most of the MMO's were growing year over year for many years.
In regards to DAOC, even on the regular PVP servers you could PVE normally without being killed by other players in almost all the zones. PVE in non PVP areas was really good. Even in the "PVP" areas like darkness falls, the PVP really only happened when the dungeon was turned from 1 realm to another, people had plenty of notice to get out.
The full PVP servers like Mordred and Andred were ALWAYS dead, I used to play on those servers but they where so dead it was hard to find anyone.
Just so I am clear, I am not advocating Albion should change to PVE mode. I hate when games change from their core. I think they should launch with PVE and PVP separate servers from the get go, keep their core customers happy and grow that core.
You can't delete your own posts mate, that's too confusing.
Well I was about to slam some ones post, and get banded as usual.
I'll take the confusion. Well done on the restraint
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
Yeah I think you give dev teams way way to much credit for knowing what is best for their games. If they did know, then the games would not be stagnanting but seeing year over year large increases. If this game was seeing huge increases in paying customers then maybe your point would have some weight. Right now its just stagnating.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
So many game devs are just 1 hit wonders.
I don't know if this "rumor" I've heard bandied about is true, but I have seen others suggest that many MMORPGs have stats on "what activities players partake in and how often and how long." If not, I'm sure they have some kind way of measuring what is working and what is not in their games.
My point is, a small fraction of players visit websites/message boards. Even then, many post about activities they want/need and when looked at don't actually partake in. Basically it boils down to players looking for fun. If they don't find it they leave. Seldom do they tell a game "Why."
If PvP is not fun for them, players will just stop playing. If crafting is too much for them, they leave. If combat changes their favorite character, they leave. If the "flavor of the month" switches and they don't have it, they leave. The point being, the developers get almost no feedback.
However... They can look at MMOs and think, "They're doing very well. What can we implement from them?" (Look at WoW, the masters of this.)
Take that for what it is, just more speculation
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
It is always interesting to see what a game does to improve and initially as others pointed out Albion Online was indeed doing poorly. This is one of the things 3 years on has proved to be popular after it was voted down severely on Reddit.
I am not arguing against your points here, but I would be wary of using social media to tell us what players true feelings are, indeed what the truth is about anything.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
I was commenting elsewhere today that developers have to sometimes ignore the feedback, players so often want what would be bad for the game or don't actually realise what the game needs.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
Yeah I think you give dev teams way way to much credit for knowing what is best for their games. If they did know, then the games would not be stagnanting but seeing year over year large increases. If this game was seeing huge increases in paying customers then maybe your point would have some weight. Right now its just stagnating.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
So many game devs are just 1 hit wonders.
I don't know if this "rumor" I've heard bandied about is true, but I have seen others suggest that many MMORPGs have stats on "what activities players partake in and how often and how long." If not, I'm sure they have some kind way of measuring what is working and what is not in their games.
My point is, a small fraction of players visit websites/message boards. Even then, many post about activities they want/need and when looked at don't actually partake in. Basically it boils down to players looking for fun. If they don't find it they leave. Seldom do they tell a game "Why."
If PvP is not fun for them, players will just stop playing. If crafting is too much for them, they leave. If combat changes their favorite character, they leave. If the "flavor of the month" switches and they don't have it, they leave. The point being, the developers get almost no feedback.
However... They can look at MMOs and think, "They're doing very well. What can we implement from them?" (Look at WoW, the masters of this.)
Take that for what it is, just more speculation
It is difficult to judge what works and forum posters are notoriously louder than the many who quietly go about and play the game. Not everything that is doom and gloom on a the game forum necessarily translates into what is really going on in game.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
Yeah I think you give dev teams way way to much credit for knowing what is best for their games. If they did know, then the games would not be stagnanting but seeing year over year large increases. If this game was seeing huge increases in paying customers then maybe your point would have some weight. Right now its just stagnating.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
So many game devs are just 1 hit wonders.
I don't know if this "rumor" I've heard bandied about is true, but I have seen others suggest that many MMORPGs have stats on "what activities players partake in and how often and how long." If not, I'm sure they have some kind way of measuring what is working and what is not in their games.
My point is, a small fraction of players visit websites/message boards. Even then, many post about activities they want/need and when looked at don't actually partake in. Basically it boils down to players looking for fun. If they don't find it they leave. Seldom do they tell a game "Why."
