Originally posted by Flatfingers I don't disagree with the point of the editorial, but I don't believe an Answer will become apparent without questioning some of the unspoken assumptions being made in it. To start with: How many of you hope the future games will offer more for players to explore instead of the grinding, questing, raiding, PvP systems we see today?
Key word there: "explore."
Why assume that the content of MMORPGs has to be all about combat and competition and accumulation?
Here's the theory I'm going on these days: people are different. Different people like different things, including gameplay. Some people like competitive gameplay; others prefer cooperative gameplay. Some people like playing in groups with lots of social interaction; others prefer solo play with indirect interaction. Some people enjoy hands-on, adrenalin-pumping action; others prefer more cerebral, exploratory play. Some people like to measure themselves by how many things they can accumulate and how fast they can do it; others care about forming deep and long-lasting relationships.
So if the point is to attract lots of gamers over the long run, how is offering only combat and competition and accumulation supposed to appeal to all these kinds of people?
Richard Bartle has (accurately, I think) described four main kinds of gamers: Killers, Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers. (I have a theory that these are actually gaming-specific subtypes of the four temperaments -- Artisans, Guardians, Rationals, and Idealists -- described by David Keirsey, but that's another thread.) Where MMORPGs are concerned, I think of Achievers as being like locusts. When a new MMORPG comes out, the Achievers swarm to it, devour all content as quickly as possible, complain bitterly when they run out of "end-game" content, and then swarm off to the Next Big Game.
The point being, Achievers aren't the kinds of players who stick around long in MMORPGs. They may hang around if they don't see any Next Big Game, but they'll complain a lot about it. What they don't do is contribute to the long-term community of a game, to the formation and maintenance of long-term bonds between players who like a game and want it to survive. Achievers are utilitarians -- as soon as something better comes along, they're gone.
So why in the world do designers design games almost solely around the Achiever playstyle?
If your players -- who are not all Achievers -- are leaving because they're tired of constantly being told (though the features you give them) that you don't value them, that the only kinds of gameplay that really matter are combat and competition and accumulation, then maybe you need to rethink who you're making these games for.
--Flatfingers
Could not have been stated any better than that. Glad to see some intelligent thinking.
As MMO goes, I could take em or leave them. I have stated this in the past, as people wanting a world to truely called thier own, they have one... Its called Earth! VIDEO GAMES come and go and traditionally have a 1 year life span, if you are lucky. Yes, just like movies and music, classic games will live in the hearts of fans for the rest of the lives, but in the end as time passes, so will everything else. So in the end, I will enjoy it for now, cry when its gone, and forget about it when I find something else new.
I usually burnout on a game when it hits that I'm doing the exact same thing I have been doing for a while now in a slightly different guise. I realize I have accomplished nothing but getter marginally better ability's or gear. I look and see all I have to look forward too is getting the same marginally better gear and abilities ad infinitum. I realize I haven't changed in the game anything even temporarily.
My favorite expansion of everquest was Ldon because I felt like I was accomplishing something, when we killed a enemy it stayed dead. One of my favorite areas was called I believe howling moor, it had 3 groups of monsters the bugbears, sonic wolves, and if memory serves goblins. You could help one of the groups temporarily dominate the area by aiding their raiding parties and helping defend their bases. I kind of wished they would have extended that concept I think it had a lot of potential.
I also don't that it helps that almost any quest in any mmorpg can be defined with a combination of Goto area v Kill w of monster x Bring item y to person z
There is usually only one way of accomplishing this task, at most the difference is whether to turn in item y to person Z-good or Z-evil and even that is rare. You can't for instance negotiate with or trick monster x to get item y you have to kill him. You can't betray the quest giver or lie to him or give him a counterfeit item y.
I play MMOs since UO was released and I still pay for SWG (god knows why), and I agree, the burnout is there. At the same time, Im not happy about everyone complaining about it.
I found out by myself I would never find a game I really love, a mix of WoW, SWG, UO, DAoC and so on, so I decided to create my own game, it surely won't have the numbers of WoW of even Disney's Toontown but at least it will be what I and several others like.
If you're not happy with what you have, make it better. That's what I do and it's getting fine, if I can, why can't you?
It's easy to say, no, this game is boring, yes, it is, because, even if it's another world, the game is still the same, go kill x mobs, loot, come back get XP. And it's normal. Why? well why do you buy a boring game? You give the developers the confirmation they need, all they will say is, 6 million customers can't be wrong (WoW anyone?). I played it for 1 month and I had enough. Sure we lack the choice, and even if something like 12 MMO come out this year, it will still be the same old one we already played, in another world, but still the same. Gather your ideas and create your own thing, or at least voice them to developers and producers. It won't cost you a cent and you might get a better response then what you think.
Game designers would be wise to read this thread. Overall, the posters are mature, long-time gamers. Perhaps that's telling in that we are the ones who found the truth in the lead-in article. Of course, I also read many poster's difference of opinions, too. Those who loved DAoC are aren't likely to be the ones who loved WoW.
The most important over-arching truth is that we are tired of the grind, raids and PvP as done in most online games that are just copying the mold that has been set as the standard. Perhaps the designers see that players keep skipping on to new games, and assume that's what the players want.
My guild friends and I are also tired of the same old gameplay, game after game. Some of us are sitting out our time, and watching for something new that might interest us. Others are biding their time in different games, just to satisfy their gaming addiction, but with no long term loyalty to those games.
Why do players only look for information on the most hyped games? How many have checked into the little known games like Hero's Journey or The Chronicles of Spellborn? They seem to be offering something different. Perhaps they will be niche games that won't attract a lot of players, but they do look interesting.
One additional thought from my angle: One of the things that made me very tired of MMOs is the feeling of needing to "keep up" with other players. As previously noted, I'm married, with a career and a child. My gaming time is limited. If I'm going to pay for the ability to play a game, I don't feel that it's too much to ask that I have fun.
Here's the thing. If I play a single player game, I can save my progress, and even if I don't play the game for a year, when I come back, I won't have lost anything. My gear will be just as good as it was, the monsters will not suddenly be twenty levels higher, and I won't have to adapt to some change to my character class that makes my old playstyle invalid.
Such is not the case with MMOs. I'm not saying it should be, either, but I do take issue with the feeling that I get penalized for not playing as much as someone else. CoH/CoV do a good job with the sidekick system, where if my friends have spent more time in-game than I have, there's at least a way for me to still be a useful member of their team. I don't expect that if I play for three hours a week, I should have the same gear as someone who plays like it was a second job. What I do feel is that there are probably a fair number of other people like me, for whom content that does little more than push you towards the end-game becomes too repetitive and boring to care about getting to the end-game.
----------------------------- When I go, I want to leave a crater, not lie in one.
I've been playing online RPGs since the early MUD days where advanced players could add their own area to the game programmed in LPC. The first graphical one I played was The Realm and then I played AC1 for nearly 5 years (along with betas of several other games like E&B). Then looking for a change of pace I tried Horizons, ATiTD and SWG, each for 6-9 months. It each case, the game got too repetitive with time sinks getting progressively larger.
I've been playing WoW now since beta and looking for an alternative, but although I've tried nearly a dozen betas and free trials, I have found another one to replace it. Several were interesting but were in poor shape. Others were just cheap imitations of other games. The rest weren't interesting enough to me to keep me playing for more than a few days.
One of the reasons that I've stayed with WoW so long is the customizable UI which I can program in Lua. I've probably spent as much time doing that as I have actually playing. I also don't rush to get my chars to level 60, but have a variety of character classes that I alternate between for variety. The biggest feature that WoW lacks is some form of player housing. One of the things I really liked about SWG was the way players could build their own towns with elected mayor, etc. ATITD also lets players build permanent structures just bout anywhere that can have a lasting effect. Horizons also had player buildings, but only on pre-designated lots.
I (and probably many others) am looking for a game where what i do will affect the game. When you wipe out a group of attacking monsters and they all respawn to attack again in 5-10 minutes there isn't much feeling that your efforts have changed anything. If you go on vacation from a game for a couple of months and everything looks the same when you return, its a static world, not an evolving one. To keep players long term, they need to be able to permanently affect the game and the game needs to evolve over time based on player actions.
I've been watching several of the new games coming out and hope to have something new by the end of the year, but so far the ones that appeared to have promise have turned out to be lacking (i.e., the hype significantly exceeded reality).
Quote from Morneblade: "Make all the content fun and interesting. Make getting maxed out not a finish line, but simply another turn in your roadmap. Give us something different and truely Heroic to do at all times. Not just when you powergamed to the top, tearing through content like it was an empediment. And make it fun. Make us laugh, make us sweat, and make us grin as we relive it in our minds."
Originally posted by chlaos Originally posted by Flatfingers I don't disagree with the point of the editorial, but I don't believe an Answer will become apparent without questioning some of the unspoken assumptions being made in it. To start with: How many of you hope the future games will offer more for players to explore instead of the grinding, questing, raiding, PvP systems we see today? Key word there: "explore." Why assume that the content of MMORPGs has to be all about combat and competition and accumulation? Here's the theory I'm going on these days: people are different. Different people like different things, including gameplay. Some people like competitive gameplay; others prefer cooperative gameplay. Some people like playing in groups with lots of social interaction; others prefer solo play with indirect interaction. Some people enjoy hands-on, adrenalin-pumping action; others prefer more cerebral, exploratory play. Some people like to measure themselves by how many things they can accumulate and how fast they can do it; others care about forming deep and long-lasting relationships. So if the point is to attract lots of gamers over the long run, how is offering only combat and competition and accumulation supposed to appeal to all these kinds of people? Richard Bartle has (accurately, I think) described four main kinds of gamers: Killers, Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers. (I have a theory that these are actually gaming-specific subtypes of the four temperaments -- Artisans, Guardians, Rationals, and Idealists -- described by David Keirsey, but that's another thread.) Where MMORPGs are concerned, I think of Achievers as being like locusts. When a new MMORPG comes out, the Achievers swarm to it, devour all content as quickly as possible, complain bitterly when they run out of "end-game" content, and then swarm off to the Next Big Game. The point being, Achievers aren't the kinds of players who stick around long in MMORPGs. They may hang around if they don't see any Next Big Game, but they'll complain a lot about it. What they don't do is contribute to the long-term community of a game, to the formation and maintenance of long-term bonds between players who like a game and want it to survive. Achievers are utilitarians -- as soon as something better comes along, they're gone. So why in the world do designers design games almost solely around the Achiever playstyle? If your players -- who are not all Achievers -- are leaving because they're tired of constantly being told (though the features you give them) that you don't value them, that the only kinds of gameplay that really matter are combat and competition and accumulation, then maybe you need to rethink who you're making these games for. --FlatfingersIncredibly well said, and dead on accurate in my book. One thing I would add, is that some of us (myself included) have some of all the types mentioned in us. At different times and in different moods I enjoy all of the gamestyles listed and ideally like a game that lets me enjoy any and all of the above without switching from one game to another. A game that encompasses all of these playstyles in a persistent world could keep my interest for quite some time. I too wonder why games are so geared to the "locusts" who will just migrate to the next big thing instead of the players who will stick with a good game till hell freezes over.
The article and the above have many things I agree with. Many times I feel like doing something different, not the same old thing. I can see people getting bored with the games available and moving on to something they hope will be better. Many times it might be a little bit better but then becomes stale on it's own. We need something that changes even when you aren't there, many possible things to do, and a constantly moving storyline that you can be a part of. Some said like RL, but I think that is why we play the games, to escape a little of the monotony and drudgery of our daily lives. Maybe that is why single player games were so fun, everything depended on you to change the world, but a mmorpg can't have a story for each player so the story has a hard time advancing.
Another comment from me, too: I'm not anti-Achiever.
In the first place, these folks are gamers and deserve game features in a MMORPG as much as anyone else. Combat and competition and accumulation aren't everything (or shouldn't be), but they help keep a game's energy level high and that's a Good Thing.
And in the second place, there are a lot of Achievers. A developer who's trying to maximize subscriptions would be nuts to completely ignore them.
Having said this, I want to emphasize my original point concerning how different people view these virtual world games. Specifically, I see a clear division: "play in" vs. "live in."
Achievers (and Killers, when they're allowed in) want to play in virtual worlds. For them, MMORPGs are clearly games to be played -- you start the game, you learn the rules, you beat the game, you move on to another game.
But Socializers (and, to a lesser extent, Explorers) don't look at virtual worlds that way. For these gamers, the world is more than just a game; it's a place. It's a place you go to enjoy the scenery, or hang out with friends, or figure out the rules of the universe, or make things (not for sale, but because making things is creative fun). There can be some game-y features, but for these kinds of people, MMORPGs are clearly worlds to be lived in.
The point behind this distinction is the impact it has on how you plan to make your revenue. If you expect to make your money by selling boxes at retail, then your primary objective must be to attract players, and not so much to retain them. In this case, appealing to Achievers makes sense -- once you've got their money, you can let them go. Your next expansion will bring in a fresh wave of Achiever players.
But if you expect the bulk of your revenue to come from long-term play, whether through subscriptions or the newly popular pay-for-content approach, then designing your game to appeal solely to Achievers is counterproductive because these typically aren't long-term players. If your business plan calls for gradually increasing your base of long-term players, then your best strategy is to deliberately and consistently design features to appeal to the gamers who want to "live in" a game world -- the Socializers and Explorers.
Personally, I advocate not having to choose. Why not design a game to appeal to all these kinds of gamers, and maximize both kinds of revenue?
I can't tell you how much I look forward to the day when some MMORPG designer with proper funding decides to follow this path, and consciously designs a game world to be both played in and lived in by everyone.
I always play 'too much' on computer video games. Suddenly attacking the MMOs is extremely silly IMO, if I ain't playing in a MMO, I will play in some other game.
EVERYONE need something to hold onto in life. Holding on games is certainly not the 'ideal' thing, it is far from a bad result or something you want to avoid. Games act like a catching net.
A game is never 'too much', it is the remaining of that person life that is 'too less'. If someone play games, smile and encourage him/her, despite having a relatively empty life, they are holding onto something.
And don't come saying that a family is necessarily something important for everyone, I agree that it should be. But fact is, it is not all the time. If someone is 'surfing' accross life with mild interest and then enjoy a game, encourage it. That's person is happy and that matter a lot.
Of course, if that game is runs by SoE, you might want to help that person discover real game devs, worthy of a player time and trust! Check CoV or if you can wait or don't need a MMO, check BioWare.com! Real devs! RaR!
Before MMOs, I was playing Civilisations/KOEI/SSI/Black Isles products over, and over, and over again. Now I often play a single toon and keep progressing...of course, right now, I am in Heroes of Might and Magic V.
And if I had only 1 last thing to do before my life end, I will play more games! Trashing what peoples hold unto is really silly, especially when it is as nice as games. Yes they SHOULD take their responsabilities and all, but praising those games is certainly going to help a LOT more than trying to fight them.
'Burn out' has never happen to me, will never happen. Reason: I refuse to do something I dislike more than a few times, the only exception to that golden rule is raiding, which I really try for 2 hardcore months and I hate it all the more. 'Burn out' can't happen if you are happy and enjoying the game, I would prolly still be enjoying LDoN if those devs would have a clue on what they are doing instead of putting trashy raiding enforcement. Heck, they almost turn me in a soloer at some point, which is soooo silly...enforcing is not the way, only dimwits think that enforcing bring any good to anything or anyone.
As an achiever, I rather have a clone of Crushbone with real solo/grouping challenge than some other gameplay which I don't want to play to start with. Achievers like me don't need much efforts in a MMO, only have a 'open system' for endless achievements in some area but put a level cap outside of this area and guess what, I will just avoid the level cap area unless my RL friends are there, then we will have a blast and tons of fun, they log off? I return to uber level lands and do uber stuff with that orc v17.2 who only have a different shade in color, X 17 the stats, and items with X17 the stats as well...you can make a few twists to make it challenging, harder, a few nice things, it take far LESS time than setting raiding and guess what, it has ENDLESS opportunities which I find FUN, I ENJOY and I CRAVE for more...same graphics? Fine! Can I SK a friend and progress on my levels and XP in that zone? If so even better! An achiever, a real achiever, will find challenge and add some in nearly every setting. If we group with silly folks, we adapt to them to achieve better, but we will put back some more challenge in it, in a way or another...yes farming is okay, in fact most of the time we are farming...but challenge is also something craved for. If grouping is too easy in old EQ, fine I will see if I can solo stuff who shouldn't be soloed...if I manage to succeed, I will gloat about it (runes for selling, going to solo more later, and so on) Achievers rarely enforce their ways or trash on others, unless they somehow hinder them, which is exactly what raiding enforcement is doing, raiding is an achievers-killer. I see some of the most skill achievers become raid-leader and leave the game burned...and achiever is unburnable, unless he does stuff he dislike...which is raiding! Raiding, in an EQish enforcement form, can't be tolerated.
And to someone thinking I play too much videos games...what are the alternatives? Becoming a religious fanatic? Drinking? Becoming a criminal? A drug addict? Eh, it is only a harmless video game and I am a productive citizen, because I enjoy those games, otherwise I would never have become a productive citizen to start with.
In facts, the only thing in life that I value more than French...is gaming. Now think just how strong this is, been French on a cultural point of view (North American as well) is the single most important aspect of all my value if you ask me what I am...after been a gamer. I learn English because it is a nice tool to be a better gamer, I study and get a job because it afford me all I need to be a gamer...
I dunno, trashing gaming is the single most dumb thing someone could do, I would even reny my French origin for gaming...yet, everyone knowing me see the flags I have all around and exibit proudly...and gaming don't care at all about me been frenchy, as long as I can read in English to understand gaming better...which is something I always improve with passing years.
I become a game designer with a lot of apprehension, didn't study for that. Didn't want to interfere with my gaming love...and I find that my gaming love is immune, even to been a Game Designer. Why did I become a Game Designer? The Vision(tm) is incredibly flawed and can't be allowed to do more harm, it must be contain and if they don't understand, maybe by becoming a game designer I may start using the right word, the right organisation, the right structure, to make them understand that raiding, despite it initial 'good looking attributes', is a critical design failure and mistake. That would be hard to explain in the full details, so I keep to the simple, yet efficient...best soloer deserve to be a soloer, best raider deserve to be a raider and best grouper deserve to be a grouper. This simple sentence is logical, it is true and I could try to expand on it, but why don't you ask just about any achiever, he can explain why this sentence is right. I don't claim to be a genius who will understand the next 'Tetris', well if this happen, great, but...I do know that raiding enforcement is a mistake. Raiding (ala EQ) please only the production team and a minority of players who happen to be extremely social and eloquent and often using 954394 accounts, not the core of the players.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
But your timeline is about 2 years off. Meridian 59 was well before UO and I consider it the first true MMO. I would say we been gaming this way for over 12 years and I still enjoy it.
and if anyone wonders yep I am the Buwah from M59 server 104. Hail to all of the KotAO.
have played eq. and that got too much. take a letter here, deliever it there. think i played it for 1 month.