If PvP is not fun for them, players will just stop playing. If crafting is too much for them, they leave. If combat changes their favorite character, they leave. If the "flavor of the month" switches and they don't have it, they leave. The point being, the developers get almost no feedback.
However... They can look at MMOs and think, "They're doing very well. What can we implement from them?" (Look at WoW, the masters of this.)
Take that for what it is, just more speculation
See I have a different take on this then you do. I have talked with Devs, friends with Devs, also been to the same schools and fields as devs. What I have seen is devs get plenty of feedback, unfortunately too much feedback. They cannot decipher good feedback from bad feedback. Devs are game makers, but not really game players. When a dev says he played a game like WoW they generally are talking at low level, they are not high end raiders, or high end crafter or high end anything. They dont have a clue what their customer wants because they dont understand them.
Most devs I know like very niche systems that average gamers dont even care about. I have told devs in betas how the system they are putting in will not go well, had detailed conversations with devs on various systems, then they put their stupid system in and BAM people hate it. The problem is they surround themselves with this group of "YES" fanbois that constantly reaffirm their beliefs. So they cant figure out good and bad feedback.
Solution in the old days was games PAID players to test and feedback the game. These were HIRED PLAYERS. So real core player advocates had a seat at the table. Now players who play ALPHA do it for free, and people that play in very untested systems are not the same as end game retail players. So Devs are getting really bad information that plays into their own belief.
So I think Devs are totally out of touch. If devs studios actually put real players on the building teams again, then maybe you might see some good stuff come out.
No I'm not you misunderstood one of the reasons I used that, I am saying the developers made a change that was greeted with a great deal of anger but over time the developer went on and developed more content in that direction. So ask yourself why and are you in a better position than the Albion developers to see what is bringing them success.
Yeah I think you give dev teams way way to much credit for knowing what is best for their games. If they did know, then the games would not be stagnanting but seeing year over year large increases. If this game was seeing huge increases in paying customers then maybe your point would have some weight. Right now its just stagnating.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
So many game devs are just 1 hit wonders.
I don't know if this "rumor" I've heard bandied about is true, but I have seen others suggest that many MMORPGs have stats on "what activities players partake in and how often and how long." If not, I'm sure they have some kind way of measuring what is working and what is not in their games.
My point is, a small fraction of players visit websites/message boards. Even then, many post about activities they want/need and when looked at don't actually partake in. Basically it boils down to players looking for fun. If they don't find it they leave. Seldom do they tell a game "Why."
If PvP is not fun for them, players will just stop playing. If crafting is too much for them, they leave. If combat changes their favorite character, they leave. If the "flavor of the month" switches and they don't have it, they leave. The point being, the developers get almost no feedback.
However... They can look at MMOs and think, "They're doing very well. What can we implement from them?" (Look at WoW, the masters of this.)
Take that for what it is, just more speculation
See I have a different take on this then you do. I have talked with Devs, friends with Devs, also been to the same schools and fields as devs. What I have seen is devs get plenty of feedback, unfortunately too much feedback. They cannot decipher good feedback from bad feedback. Devs are game makers, but not really game players. When a dev says he played a game like WoW they generally are talking at low level, they are not high end raiders, or high end crafter or high end anything. They dont have a clue what their customer wants because they dont understand them.
Most devs I know like very niche systems that average gamers dont even care about. I have told devs in betas how the system they are putting in will not go well, had detailed conversations with devs on various systems, then they put their stupid system in and BAM people hate it. The problem is they surround themselves with this group of "YES" fanbois that constantly reaffirm their beliefs. So they cant figure out good and bad feedback.
Solution in the old days was games PAID players to test and feedback the game. These were HIRED PLAYERS. So real core player advocates had a seat at the table. Now players who play ALPHA do it for free, and people that play in very untested systems are not the same as end game retail players. So Devs are getting really bad information that plays into their own belief.
So I think Devs are totally out of touch. If devs studios actually put real players on the building teams again, then maybe you might see some good stuff come out.
Most updates and changes made in games now is pulled directly from in game data of player activity .And most every game now incorporates these systems into there decision making and game direction more than any other source of feedback.
Yeah, "data driven development" has continued to become bigger. That's also part of why it leans more towards focuses on monetization and discrete event/season reward loops. A very mechanical look at games that drive mechanical solutions to user retention, frequently by developing FOMO models and pushing players via punishment.