- - - - -
now i have played guild wars factions for around a little week. hmm. can only get to a level of 20. what is the point in that. so that is ruined.
then there are guilds. think there are around 4000 different. have been into between 5 and 10 different. but they are still the same. lots of ppl not online. and the ones that is online don't group together. so forming a group is not easy. what i want is have a group. learn things together. get our own experience. but when i cannot get a group thats serious enought. then its not easy.
then there is pvp. the first u come to. is random battle. 4 against 4. that is fun for some time. but when u have been grouped with ppl who think they are alone, and looks like this one cannot see us other 3. then its not fun. and its not easy to win, when the ppl playing are not that good. the next thing is to do random battles and win 5 times in a row to move to pvp where u can customize your teams. but win 5 times is not easy, when u are the only one who try to do it in a strategic way.
then there are the island. when won 5 pvp. but that is also impossible. because the guild i'm in and many other guild i have tried are not serios enought or the players are simple not online.
so what is it i want. hard to say. i think it would be fun. if there had been some more serious players and another way than random. but still i'm thinking : how long would that be fun ??
and after a week of playinf guild wars factions. i'm getting very tired of the game, very tired. its all the same.
start the game. find a town in the game. soon u will be asked to join a team of 8 to fight the same monsters over and over again. then u finish the round. and start over again. maybe in another town. then u sell the equipment u don't have to use and hopefully u got enough cash to buy something new or better. and then u are at the beginning again.
- - - - -
what i want is :
if i want a store thats what i gonna open. if i got enought cash.
a point system for players. so i don't have to be with the ones that cannot play.
more graphic instead of the flat straight, that is everywhere.
a leveling system in exp that allows me to be me.
characters that are more personal. in guild wars factions. they are all very beautifull, and they all look almost the same. same body type, same faces, where are all the ugly ppl ? hmm. maybe this is to be a perfect world with perfect ppl.
i want equipment that only a few have and that is really hard to get.
i want difference between ppl.
i want the game to be hard if i want it.
and lots more.
- - - - -
so now. when i think of starting the game again. i can't. because before i start it, i know its the same again.
I also have had that burned out of MMOs, and it was SWG that did it for me.
Now I play EVE and being the crafter/explorer type player I dont see myself getting bored any time soon, not only with exploreing 5,000+ systems but exploreing how the game plays, and works.
SWG Pre-CU had it perfect, it had decent if extreamly bugged PvP, but it also had elements for other play styles as well, there was 10 WHOLE planets to explore, there was even a entire player class dedicated to socializing ( but one dev even said that entertainers werew"not starwarsy, and in the movies they only got eatten" ) even with the CU there was still solid hope for the game, now with the NGE they have broken it to fix it. And I dont think they can fix it fast enough to keep it live.
You want something different? You want something that is unlike anything else on the market? You want a game that only has competition against yourself and other players? Give A Tale in the Desert a shot. Oh, did i also mention the complete and utter lack of combat? Ok, so if you are not into crafting at all, you may not dig ATITD, but if it's something different you are looking for, give it a try.
~Mozleron
~Mozleron
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
You know - I was talking this exact thing over with some old friends of mine a few weeks back. The very nature of the industry is what leads to this burn out. They need to keep you playing AND they need to make it so many people keep playing. SO far the only thing that the majority of games have come up with is repetitive time sinks and generic repeatable quests (though sometimes with different names and locations). The truly unique quests or adventures get rave reviews and are often brought up in passing conversations and nostalgia. Sadly, these quests come and go like your birthday - over and then done with thus leaving us to go back to the grind.
Our conversation then came back to the true start of all of this - Pen and Paper games. Ones where the DM's customized adventures to truly make you a part of the world and your actions have a lasting effect. Standing in line of people turning in a quest item for a WoW adventure doesn't quite have this immersion. So there it was - the idea that your actions mattered and that adventures were customized to you and your groups tastes and history. Years of game play was to be had in Pen and Paper campaigns.
Question is can this customization and "campaign feel" be had in a MMO? Matrix Online tired a bit of it and captured the heart of some who played them out. Games like Neverwinter Nights fostered whole PW campaigns and module releases. NWN2 is due out and I think many are looking forward to that and Ryzom is experimenting with the concept. Perhaps their success will foster in the next age of MMO concepts. Player created content which foster a nice mix of social interaction and tedium killing.
If I really had a wish to be granted in the matter - I think a game that offers private servers with either player maintained content or perhaps a team of dm's catering to the servers limited population would be my end all be all fix.
I think this is my first post on these forums (turns out its my fifth, lol) even after years of being a member here. I read all of the posts above and I appreciate the mature and thoughtful ideas presented here.
I've been an avid 'paper and dice' role player for 20+ years. I started playing online RPG's with MUDDs back in my college days, then moved on to more advanced games as they came out.
Every generation of games has something more than the last. Deeper graphics, better physics, sound and music. Storylines and such. It does seem, however, that the generally accepted idea of what an MMORPG is, as defined by its name, is wrong.
When you say RPG I am taken back to my paper and dice days. Drawn out maps, a DM character sheets, etc. The world of DnD changed. Me and a group of HEROs changed it. Emphasis on Hero to be covered later. The DM takes hours to prepare thoughts and possible actions and is there to effect the world in realtime as you play. In those games, if you died, you had to have a friend take your body to a place with magicians/preists or technology to revive or repair you (in RIFTS this could be implants or such). You Could do ANYTHING you wanted to...anything. I was about to list a list of "anything" and decided it was rather long. Instead I'll talk about what MMO RPGs need to add to have that kind of feeling to them.
If I could give a title like MMORPG to a game like EQ or WoW, it would be MMO fantasy Game. If you play the game ONCE through and follow the quest lines in WoW, it can be engaging. But the first time you have to help a friend do the same quest for the same item for a friend...it loses its RPG status and starts down the path to repativeness. In DnD can you kill the same enemy several times in hopes of getting different items from him? The idea is absurd...and don't get me started on what a monster 'drops'. In an RPG, if a DM ever said that a PIG dropped a few copper coins, a piece of dwarvish cheese and a rusty chainmail shirt, youd demand that your DM share whatever he is smoking. If you kill the guy at the end of the big quest and he is wielding a sweet sword...guess what, in an RPG that sword is now your groups to decide who gets it. How many times do you kill a guy to see if hes going to drop the dagger, or the sheild or the whatever.
--in the end, games currently titled mmoRPG are not RPG at all. They're merely fantasy games with static quests-- Fantasy world meets groundhogs day!!
FPS action titles are evolving towards an MMO like quality. Battlefield2 is a great example. A server with 64 soldiers. Previous experience grants some soldiers advanced weapons. Its an FPS so its notstop action. I don't play that game thinking, grind grind grind...then all the sudden *ding* I've made a new rank and can unlock another advanced weapon. These games don't even try to say they're RPG but they have the same elements as games that do. Repeatable content, character classes, expereince, better gear as you move up. But they do something that "grinding" cannot do...be fun. Grinding cannot be fun. It is the antithesis of FUN! So please please please stop making me grind to RP in your world.
Back to HEROs. The reason we play games is to do something we cannot do IRL. SO, you don't want a game that makes you eat, sleep, use the restroom, brush your teeth, etc. Also, in most cases you are above the normal class of people that live in the world. You are a hero. You have better combat abilities, powers or something that makes you special. But you are a vagabond. You start the game with junk, no money and no home. In real RPG's you have a back history, money from parents and/or a home.
So, heres what I think would make MMO's have lasting interest.
Everything on this list is an entire thread of its own so I won't go into details here. -Allow for player created (or at least controled) content -no static anything unless its reasonable (the same guy cannot be killed twice let alone a million times, but you can gather resources over and over -BORING!!) -make the power difference between level advancments less. Lets try not adding to hit points at all. This idea is a departure from DnD but other RPG's didn't add HP as you leveled. Instead level advancement should be more towards social effects...or unlocks your abilities to create/control some of that player controlled content -no dropping items from mobs that that creature would never be carrying. -NO grinding! -YES to FPS fast action combat! Throw more at me faster if you have to, but make my adrenaline go! -YES to permanent death!! perhaps you can be revived or have body parts replaced but once you are thoroughly dead...no more for you! (but if the power differenc in levels is lower starting over isn't horrific). -YES to permanent NPC deaths. If you kill the king of stormwind, then hes dead. Got it? -please add realistic reactions, morale etc.
So, I've had this heated discussion with members from my WoW guild several times. It always 100% comes down to money.
The arguement is this. It costs to much to constantly create dynamic content...and if you allow player content some jerk will totally make the game unplayable. Sooo you get endless supplies of "repeatable content" and the game companies know that they need a reason to make you play it again so thats why you get the random drops, farming, grinding etc. Gee...
Heres my rebutal. The Game mechanic needs to be changed. DnD was usually a group of 3-10 guys. The DM controled the rest of the world. Dm's did it for free and it was as much (sometimes more) fun as playing the characters. But thats not an MMO.
I imagine a game where DM's are playing a game that looks like Battle for middle earth 2, or starcraft. They're controling mass movements of NPC armies to help protect the realm. Perhaps their title in game is King or God or some such that fits what they are doing in this persistant state world. They need resources, land etc to overcome the enemies. The individual playing the RPG is playing a game that looks like an FPS. They are then given tasks to aid in this effort. They are heros and have abilites far above that of the common soldiers that are controlled by the DM's and therefore have a great effect in the overall storyline that the DM is creating. So a cross between FPS and RTS, how about it?...all on an MMO scale? In my mind this creates an RPG.
I write too much, sorry. This is really just the tip of the iceburg. In one sentence, here it is.
Dev's go back and find out what an RPG is then change the game mechanics to fit!!
Currently not playing any MMOrpg -- Lvl 80 paladin WoW
Ever play Everquest (the first one)? Talk about MMO burnout. Getting to the end game of each expansion to get your new gear for the next expansion was alright for a while until Planes of Power came out. That in my opinion was burn out for a MMO. After taking up to 2 hours at times to find a group you gotta wonder to yourself, "what's the point?" When you did find a group you were pre-evaluated on your accumulation of AA points and what you spent them on only to find out another class had better AA points than you. That was burnout.
I've tried a good portion of the MMOs since then. So many had so much promise (Horizons was by far the one MMO with the most potential) but most of the new MMOs lacked a decent player base. Without the players playing it's not really Massively Multiplayer anymore. I think a new genre should be called Mildly Multiplayer or Possibly Meet Others Multiplayer (PMOM).
I can only agree with the article. I am in much the same position as the author, being 35 years old and having played computer games for 20 years. I was in SWG two years, also in EQ2 and nearly a year in WOW. I feel so much the same, and it is very frustrating. I had hoped companies would make my investment in time (not to speak of the money) more worthwhile in the long term, but it isnt. In none of these or any MMO I ever have seen.
Isn't it weird, btw that the age old Everquest still have twice as much subscribers than EQ2? It seems at last after 2 years everyone is burnt out of an MMO, and maybe that is ok, but I still wonder if there is no way to make games long term fun beyond that. No matter how many grudges I bear to some MMOs I play, cancelling them after such a long time is always a terrible thing. I nearly cried when I finally cancelled my SWG or EQ2 accounts after 2 years of playing them day by day. But I just felt trapped like in a hamster wheel in them, which finally was weighing heavier than the good memories of the first year. I really wish someone would create some game that lasts longer and evolves. WOW was nice, but it's about time some new MMO takes over the subscription throne.
Looking at all MMOs coming in the next 6-12 months, I must say, none of them is really thrilling me in any way the previous games had thrilled me.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I'm 35 years old and I started with text-based games. British Isles on Compuserve then moved to DragonRealms which I played from beta for 6 years. I had the opportunity to alpha test a number of games including EverQuest, beta test from start to finish such games as Asheron's Call and StarWars Galaxies. I've played most of them out there for at least a month, many for several months.
The longest I stayed with any game after DragonRealms was about 10 months. I played everything that came out, on both test and live servers, looking for something that would hook me. In most cases I was bored within 4 weeks.
Here are some of the things that turned me off from a game:
Inability to create a character concept (e.g. a self-seficient small stature ranger / outdoors type; games forcing inter-dependence)
Repetitive grind - kill x number of goblins to gain levels to kill x number of goblins to get the next level to kill x number of goblins to gain a level to kill x number of orcs to kill x number of orcs to kill x... etc. (starting with 10 hit points and ending with 5000 hitpoints is really stupid in my opinion)
Realism - why start with 10 hp and end with 5000?? Why not base the system loosely on something like ShadowRun game system where hitpoints are static? Why not build a game where achievement isn't in levels, but in other aspects?
Community problems - I like cooperative play; I don't like wandering into a town to check it out, be ambushed, killed, looted of my best equipment, and loose 10 hours of experience by other players
Lack of friendly community - I'm a pretty shy person, but a leader in anything I do; few things suck as bad as joining some guild that looked good with good players to suddenly find out that I'm worth nothing to the guild and have no value and nothing I say or do will change the existing leadership's minds; not nessisarily a problem for the developers, but heck - I've left more than one game because I couldn't find a good community that I fit into - it's one of the reasons I often join test servers
Impact / change game world - ho, hum - I've been to the Black Forest soooo many times this week, why don't we just burn it down and create a town instead? Did those flock of bear move east or west? Wow, I saved a town and they build a statue of me right in the middle of the town square!
Why do you have to play hundres to thousands of hours before you can say, "I'm at the top, I'm uber, I've achieved something."? Why does a casual player (i.e. me with a family) get the shaft when it comes to fame and glory? Sure, my family is great but if I'm trying to escape the stress of life in a game, the least it can do is cater to my vain side and procaim me a hero, savior, etc. I don't want to play a game that treats me like dirt (e.g. 2 hours to play everquest, can't find a group because everyone is already 65 and I'm 34 cleric, try to solo and loose 2 levels - wow, I feel great... not).
In most cases I blame the game designers for not creating a virtual world that allowed me to create my vision. I'm stuck with whatever vision they have (and sometimes not even that). Why would I spend hundreds of dollars to play someone elses vision? Give me what I want, make it realistic enough to be believable and fun enoguh to play. I know the response - sounds simple, but it's not. I'm not getting payed millions to figure this out though - I'm the customer demanding it so that I can contribute my hundreds. Put me on the pay check, let me quit my current job, and I'll start tossing ideas out.
Originally posted by Isaak I imagine a game where DM's are playing a game that looks like Battle for middle earth 2, or starcraft. They're controling mass movements of NPC armies to help protect the realm. Perhaps their title in game is King or God or some such that fits what they are doing in this persistant state world. They need resources, land etc to overcome the enemies. The individual playing the RPG is playing a game that looks like an FPS. They are then given tasks to aid in this effort. They are heros and have abilites far above that of the common soldiers that are controlled by the DM's and therefore have a great effect in the overall storyline that the DM is creating. So a cross between FPS and RTS, how about it?...all on an MMO scale? In my mind this creates an RPG.
There is actually a game like this but not an MMO. I forgot the name of it but the idea really stood out to me. Just wish I remembered the name
- the game is centered around player-interaction and player-skill (not char skill) -where the actions of players have impact on the game world (that means player-influenced and driven economy, faction and single pvp that has lasting impacts on the gameworld) It must be possible to conquer cities, countries or planets, it must be possible to win and loose. -where the "content" of the gameworld is created by the behaviour of the players (not pre-scripted stories and missions a player must follow) Like roles and positions a player can fill with his own personality. cleverness, communication skills. -game design must be centered around player interaction and communication
a good example: EVE online. Many long-term players, numbers slowly but steadily rising
World War II Online Battleground Europe.
I'm playing this game for five years now! Still the same theater of operations (gameworld). But why is it interesting for me and many other long-term players? Its not the graphics...the graphics can't compete with most other MMOGs...
Because it is like a big soccer or football game on a massive scale that runs 24/7 with thousands of players from all over the world until one side wins!
-one side wins and one side looses! Cities can be conquered, when all (over 400) are conquered a side wins! And one side looses! The map gets reset than. This can take from 1 week to 2-3 months. -teamwork is essential to win. That means player interaction, communication and organisation on different levels -everybody is important. The skill of every player counts. Every player forms small parts of the big picture by his actions. The more players, the better the chance to win a fight, conquer a city. So new players normally are very welcome to all "factions". -player-skill makes every duel or fight interesting! A bullet is a bullet..regardless if fired by a recruit or a general. A skilled pilot in a bad plane can win against a newbie player in the best plane in dogfights -every vehicle, plane, ship is limited. When it gets destroyed it is replaced after 4 hours. So every piece of equipment has a certain value and You can attrit enemy cities out of equipment. -the gameworld (the soccer field) is always the same, but every campain/war (soccer or football match) is different...it depends on players, tactics, equipment, teamwork...which change all the time.
But one very important feature: a player-driven ingame hierarchy and organisation. Player can just log in and fight, but player also can join the high command hierarchy and post missions for other players to take, organise attacks and operations, move brigades and divisions, decide where to attack. He can work up his way through the ranks up to armchair general Chief in Command of a side who decides about overall strategy and production of vehicles...the higher in the ranks a player gets the more he must organise and communicate with players from all over the world to keep the show running. Politics comes into play here. Organisation, communication. There are players who got famous and popular because of their leadership skills and forming a bunch of players from all over the world into a team that cooperates to win the war!
Give roles to the players they can fill and shape and which have impact on the gameworld and outcome of trade, wars and faction politics...and it'll never get boring!
In my opinion MMOGs must focus on player interaction and communication. Its the behaviour of players that make it interesting, also for a long time. Just levelling and beating monsters is boring for me...that is something best for single player offline RPGs...
Level-centric ai-monster-beating MMOGs are like a soccer, basketball or football game where every player has his own ball and goal where he can shoot as many goals as he want. It doesn't have any impact and doesn't matter at all, but it gives You a great feeling of being a soccer or football hero and as a reward You get better shoes and T-shirts. No need to talk to other players also, because everybody or every small group (guild) have their own goals where they can shoot into...only difference is the colour and quality of their shoes and T-shirts! Players get bored? Well...then the devs enter golden T-Shirts and diamond shoes You can get when You have scored 10.000 goals (end-game, level cap at 60). See the difference?
In my opinion many mmog dev studios must learn that the technology and character of MMOGs needs a completely different approach to game design than single player games! It doesnt matter if the setting of a MMOG is fantasy, sci-fi, real-life or some historic. Its about gameplay and design.
----------------------------------- Life is too short to play bad games.
Hi, My name's Michael, Kirzan as fictionnal name for games. I've played a LOT of MMO's since I was 13. And I must say Mr.Garrett, that you are totally right and I agree at 100% with you. The grind... the "Spam 1 2 3 4 or 5 keys" to kill monsters over and over, the endless raids to get new gear to get to do harder raids... and back to the beginning of the cycle. It's all what MMORPGs are about these days. I'm currently playing Dark Age of Camelot, and I must say that in every MMO I played, this game gave me alllll the PvP I ever needed/wanted. If you're not a graphic *****, try it out . Back to the subject. I recently talked about this to my ventrilo friends... an idea for a new interactive MMO system. You've played The Elder Scrolls IV : Oblivion right?! (every RPG fan played that) Why not put the First person view combat... INTO AN MMO! That's right, instead of clicking your hotkeys use your mouse to slash'n'shield block or use your incredible FPS talents to shoot bows over walls and cross-bows directly at people. Why not make a class specialized in Siege Weapons?! able to create these and use them. Put a first person view combat MMO in any world you want... Medieval, Sci-Fi, heck both! How about an All-PvP Game?!?! Where instead of having 3 PvP servers and 20 PvE ones, you have 20 PvP servers and 3 PvE ones?! People could level and gain experience off Player kills and keep different PvP zones for a small level range so you can't get ganked by a level 60 tier 2 epic geared Undead Rogue while leveling in your 18-25 zone. These are just ideas, and I personally like them, comment if you want but I doubt I'll check this thread regularly. So send your comments to kirzan@gmail.com ! Have a nice day MMOGamers.