A chunky part of what makes it often feel out of touch, because the games are designed around the more apparent extrinsic motivators that can be easily tracked by data crunching. A ton less effort than developing a game that engages users on an intrinsic level.
The PvP stuff just circles some of the same points made prior and serves to restate the primary point. People enjoy controlled PvP more than open PvP. Even ikcin admitted "that was my favorite part in Albion". That more people enjoy and engage in the that content is not really surprising, lobby games, team matchups, and controlled PvP modes are vastly more successful than any open PvP game has ever been.
As usual this isn't to say it couldn't or shouldn't be done. But the stability and size of the player base matters for not just the longevity of a game, but the breadth of it's content. If people want to make an MMO that drags long enough success to pull away from any perceived rut the genre or a game singularly is in, they need to consider how to engage users through the game in ways that will build lasting intrinsic reasons to return time and again. Can hardly call content which contributes to churn a good plan of action in that regard.
Comments
just wrote applies to reality.
By all means, show where anyone said you can't do something different. Show where I have talked about whether or not I personally enjoy the subject.
Fact is that's not the argument being made, no matter how many times you lie about what others are saying. Calling others stupid over nonsense YOU made up is nothing but a rude tangent that at best only serves to avoid addressing the actual subject.
You want to talk about toxicity? Toxicity is people who use fallacy after fallacy to attack others, like your post happens to do. Toxicity is people who take offense to problems they make up in their own head and project onto others, as your post has done.
Your projections, assumptions, and ad hominems do not make good conversation. It's dishonest and it's rude, nothing more.
If you want to respond to what you quoted instead of some make believe argument, feel free. As is, all you have done is yell at a straw man.
Having experience with something and being able to corroborate it by linking to rundowns of the game's mechanic that prove what I said is the opposite of lying.
In reality, that's called an empirical truth.
You making claims and then backing it by nothing but random personal anecdote is antithetical to that, and you stacking that with ad hominems and straw men does nothing to further the subject and instead makes your statements all the more counterproductive.
Point in case, the fact you're talking about something that doesn't even have to do with the current topic or what you've quoted above. You're taking animosity about being proven wrong in a different conversation and using it as justification to dismiss and make personal attacks here.
There is no rationality to your argument.
If you build your MMO around PvP (as a foundation), make every part of the game add to that foundation. If your MMORPG has four foundations, for example combat, crafting, guilds, and quests STICK to those foundations and make the rest of the game adhere, or add to those foundations. Any upcoming changes should keep those foundations in place with only a nudge here or there.
I believe this is the wrench in the works. It is a tough tight-rope to walk trying to balance what made your game fun and trying to entice new players. I've seen this happen in every MMORPG/MMO I've played for any length of time. Each and every one has "added" something to attract new players which piss off the core player base. I blame "big businesses" take over of the genre. Big business has a motto built of, "MORE! MORE! MORE!"
I do not envy game company's roads they travel. And developers get the raw end of the stick, by far. I pray for them all and try not to take out my frustrations on the developers
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
It's not for me to decide, but I'd suggest ignoring this poster altogether. They add nothing to a discussion
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
This is a very perplexing way to discuss things.
1) You feel like you should make claims about something you dont know anything about.
2) when called out about that and they counter your point you say you now agree?
How can you agree, if you dont know if what they are saying is right?
In both cases shouldnt you just refrain from making judgements on things you have NO CLUE about. You should neither agree or disagree about things you havent got enough information about.
This explains alot about your way of commenting. Just for reference, when you dont know something, its ok not to have an opinion LOL. Try that sometime, it will save alot of these back and forth fights.
Interesting your perspective on this. Obviously if you like the original and it changes to something you dont like, thats not good for you (personally).
My real question here is this, when these devs are changing the game from the core to some new base are they REALLY getting more people? People are saying they are doing this for more people but are they REALLY getting more? Back in the old days the MMO's were changing and they were seeing year over year increases in subs.
Even if I dont like the change, I can definetely respect a dev for changing the game to capture more customers. They are in business to make money after all.
What I have found in the last 10+ years is that they actually have gotten substantially less customers. This I cant respect at all. This is stupid. Why would bother to change something to end up with less people, that to me is moronic.
The only MMO I can think of in the last 10 years that has grown its customer base is FFXIV. I personally dont like the game, (too many cutscenes). But I totally respect their position because after all they are seeing growth. So from a business model I understand that I am just not their target customer and can live with that.
So the fact that the genre is in trouble describes a problem.