P.S.: If any Blizzard executive or developper reads this : Try to go talk to your boss up there in the next building and tell him that he should think about these things : First, Cancel Starcraft Ghost. Second, Make an MMOFPS with Starcraft. Man that would make me spend some more money for you guys!
Great article, I totally agreed. I didn't get a chance to read all of the replies but I wanted to make a quick list of stuff I would like to see in upcoming games (hopefully developers and investors are reading all of the great suggestions people have posted)
- I don't need crazy customization but I would like to see at least 10 of each, hair style, hair color and faces to choose from. Also, scalable bodies like in Phantasy Star Online would be awesome, everyone had so much fun making characters.
- Slotted items and armor upgrades. This really keeps me playing and also it's nice to upgrade a piece of armor if you really like how it looks, you can make it very powerful so you don't need to toss it when something new comes along.
- It would be nice if only the body armor/head armor/weapon, had a graphic on your character, the other pieces like gloves/etc. could just have stats... then you don't end up with an orange shirt and green pants like in World of Warcraft.
- The game must have pvp with a goal! For example, fighting for guild bases. If there is no goal there is no reason to keep fighting. Guild vs Guild is a good way to go since people can share in the glory, not just have one uber person. Also, Faction vs Faction does not cut it, people have no real reason to bond with or take pride in their faction, guilds are much better since they are player made.
- Player housing is always nice, I don't care if it is instanced (it is probably better that way so you don't have endless miles of houses that no one is going to trudge through anyway) just as long as a few friends are able to enter if you invite them.
- Soloing... this is just a personal preferance, but I really like being able to log on and do some leveling without having to spend hours finding a group.
- Leveling, I actually don't mind grinding~! I don't see a way around it anyway because if everyone starts out powerful and jumps right into PvP then what is the point? The only thing I ask is for a little selection, diffrent places to grind and diffrent monsters to kill at diffrent levels to keep things fresh. I don't want to kill the same monster for 20 days. >< Also I would like the game to be as bot-free as possible (I suppose this is only an option for the most popular games since they can afford to ban paying customers)
- High level limit. (or slower leveling maybe?) I don't care how long it takes to reach the maximum level, walking around in WoW with everyone being max level is just insane, how can anyone feel special? It is a sad thing when you have to abandon your beloved character to make an alt because you actually finished your main...
- Difficult crafting system. Yes, I want crafting to be very difficult and time consuming... the way things are in World of Warcraft where everyone is a crafter and you can max your craft out very quickly is just...whats the point?? Crafting should only be for some people, just like how pvp is only for some. It leaves a whole new area of the game to explore after you need a break from your usual fun!
thats all I can think of for now... I used WoW as a comparison for a lot of my points since it is so popular that I have a feeling many future games are going to emulate it and I would rather they didn't copy its weak points.
Impact / change game world - ho, hum - I've been to the Black Forest soooo many times this week, why don't we just burn it down and create a town instead? Did those flock of bear move east or west? Wow, I saved a town and they build a statue of me right in the middle of the town square!
Why do you have to play hundres to thousands of hours before you can say, "I'm at the top, I'm uber, I've achieved something."? Why does a casual player (i.e. me with a family) get the shaft when it comes to fame and glory? Sure, my family is great but if I'm trying to escape the stress of life in a game, the least it can do is cater to my vain side and procaim me a hero, savior, etc. I don't want to play a game that treats me like dirt (e.g. 2 hours to play everquest, can't find a group because everyone is already 65 and I'm 34 cleric, try to solo and loose 2 levels - wow, I feel great... not).
In most cases I blame the game designers for not creating a virtual world that allowed me to create my vision. I'm stuck with whatever vision they have (and sometimes not even that). Why would I spend hundreds of dollars to play someone elses vision? Give me what I want, make it realistic enough to be believable and fun enoguh to play. I know the response - sounds simple, but it's not. I'm not getting payed millions to figure this out though - I'm the customer demanding it so that I can contribute my hundreds. Put me on the pay check, let me quit my current job, and I'll start tossing ideas out.
That will be the only way you will get what you want. IRL, there are people that will be better then you because they take the time to get where they are. What you want is a single player game that is so massive that it feels like a world.
You play a MMO to be with a lot of other people and you can't really have 6 million be uber champs or heros. There has to be people who put in the time and effort to reach the top. How would you feel if you spent 100 hours playing a game but someone who has only played 20 has the same status?
Comments
Key word there: "explore."
Why assume that the content of MMORPGs has to be all about combat and competition and accumulation?
Here's the theory I'm going on these days: people are different. Different people like different things, including gameplay. Some people like competitive gameplay; others prefer cooperative gameplay. Some people like playing in groups with lots of social interaction; others prefer solo play with indirect interaction. Some people enjoy hands-on, adrenalin-pumping action; others prefer more cerebral, exploratory play. Some people like to measure themselves by how many things they can accumulate and how fast they can do it; others care about forming deep and long-lasting relationships.
So if the point is to attract lots of gamers over the long run, how is offering only combat and competition and accumulation supposed to appeal to all these kinds of people?
Richard Bartle has (accurately, I think) described four main kinds of gamers: Killers, Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers. (I have a theory that these are actually gaming-specific subtypes of the four temperaments -- Artisans, Guardians, Rationals, and Idealists -- described by David Keirsey, but that's another thread.) Where MMORPGs are concerned, I think of Achievers as being like locusts. When a new MMORPG comes out, the Achievers swarm to it, devour all content as quickly as possible, complain bitterly when they run out of "end-game" content, and then swarm off to the Next Big Game.
The point being, Achievers aren't the kinds of players who stick around long in MMORPGs. They may hang around if they don't see any Next Big Game, but they'll complain a lot about it. What they don't do is contribute to the long-term community of a game, to the formation and maintenance of long-term bonds between players who like a game and want it to survive. Achievers are utilitarians -- as soon as something better comes along, they're gone.
So why in the world do designers design games almost solely around the Achiever playstyle?
If your players -- who are not all Achievers -- are leaving because they're tired of constantly being told (though the features you give them) that you don't value them, that the only kinds of gameplay that really matter are combat and competition and accumulation, then maybe you need to rethink who you're making these games for.
--Flatfingers
As MMO goes, I could take em or leave them. I have stated this in the past, as people wanting a world to truely called thier own, they have one... Its called Earth! VIDEO GAMES come and go and traditionally have a 1 year life span, if you are lucky. Yes, just like movies and music, classic games will live in the hearts of fans for the rest of the lives, but in the end as time passes, so will everything else. So in the end, I will enjoy it for now, cry when its gone, and forget about it when I find something else new.
Don't Knock the Jock
My favorite expansion of everquest was Ldon because I felt like I was accomplishing something, when we killed a enemy it stayed dead. One of my favorite areas was called I believe howling moor, it had 3 groups of monsters the bugbears, sonic wolves, and if memory serves goblins. You could help one of the groups temporarily dominate the area by aiding their raiding parties and helping defend their bases. I kind of wished they would have extended that concept I think it had a lot of potential.
I also don't that it helps that almost any quest in any mmorpg can be defined with a combination of
Goto area v
Kill w of monster x
Bring item y to person z
There is usually only one way of accomplishing this task, at most the difference is whether to turn in item y to person Z-good or Z-evil and even that is rare. You can't for instance negotiate with or trick monster x to get item y you have to kill him. You can't betray the quest giver or lie to him or give him a counterfeit item y.
Anskier
I found out by myself I would never find a game I really love, a mix of WoW, SWG, UO, DAoC and so on, so I decided to create my own game, it surely won't have the numbers of WoW of even Disney's Toontown but at least it will be what I and several others like.
If you're not happy with what you have, make it better. That's what I do and it's getting fine, if I can, why can't you?
It's easy to say, no, this game is boring, yes, it is, because, even if it's another world, the game is still the same, go kill x mobs, loot, come back get XP. And it's normal. Why? well why do you buy a boring game? You give the developers the confirmation they need, all they will say is, 6 million customers can't be wrong (WoW anyone?).
I played it for 1 month and I had enough. Sure we lack the choice, and even if something like 12 MMO come out this year, it will still be the same old one we already played, in another world, but still the same.
Gather your ideas and create your own thing, or at least voice them to developers and producers. It won't cost you a cent and you might get a better response then what you think.
Game designers would be wise to read this thread. Overall, the posters are mature, long-time gamers. Perhaps that's telling in that we are the ones who found the truth in the lead-in article. Of course, I also read many poster's difference of opinions, too. Those who loved DAoC are aren't likely to be the ones who loved WoW.
The most important over-arching truth is that we are tired of the grind, raids and PvP as done in most online games that are just copying the mold that has been set as the standard. Perhaps the designers see that players keep skipping on to new games, and assume that's what the players want.
My guild friends and I are also tired of the same old gameplay, game after game. Some of us are sitting out our time, and watching for something new that might interest us. Others are biding their time in different games, just to satisfy their gaming addiction, but with no long term loyalty to those games.
Why do players only look for information on the most hyped games? How many have checked into the little known games like Hero's Journey or The Chronicles of Spellborn? They seem to be offering something different. Perhaps they will be niche games that won't attract a lot of players, but they do look interesting.
Here's the thing. If I play a single player game, I can save my progress, and even if I don't play the game for a year, when I come back, I won't have lost anything. My gear will be just as good as it was, the monsters will not suddenly be twenty levels higher, and I won't have to adapt to some change to my character class that makes my old playstyle invalid.
Such is not the case with MMOs. I'm not saying it should be, either, but I do take issue with the feeling that I get penalized for not playing as much as someone else. CoH/CoV do a good job with the sidekick system, where if my friends have spent more time in-game than I have, there's at least a way for me to still be a useful member of their team. I don't expect that if I play for three hours a week, I should have the same gear as someone who plays like it was a second job. What I do feel is that there are probably a fair number of other people like me, for whom content that does little more than push you towards the end-game becomes too repetitive and boring to care about getting to the end-game.
-----------------------------
When I go, I want to leave a crater, not lie in one.
Former Matrix: Online dev. Been there, done that.
I've been playing online RPGs since the early MUD days where advanced players could add their own area to the game programmed in LPC. The first graphical one I played was The Realm and then I played AC1 for nearly 5 years (along with betas of several other games like E&B). Then looking for a change of pace I tried Horizons, ATiTD and SWG, each for 6-9 months. It each case, the game got too repetitive with time sinks getting progressively larger.
I've been playing WoW now since beta and looking for an alternative, but although I've tried nearly a dozen betas and free trials, I have found another one to replace it. Several were interesting but were in poor shape. Others were just cheap imitations of other games. The rest weren't interesting enough to me to keep me playing for more than a few days.
One of the reasons that I've stayed with WoW so long is the customizable UI which I can program in Lua. I've probably spent as much time doing that as I have actually playing. I also don't rush to get my chars to level 60, but have a variety of character classes that I alternate between for variety. The biggest feature that WoW lacks is some form of player housing. One of the things I really liked about SWG was the way players could build their own towns with elected mayor, etc. ATITD also lets players build permanent structures just bout anywhere that can have a lasting effect. Horizons also had player buildings, but only on pre-designated lots.
I (and probably many others) am looking for a game where what i do will affect the game. When you wipe out a group of attacking monsters and they all respawn to attack again in 5-10 minutes there isn't much feeling that your efforts have changed anything. If you go on vacation from a game for a couple of months and everything looks the same when you return, its a static world, not an evolving one. To keep players long term, they need to be able to permanently affect the game and the game needs to evolve over time based on player actions.
I've been watching several of the new games coming out and hope to have something new by the end of the year, but so far the ones that appeared to have promise have turned out to be lacking (i.e., the hype significantly exceeded reality).
This was a comment made by a friend of mine:
The article and the above have many things I agree with. Many times I feel like doing something different, not the same old thing. I can see people getting bored with the games available and moving on to something they hope will be better. Many times it might be a little bit better but then becomes stale on it's own. We need something that changes even when you aren't there, many possible things to do, and a constantly moving storyline that you can be a part of. Some said like RL, but I think that is why we play the games, to escape a little of the monotony and drudgery of our daily lives. Maybe that is why single player games were so fun, everything depended on you to change the world, but a mmorpg can't have a story for each player so the story has a hard time advancing.
Another comment from me, too: I'm not anti-Achiever.
In the first place, these folks are gamers and deserve game features in a MMORPG as much as anyone else. Combat and competition and accumulation aren't everything (or shouldn't be), but they help keep a game's energy level high and that's a Good Thing.
And in the second place, there are a lot of Achievers. A developer who's trying to maximize subscriptions would be nuts to completely ignore them.
Having said this, I want to emphasize my original point concerning how different people view these virtual world games. Specifically, I see a clear division: "play in" vs. "live in."
Achievers (and Killers, when they're allowed in) want to play in virtual worlds. For them, MMORPGs are clearly games to be played -- you start the game, you learn the rules, you beat the game, you move on to another game.
But Socializers (and, to a lesser extent, Explorers) don't look at virtual worlds that way. For these gamers, the world is more than just a game; it's a place. It's a place you go to enjoy the scenery, or hang out with friends, or figure out the rules of the universe, or make things (not for sale, but because making things is creative fun). There can be some game-y features, but for these kinds of people, MMORPGs are clearly worlds to be lived in.
The point behind this distinction is the impact it has on how you plan to make your revenue. If you expect to make your money by selling boxes at retail, then your primary objective must be to attract players, and not so much to retain them. In this case, appealing to Achievers makes sense -- once you've got their money, you can let them go. Your next expansion will bring in a fresh wave of Achiever players.
But if you expect the bulk of your revenue to come from long-term play, whether through subscriptions or the newly popular pay-for-content approach, then designing your game to appeal solely to Achievers is counterproductive because these typically aren't long-term players. If your business plan calls for gradually increasing your base of long-term players, then your best strategy is to deliberately and consistently design features to appeal to the gamers who want to "live in" a game world -- the Socializers and Explorers.
Personally, I advocate not having to choose. Why not design a game to appeal to all these kinds of gamers, and maximize both kinds of revenue?
I can't tell you how much I look forward to the day when some MMORPG designer with proper funding decides to follow this path, and consciously designs a game world to be both played in and lived in by everyone.
I have some ideas for such a game world....
--Flatfingers
*shrug*
I always play 'too much' on computer video games. Suddenly attacking the MMOs is extremely silly IMO, if I ain't playing in a MMO, I will play in some other game.
EVERYONE need something to hold onto in life. Holding on games is certainly not the 'ideal' thing, it is far from a bad result or something you want to avoid. Games act like a catching net.
A game is never 'too much', it is the remaining of that person life that is 'too less'. If someone play games, smile and encourage him/her, despite having a relatively empty life, they are holding onto something.
And don't come saying that a family is necessarily something important for everyone, I agree that it should be. But fact is, it is not all the time. If someone is 'surfing' accross life with mild interest and then enjoy a game, encourage it. That's person is happy and that matter a lot.
Of course, if that game is runs by SoE, you might want to help that person discover real game devs, worthy of a player time and trust! Check CoV or if you can wait or don't need a MMO, check BioWare.com! Real devs! RaR!
Before MMOs, I was playing Civilisations/KOEI/SSI/Black Isles products over, and over, and over again. Now I often play a single toon and keep progressing...of course, right now, I am in Heroes of Might and Magic V.
And if I had only 1 last thing to do before my life end, I will play more games! Trashing what peoples hold unto is really silly, especially when it is as nice as games. Yes they SHOULD take their responsabilities and all, but praising those games is certainly going to help a LOT more than trying to fight them.
'Burn out' has never happen to me, will never happen. Reason: I refuse to do something I dislike more than a few times, the only exception to that golden rule is raiding, which I really try for 2 hardcore months and I hate it all the more. 'Burn out' can't happen if you are happy and enjoying the game, I would prolly still be enjoying LDoN if those devs would have a clue on what they are doing instead of putting trashy raiding enforcement. Heck, they almost turn me in a soloer at some point, which is soooo silly...enforcing is not the way, only dimwits think that enforcing bring any good to anything or anyone.
As an achiever, I rather have a clone of Crushbone with real solo/grouping challenge than some other gameplay which I don't want to play to start with. Achievers like me don't need much efforts in a MMO, only have a 'open system' for endless achievements in some area but put a level cap outside of this area and guess what, I will just avoid the level cap area unless my RL friends are there, then we will have a blast and tons of fun, they log off? I return to uber level lands and do uber stuff with that orc v17.2 who only have a different shade in color, X 17 the stats, and items with X17 the stats as well...you can make a few twists to make it challenging, harder, a few nice things, it take far LESS time than setting raiding and guess what, it has ENDLESS opportunities which I find FUN, I ENJOY and I CRAVE for more...same graphics? Fine! Can I SK a friend and progress on my levels and XP in that zone? If so even better! An achiever, a real achiever, will find challenge and add some in nearly every setting. If we group with silly folks, we adapt to them to achieve better, but we will put back some more challenge in it, in a way or another...yes farming is okay, in fact most of the time we are farming...but challenge is also something craved for. If grouping is too easy in old EQ, fine I will see if I can solo stuff who shouldn't be soloed...if I manage to succeed, I will gloat about it (runes for selling, going to solo more later, and so on)
Achievers rarely enforce their ways or trash on others, unless they somehow hinder them, which is exactly what raiding enforcement is doing, raiding is an achievers-killer. I see some of the most skill achievers become raid-leader and leave the game burned...and achiever is unburnable, unless he does stuff he dislike...which is raiding! Raiding, in an EQish enforcement form, can't be tolerated. 
And to someone thinking I play too much videos games...what are the alternatives? Becoming a religious fanatic? Drinking? Becoming a criminal? A drug addict? Eh, it is only a harmless video game and I am a productive citizen, because I enjoy those games, otherwise I would never have become a productive citizen to start with.
In facts, the only thing in life that I value more than French...is gaming. Now think just how strong this is, been French on a cultural point of view (North American as well) is the single most important aspect of all my value if you ask me what I am...after been a gamer. I learn English because it is a nice tool to be a better gamer, I study and get a job because it afford me all I need to be a gamer...
I dunno, trashing gaming is the single most dumb thing someone could do, I would even reny my French origin for gaming...yet, everyone knowing me see the flags I have all around and exibit proudly...and gaming don't care at all about me been frenchy, as long as I can read in English to understand gaming better...which is something I always improve with passing years.
I become a game designer with a lot of apprehension, didn't study for that. Didn't want to interfere with my gaming love...and I find that my gaming love is immune, even to been a Game Designer. Why did I become a Game Designer? The Vision(tm) is incredibly flawed and can't be allowed to do more harm, it must be contain and if they don't understand, maybe by becoming a game designer I may start using the right word, the right organisation, the right structure, to make them understand that raiding, despite it initial 'good looking attributes', is a critical design failure and mistake. That would be hard to explain in the full details, so I keep to the simple, yet efficient...best soloer deserve to be a soloer, best raider deserve to be a raider and best grouper deserve to be a grouper. This simple sentence is logical, it is true and I could try to expand on it, but why don't you ask just about any achiever, he can explain why this sentence is right. I don't claim to be a genius who will understand the next 'Tetris', well if this happen, great, but...I do know that raiding enforcement is a mistake. Raiding (ala EQ) please only the production team and a minority of players who happen to be extremely social and eloquent and often using 954394 accounts, not the core of the players.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Overall a nice read. Well developed.