There are plenty of niche MMO's. 1k players is not going to save this genre. I had more people in my high school graduation class than that.
Many people would say the entire MMO genre is Niche. I dont know why we need to celebrate games that are so utterly bad that they cant even get 1k players to play. So no I dont think this genre needs any more of those kind of games.
I dont dispute peoples right to build them, but I dont think its good for the genre. Even in entertainment, you think we should be encouraging movies that can only gross about 100k revenue? LOL thats going to be a pretty bad movie, and if there were too many of those it would CRUSH the movie theaters.
This is what these extremely niche MMO's are doing to this genre, people are losing faith in MMO's because there is literally so much garbage.
So the fact you've accused random statements multiple times of being "WoW" things means you not only are talking about things you admit you don't even know anything about, but you also contradict yourself here by claiming if you say someone calls you on it that you'd correct yourself.
Which you did get called on it, and you didn't correct yourself.
So guess that's another lie. Your entire tangent about others making no sense and lying really goes up in flames when you reduce you position to brazen lies.
As for the last statement, that's what the comment you attacked without ever acknowledging or responding to still is. Feel free to acknowledge your mistakes at any time and respond to the actual subject instead of derail with nonsensical personal attacks.
Conflating all PvP as the same kind of thing is very simply a dishonest and illogical argument. Just because a lobby shooter is wildly successful, does not mean a open world PvP game with full loot is going to pull the same numbers. There's been a variety of attempts with a variety of supporting mechanics to establish certain forms of PvP are niche.
And as has been said a million times, niche isn't bad, but it's not going to suddenly stop being niche. The fact you refer to games that meet success by mitigating and offering alternative to the open PvP content just goes to show the fact that such content alone does not sustain live services.
Instead of ever address this, you have either fallen back to generic comments about how PvP is popular, which fails to address the root problem, or you've made personal attacks.
You have yet to address any of this which has been said to you before, even though this was the point made to your prior ramblings. Your continued ad hominems and nonsense only makes it worse.
You value the PvP part and think it's great for Albion. But as has been noted before, with that along the game nearly died, so clearly there is an issue there. Pinning it on the PvE, which is a big reason the game still exists along with the F2P move, is a little erroneous given we can see the same pattern of failure across other open PvP focused mmos.
And this does put weight as a player on the meaning of the game being a niche, because it directly affects the scope of the game that can be delivered. Developers do not have infinite budgets, they have to build for what they are capable of supporting. That puts massive importance on the choice of gameplay and features, because they can't develop more content for a game with too few players to pay the devs. That's not a subject of investment, that's a matter of whether or not the game you want to enjoy is capable of existing.
And hence the compromises and changes made. Albion is a niche that survives by catering beyond it's niche. If it stopped doing so, it'd likely wither back to the hundreds and die off.
This doesn't take a crystal ball to know. It's happened time and again with other MMOs and it nearly happened to Albion once already.
It is unfortunate that you consider reason "toxic".
https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/176339-Solo-is-much-BIGGER-than-you-think/?postID=1278183#post1278183
See the original thread and read the responses to it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/albiononline/comments/f6wsm5/solo_is_much_bigger_then_you_think/?sort=new
The key was solo PvP.
March 2019 330 concurrent before the group PVE, Free Patch and 6k during the Hype and 7K 1 month later (May 2019).
Then again in 2020 they released more group PVE updates and almost tripled their declining numbers bringing them up to 9k which is their highest point.
Nov 2022 The Solo Content Patch BEYOND THE VEIL, for solo/duo PVP/PVE content only went from 5.9k to 6k. It increased 100 players LOL, then immediately lost them.
https://steamcharts.com/app/761890
Going free, adding group PVE, and QOL is what saved this game from certain death. Solo content probably lost them more players than it gained.
There is also another good thread on the Albion Forum the one asking for a PvE server and that one is especially entertaining. I agree with the posters that it would indeed bring about a decline to the main servers if they introduced one. I remember when Dark Age of Camelot brought Gaheris it was long after the game's halcyon days and possibly to finally tap into the PvE market.
https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/176014-PVE-server/?postID=1276859#post1276859
https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/175228-Why-I-quit-the-game-…/?postID=1276900#post1276900
'' Roam is frustrating way waaaaaaay more often than it is fun. Pvp is plagued by other huge problems other than just zergs too, like ratting and 3rd partying, and all of these things need to be discouraged if PvP is to flourish. Most of the PvE content (excluding only HCE) suffers from being unrewarding, complete lack of any challenge at all, and all of it is boring and repetitive. We also do not currently have a single piece of lethal PvE content in the game. PvE content doesn't have to be super easy and boring/repetitive nor does it have to be risk free and unrewarding . PvP doesn't need to have a monopoly on risk, nor should it. If PvE players dont want to PvP, then fine, but they are still players and they deserve to have fun too, so why not add lethal PvE content in the game that is both fun and challenging to check all of those boxes?''