But your timeline is about 2 years off. Meridian 59 was well before UO and I consider it the first true MMO. I would say we been gaming this way for over 12 years and I still enjoy it.
and if anyone wonders yep I am the Buwah from M59 server 104. Hail to all of the KotAO.
Bu
its the same here as with u all others.
have played eq. and that got too much. take a letter here, deliever it there. think i played it for 1 month.
- - - - -
now i have played guild wars factions for around a little week. hmm. can only get to a level of 20. what is the point in that. so that is ruined.
then there are guilds. think there are around 4000 different. have been into between 5 and 10 different. but they are still the same. lots of ppl not online. and the ones that is online don't group together. so forming a group is not easy. what i want is have a group. learn things together. get our own experience. but when i cannot get a group thats serious enought. then its not easy.
then there is pvp. the first u come to. is random battle. 4 against 4. that is fun for some time. but when u have been grouped with ppl who think they are alone, and looks like this one cannot see us other 3. then its not fun. and its not easy to win, when the ppl playing are not that good. the next thing is to do random battles and win 5 times in a row to move to pvp where u can customize your teams. but win 5 times is not easy, when u are the only one who try to do it in a strategic way.
then there are the island. when won 5 pvp. but that is also impossible. because the guild i'm in and many other guild i have tried are not serios enought or the players are simple not online.
so what is it i want. hard to say. i think it would be fun. if there had been some more serious players and another way than random. but still i'm thinking : how long would that be fun ??
and after a week of playinf guild wars factions. i'm getting very tired of the game, very tired. its all the same.
start the game.
find a town in the game.
soon u will be asked to join a team of 8 to fight the same monsters over and over again.
then u finish the round. and start over again. maybe in another town.
then u sell the equipment u don't have to use and hopefully u got enough cash to buy something new or better.
and then u are at the beginning again.
- - - - -
what i want is :
if i want a store thats what i gonna open. if i got enought cash.
a point system for players. so i don't have to be with the ones that cannot play.
more graphic instead of the flat straight, that is everywhere.
a leveling system in exp that allows me to be me.
characters that are more personal. in guild wars factions. they are all very beautifull, and they all look almost the same. same body type, same faces, where are all the ugly ppl ? hmm. maybe this is to be a perfect world with perfect ppl.
i want equipment that only a few have and that is really hard to get.
i want difference between ppl.
i want the game to be hard if i want it.
and lots more.
- - - - -
so now. when i think of starting the game again. i can't. because before i start it, i know its the same again.
great artical and I agree whole hartitly.
I also have had that burned out of MMOs, and it was SWG that did it for me.
Now I play EVE and being the crafter/explorer type player I dont see myself getting bored any time soon, not only with exploreing 5,000+ systems but exploreing how the game plays, and works.
SWG Pre-CU had it perfect, it had decent if extreamly bugged PvP, but it also had elements for other play styles as well, there was 10 WHOLE planets to explore, there was even a entire player class dedicated to socializing ( but one dev even said that entertainers werew"not starwarsy, and in the movies they only got eatten" ) even with the CU there was still solid hope for the game, now with the NGE they have broken it to fix it. And I dont think they can fix it fast enough to keep it live.
You want something different? You want something that is unlike anything else on the market? You want a game that only has competition against yourself and other players? Give A Tale in the Desert a shot. Oh, did i also mention the complete and utter lack of combat? Ok, so if you are not into crafting at all, you may not dig ATITD, but if it's something different you are looking for, give it a try.
~Mozleron
~Mozleron
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
You know - I was talking this exact thing over with some old friends of mine a few weeks back. The very nature of the industry is what leads to this burn out. They need to keep you playing AND they need to make it so many people keep playing. SO far the only thing that the majority of games have come up with is repetitive time sinks and generic repeatable quests (though sometimes with different names and locations). The truly unique quests or adventures get rave reviews and are often brought up in passing conversations and nostalgia. Sadly, these quests come and go like your birthday - over and then done with thus leaving us to go back to the grind.
Our conversation then came back to the true start of all of this - Pen and Paper games. Ones where the DM's customized adventures to truly make you a part of the world and your actions have a lasting effect. Standing in line of people turning in a quest item for a WoW adventure doesn't quite have this immersion. So there it was - the idea that your actions mattered and that adventures were customized to you and your groups tastes and history. Years of game play was to be had in Pen and Paper campaigns.
Question is can this customization and "campaign feel" be had in a MMO? Matrix Online tired a bit of it and captured the heart of some who played them out. Games like Neverwinter Nights fostered whole PW campaigns and module releases. NWN2 is due out and I think many are looking forward to that and Ryzom is experimenting with the concept. Perhaps their success will foster in the next age of MMO concepts. Player created content which foster a nice mix of social interaction and tedium killing.
If I really had a wish to be granted in the matter - I think a game that offers private servers with either player maintained content or perhaps a team of dm's catering to the servers limited population would be my end all be all fix.
I think this is my first post on these forums (turns out its my fifth, lol) even after years of being a member here. I read all of the posts above and I appreciate the mature and thoughtful ideas presented here.
I've been an avid 'paper and dice' role player for 20+ years. I started playing online RPG's with MUDDs back in my college days, then moved on to more advanced games as they came out.
Every generation of games has something more than the last. Deeper graphics, better physics, sound and music. Storylines and such. It does seem, however, that the generally accepted idea of what an MMORPG is, as defined by its name, is wrong.
When you say RPG I am taken back to my paper and dice days. Drawn out maps, a DM character sheets, etc. The world of DnD changed. Me and a group of HEROs changed it. Emphasis on Hero to be covered later. The DM takes hours to prepare thoughts and possible actions and is there to effect the world in realtime as you play. In those games, if you died, you had to have a friend take your body to a place with magicians/preists or technology to revive or repair you (in RIFTS this could be implants or such). You Could do ANYTHING you wanted to...anything. I was about to list a list of "anything" and decided it was rather long. Instead I'll talk about what MMO RPGs need to add to have that kind of feeling to them.
If I could give a title like MMORPG to a game like EQ or WoW, it would be MMO fantasy Game. If you play the game ONCE through and follow the quest lines in WoW, it can be engaging. But the first time you have to help a friend do the same quest for the same item for a friend...it loses its RPG status and starts down the path to repativeness. In DnD can you kill the same enemy several times in hopes of getting different items from him? The idea is absurd...and don't get me started on what a monster 'drops'. In an RPG, if a DM ever said that a PIG dropped a few copper coins, a piece of dwarvish cheese and a rusty chainmail shirt, youd demand that your DM share whatever he is smoking. If you kill the guy at the end of the big quest and he is wielding a sweet sword...guess what, in an RPG that sword is now your groups to decide who gets it. How many times do you kill a guy to see if hes going to drop the dagger, or the sheild or the whatever.
--in the end, games currently titled mmoRPG are not RPG at all. They're merely fantasy games with static quests-- Fantasy world meets groundhogs day!!
FPS action titles are evolving towards an MMO like quality. Battlefield2 is a great example. A server with 64 soldiers. Previous experience grants some soldiers advanced weapons. Its an FPS so its notstop action. I don't play that game thinking, grind grind grind...then all the sudden *ding* I've made a new rank and can unlock another advanced weapon. These games don't even try to say they're RPG but they have the same elements as games that do. Repeatable content, character classes, expereince, better gear as you move up. But they do something that "grinding" cannot do...be fun. Grinding cannot be fun. It is the antithesis of FUN! So please please please stop making me grind to RP in your world.
Back to HEROs. The reason we play games is to do something we cannot do IRL. SO, you don't want a game that makes you eat, sleep, use the restroom, brush your teeth, etc. Also, in most cases you are above the normal class of people that live in the world. You are a hero. You have better combat abilities, powers or something that makes you special. But you are a vagabond. You start the game with junk, no money and no home. In real RPG's you have a back history, money from parents and/or a home.
So, heres what I think would make MMO's have lasting interest.
Everything on this list is an entire thread of its own so I won't go into details here.
-Allow for player created (or at least controled) content
-no static anything unless its reasonable
(the same guy cannot be killed twice let alone a million times, but you can gather resources over and over -BORING!!)
-make the power difference between level advancments less. Lets try not adding to hit points at all. This idea is a departure from DnD but other RPG's didn't add HP as you leveled. Instead level advancement should be more towards social effects...or unlocks your abilities to create/control some of that player controlled content
-no dropping items from mobs that that creature would never be carrying.
-NO grinding!
-YES to FPS fast action combat! Throw more at me faster if you have to, but make my adrenaline go!
-YES to permanent death!! perhaps you can be revived or have body parts replaced but once you are thoroughly dead...no more for you! (but if the power differenc in levels is lower starting over isn't horrific).
-YES to permanent NPC deaths. If you kill the king of stormwind, then hes dead. Got it?
-please add realistic reactions, morale etc.
So, I've had this heated discussion with members from my WoW guild several times. It always 100% comes down to money.
The arguement is this. It costs to much to constantly create dynamic content...and if you allow player content some jerk will totally make the game unplayable. Sooo you get endless supplies of "repeatable content" and the game companies know that they need a reason to make you play it again so thats why you get the random drops, farming, grinding etc. Gee...
Heres my rebutal. The Game mechanic needs to be changed. DnD was usually a group of 3-10 guys. The DM controled the rest of the world. Dm's did it for free and it was as much (sometimes more) fun as playing the characters. But thats not an MMO.
I imagine a game where DM's are playing a game that looks like Battle for middle earth 2, or starcraft. They're controling mass movements of NPC armies to help protect the realm. Perhaps their title in game is King or God or some such that fits what they are doing in this persistant state world. They need resources, land etc to overcome the enemies. The individual playing the RPG is playing a game that looks like an FPS. They are then given tasks to aid in this effort. They are heros and have abilites far above that of the common soldiers that are controlled by the DM's and therefore have a great effect in the overall storyline that the DM is creating. So a cross between FPS and RTS, how about it?...all on an MMO scale? In my mind this creates an RPG.
I write too much, sorry. This is really just the tip of the iceburg. In one sentence, here it is.
Dev's go back and find out what an RPG is then change the game mechanics to fit!!
Currently not playing any MMOrpg --
Lvl 80 paladin WoW
I've tried a good portion of the MMOs since then. So many had so much promise (Horizons was by far the one MMO with the most potential) but most of the new MMOs lacked a decent player base. Without the players playing it's not really Massively Multiplayer anymore. I think a new genre should be called Mildly Multiplayer or Possibly Meet Others Multiplayer (PMOM).
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/28371832@N02/2648951313/[/url]
I can only agree with the article. I am in much the same position as the author, being 35 years old and having played computer games for 20 years. I was in SWG two years, also in EQ2 and nearly a year in WOW. I feel so much the same, and it is very frustrating. I had hoped companies would make my investment in time (not to speak of the money) more worthwhile in the long term, but it isnt. In none of these or any MMO I ever have seen.
Isn't it weird, btw that the age old Everquest still have twice as much subscribers than EQ2? It seems at last after 2 years everyone is burnt out of an MMO, and maybe that is ok, but I still wonder if there is no way to make games long term fun beyond that. No matter how many grudges I bear to some MMOs I play, cancelling them after such a long time is always a terrible thing. I nearly cried when I finally cancelled my SWG or EQ2 accounts after 2 years of playing them day by day. But I just felt trapped like in a hamster wheel in them, which finally was weighing heavier than the good memories of the first year. I really wish someone would create some game that lasts longer and evolves. WOW was nice, but it's about time some new MMO takes over the subscription throne.
Looking at all MMOs coming in the next 6-12 months, I must say, none of them is really thrilling me in any way the previous games had thrilled me.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I'm 35 years old and I started with text-based games. British Isles on Compuserve then moved to DragonRealms which I played from beta for 6 years. I had the opportunity to alpha test a number of games including EverQuest, beta test from start to finish such games as Asheron's Call and StarWars Galaxies. I've played most of them out there for at least a month, many for several months.
The longest I stayed with any game after DragonRealms was about 10 months. I played everything that came out, on both test and live servers, looking for something that would hook me. In most cases I was bored within 4 weeks.
Here are some of the things that turned me off from a game:
In most cases I blame the game designers for not creating a virtual world that allowed me to create my vision. I'm stuck with whatever vision they have (and sometimes not even that). Why would I spend hundreds of dollars to play someone elses vision? Give me what I want, make it realistic enough to be believable and fun enoguh to play. I know the response - sounds simple, but it's not. I'm not getting payed millions to figure this out though - I'm the customer demanding it so that I can contribute my hundreds. Put me on the pay check, let me quit my current job, and I'll start tossing ideas out.
Regareds,
Gabriel
In my opinion the answer is simple:
-Grinding and levelling lead to burn-out fast.
MMOGs keep being interesting for a long time if:
- the game is centered around player-interaction and player-skill (not char skill)
-where the actions of players have impact on the game world (that means player-influenced and driven economy, faction and single pvp that has lasting impacts on the gameworld) It must be possible to conquer cities, countries or planets, it must be possible to win and loose.
-where the "content" of the gameworld is created by the behaviour of the players (not pre-scripted stories and missions a player must follow) Like roles and positions a player can fill with his own personality. cleverness, communication skills.
-game design must be centered around player interaction and communication
a good example:
EVE online. Many long-term players, numbers slowly but steadily rising
World War II Online Battleground Europe.
I'm playing this game for five years now! Still the same theater of operations (gameworld). But why is it interesting for me and many other long-term players? Its not the graphics...the graphics can't compete with most other MMOGs...
Because it is like a big soccer or football game on a massive scale that runs 24/7 with thousands of players from all over the world until one side wins!
-one side wins and one side looses! Cities can be conquered, when all (over 400) are conquered a side wins! And one side looses! The map gets reset than. This can take from 1 week to 2-3 months.
-teamwork is essential to win. That means player interaction, communication and organisation on different levels
-everybody is important. The skill of every player counts. Every player forms small parts of the big picture by his actions. The more players, the better the chance to win a fight, conquer a city. So new players normally are very welcome to all "factions".
-player-skill makes every duel or fight interesting! A bullet is a bullet..regardless if fired by a recruit or a general. A skilled pilot in a bad plane can win against a newbie player in the best plane in dogfights
-every vehicle, plane, ship is limited. When it gets destroyed it is replaced after 4 hours. So every piece of equipment has a certain value and You can attrit enemy cities out of equipment.
-the gameworld (the soccer field) is always the same, but every campain/war (soccer or football match) is different...it depends on players, tactics, equipment, teamwork...which change all the time.
But one very important feature: a player-driven ingame hierarchy and organisation. Player can just log in and fight, but player also can join the high command hierarchy and post missions for other players to take, organise attacks and operations, move brigades and divisions, decide where to attack. He can work up his way through the ranks up to armchair general Chief in Command of a side who decides about overall strategy and production of vehicles...the higher in the ranks a player gets the more he must organise and communicate with players from all over the world to keep the show running. Politics comes into play here. Organisation, communication. There are players who got famous and popular because of their leadership skills and forming a bunch of players from all over the world into a team that cooperates to win the war!
Give roles to the players they can fill and shape and which have impact on the gameworld and outcome of trade, wars and faction politics...and it'll never get boring!
In my opinion MMOGs must focus on player interaction and communication. Its the behaviour of players that make it interesting, also for a long time. Just levelling and beating monsters is boring for me...that is something best for single player offline RPGs...
Level-centric ai-monster-beating MMOGs are like a soccer, basketball or football game where every player has his own ball and goal where he can shoot as many goals as he want. It doesn't have any impact and doesn't matter at all, but it gives You a great feeling of being a soccer or football hero and as a reward You get better shoes and T-shirts. No need to talk to other players also, because everybody or every small group (guild) have their own goals where they can shoot into...only difference is the colour and quality of their shoes and T-shirts! Players get bored? Well...then the devs enter golden T-Shirts and diamond shoes You can get when You have scored 10.000 goals (end-game, level cap at 60). See the difference?
In my opinion many mmog dev studios must learn that the technology and character of MMOGs needs a completely different approach to game design than single player games! It doesnt matter if the setting of a MMOG is fantasy, sci-fi, real-life or some historic. Its about gameplay and design.
-----------------------------------
Life is too short to play bad games.
P.S.: If any Blizzard executive or developper reads this : Try to go talk to your boss up there in the next building and tell him that he should think about these things : First, Cancel Starcraft Ghost. Second, Make an MMOFPS with Starcraft. Man that would make me spend some more money for you guys!
Great article, I totally agreed. I didn't get a chance to read all of the replies but I wanted to make a quick list of stuff I would like to see in upcoming games (hopefully developers and investors are reading all of the great suggestions people have posted)
- I don't need crazy customization but I would like to see at least 10 of each, hair style, hair color and faces to choose from. Also, scalable bodies like in Phantasy Star Online would be awesome, everyone had so much fun making characters.
- Slotted items and armor upgrades. This really keeps me playing and also it's nice to upgrade a piece of armor if you really like how it looks, you can make it very powerful so you don't need to toss it when something new comes along.
- It would be nice if only the body armor/head armor/weapon, had a graphic on your character, the other pieces like gloves/etc. could just have stats... then you don't end up with an orange shirt and green pants like in World of Warcraft.
- The game must have pvp with a goal! For example, fighting for guild bases. If there is no goal there is no reason to keep fighting. Guild vs Guild is a good way to go since people can share in the glory, not just have one uber person. Also, Faction vs Faction does not cut it, people have no real reason to bond with or take pride in their faction, guilds are much better since they are player made.
- Player housing is always nice, I don't care if it is instanced (it is probably better that way so you don't have endless miles of houses that no one is going to trudge through anyway) just as long as a few friends are able to enter if you invite them.
- Soloing... this is just a personal preferance, but I really like being able to log on and do some leveling without having to spend hours finding a group.
- Leveling, I actually don't mind grinding~! I don't see a way around it anyway because if everyone starts out powerful and jumps right into PvP then what is the point? The only thing I ask is for a little selection, diffrent places to grind and diffrent monsters to kill at diffrent levels to keep things fresh. I don't want to kill the same monster for 20 days. >< Also I would like the game to be as bot-free as possible (I suppose this is only an option for the most popular games since they can afford to ban paying customers)
- High level limit. (or slower leveling maybe?) I don't care how long it takes to reach the maximum level, walking around in WoW with everyone being max level is just insane, how can anyone feel special? It is a sad thing when you have to abandon your beloved character to make an alt because you actually finished your main...
- Difficult crafting system. Yes, I want crafting to be very difficult and time consuming... the way things are in World of Warcraft where everyone is a crafter and you can max your craft out very quickly is just...whats the point?? Crafting should only be for some people, just like how pvp is only for some. It leaves a whole new area of the game to explore after you need a break from your usual fun!
thats all I can think of for now... I used WoW as a comparison for a lot of my points since it is so popular that I have a feeling many future games are going to emulate it and I would rather they didn't copy its weak points.
That will be the only way you will get what you want. IRL, there are people that will be better then you because they take the time to get where they are. What you want is a single player game that is so massive that it feels like a world.
You play a MMO to be with a lot of other people and you can't really have 6 million be uber champs or heros. There has to be people who put in the time and effort to reach the top. How would you feel if you spent 100 hours playing a game but someone who has only played 20 has the same status?