I do agree the F2P was significant but I was not looking at that part as it was obvious but rather the PvP direction the game actually changed or encouraged. So you see it isn't just PvE games that go solo but PvP games have shifted to that mentality too.
This is an interesting dynamic as far as PvP is concerned because I not being a PvPer have only played in games where I PvP on teams like in a battleground so learning that in full loot PvP games that solo PvP is popular brings me to the opinion that all market has shifted to this change in how players like to play. This is an interesting shift and one has to study why before saying that people want easier games and all the other accusations levied on gamers today.
How can you even know if a PVE server would be good or bad for the game. The devs could put something like that in just like UO did and become extremely popular. Not just some minor blip on a radar.
So no I dont think devs are some experts on what their customers want. When dev teams can make multiple games that are highly successful OVER and OVER again, then I will agree they know what the customers want.
So many game devs are just 1 hit wonders.
Don't forget Albion Online is a niche game so this is very good for them.
If you read the thread on why a PvE server right now is bad, it has very good points and far better than the UO example because we have far more choices for MMORPGs now so the UO example does not really apply to our current MMORPG environment. Players had way less options then but now it can be detrimental to a thriving PvP game to introduce a PvE server. They also pointed out that the Albion Online PvE content isn't that plentiful nor very good.
To be honest DAoC had bad PvE too it was incredibly boring and my time in Gaheris was shortlived.
Back in the golden age of MMO's most of the MMO's were growing year over year for many years.
In regards to DAOC, even on the regular PVP servers you could PVE normally without being killed by other players in almost all the zones. PVE in non PVP areas was really good. Even in the "PVP" areas like darkness falls, the PVP really only happened when the dungeon was turned from 1 realm to another, people had plenty of notice to get out.
The full PVP servers like Mordred and Andred were ALWAYS dead, I used to play on those servers but they where so dead it was hard to find anyone.
Just so I am clear, I am not advocating Albion should change to PVE mode. I hate when games change from their core. I think they should launch with PVE and PVP separate servers from the get go, keep their core customers happy and grow that core.
I'll take the confusion. Well done on the restraint
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
It is difficult to judge what works and forum posters are notoriously louder than the many who quietly go about and play the game. Not everything that is doom and gloom on a the game forum necessarily translates into what is really going on in game.
Most devs I know like very niche systems that average gamers dont even care about. I have told devs in betas how the system they are putting in will not go well, had detailed conversations with devs on various systems, then they put their stupid system in and BAM people hate it. The problem is they surround themselves with this group of "YES" fanbois that constantly reaffirm their beliefs. So they cant figure out good and bad feedback.
Solution in the old days was games PAID players to test and feedback the game. These were HIRED PLAYERS. So real core player advocates had a seat at the table. Now players who play ALPHA do it for free, and people that play in very untested systems are not the same as end game retail players. So Devs are getting really bad information that plays into their own belief.
So I think Devs are totally out of touch. If devs studios actually put real players on the building teams again, then maybe you might see some good stuff come out.
A chunky part of what makes it often feel out of touch, because the games are designed around the more apparent extrinsic motivators that can be easily tracked by data crunching. A ton less effort than developing a game that engages users on an intrinsic level.
The PvP stuff just circles some of the same points made prior and serves to restate the primary point. People enjoy controlled PvP more than open PvP. Even ikcin admitted "that was my favorite part in Albion". That more people enjoy and engage in the that content is not really surprising, lobby games, team matchups, and controlled PvP modes are vastly more successful than any open PvP game has ever been.
As usual this isn't to say it couldn't or shouldn't be done. But the stability and size of the player base matters for not just the longevity of a game, but the breadth of it's content. If people want to make an MMO that drags long enough success to pull away from any perceived rut the genre or a game singularly is in, they need to consider how to engage users through the game in ways that will build lasting intrinsic reasons to return time and again. Can hardly call content which contributes to churn a good plan of action in that regard.