The 3rd gen MMO = Not release yet, and I don't see it coming soon...I wish I will be surprised.
My thinking is centered around how the game played. Was it "worldly"? Social? Did non-combat aspects like the economy work right? Was there changes to the world that players could bring about? Did the Lore actually play in the game, outside of special events? Etc.
I see UO as first gen. EQ brought in the D&D style (Diku in text based, as opposed to MUD, which is what UO was based on), and that caused a huge change. However, EQ still held to the worldly concept. So it was sort of like a mix of old and next gen. But in the end, I see EQ as the 2nd generation of MMOs because of that overall basic design foundation of D&D.
Wow was the refinement, and worse (also better in many ways), of the D&D style that EQ brought in. So it falls into that 2nd generation that EQ brought.
I haven't seen a true 3rd generation game yet. I'm not sure there is such an animal, under my train of thought.
However, if UO was "worldly", and EQ was "linear level based" (for lack of a better definition), then maybe the next generation game might be the one that expands one or the other into an all new feel?
In that case, I don't see anything for the EQ side, Themepark. That's probably why it all feels so "cloned." (Technology aside.) I do see great advancements in the UO, MUD, Worldly side, as very possible. Expanding the social play into Player Group/Social aspects. Player built and run cities, with actual social involvement. The interactions between cities, agreements and trade, alliances and cooperative actions, competition and/or wars.
Even inside of cities. If you have 15 guilds and a slew of independent players, there's going to be social interactions in such a next gen game. Lots of it.
Simply put these were the ground breakers, and very unique in their own way individual way.
Gen 2: WoW, DAoC, CoH, EVE, DDO, Age of Conan.
Like any kind of evolution, you are dealing with survival of the fittest, and EQ was the more successful of the Gen 1 MMO, so The Gen 2 were mainly EQ spawns. Owing their game style to how EQ was made, and while Wow was the most famous of them, it was during this time that I believe developers were willing to take the most risks, try new things, and these games had a huge amount of diversity because of that.
Gen 3: BDO, ESO, GW2, etc.
Again, like Gen 1 to Gen 2, when we get to Gen 3, the most successful of the Gen 2 will have the most impact on the Gen 3, making all these WoW spawns.
Gen 4: Trove, ARK, Albion, H1Z1
We see at this point, that the Evolution has changed a lot here, this is because like any kind of evolution, when the gene pool gets stagnant there needs to be a some influx of new blood for things to continue to grow and evolve. And that is what we saw with WoW, it made things too homogeneous that a massive change needed to happen.
The WoW Stagnation is also what Spawned Offshoot Genres, like: MOBA - LoL BR's - Fortnight. Arena Games - Dead By Daylight.
This is just how I see it.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
UO - was my first MMO in 1997 or 98,,,,,At first it was OK just wandering around Britain talking to other players....Then I decided to try and adventure...This is wehre it just flat out gets ugly....2 steps outside the castle gates and wham killed by another player....rez and try again, dead again.....There were several high levels camped right outside the gates and all they did was kill other players as they left town...it was awful...I was so angry I vowed I would never play a multiplayer game again.
EQ - A year or two after UO a friend told me about Everquest...I told him I had no interest in multiplayer games because I didn't want to get killed constantly by jerks....He said this one has no player killing its just you (and others) against the environment.....I read some reviews and decided to give it a try...The difference was night and day.....THe players were very friendly and helpful and the gameplay was so much more enjoyable.
Conclusion: I have no idea how anyone could enjoy a game like UO...WHen they introduced Trammell it got alot better I heard. THe community was just flat out rude and awful. I wouldn't play that game if they paid me.
UO - was my first MMO in 1997 or 98,,,,,At first it was OK just wandering around Britain talking to other players....Then I decided to try and adventure...This is wehre it just flat out gets ugly....2 steps outside the castle gates and wham killed by another player....rez and try again, dead again.....There were several high levels camped right outside the gates and all they did was kill other players as they left town...it was awful...I was so angry I vowed I would never play a multiplayer game again.
EQ - A year or two after UO a friend told me about Everquest...I told him I had no interest in multiplayer games because I didn't want to get killed constantly by jerks....He said this one has no player killing its just you (and others) against the environment.....I read some reviews and decided to give it a try...The difference was night and day.....THe players were very friendly and helpful and the gameplay was so much more enjoyable.
Conclusion: I have no idea how anyone could enjoy a game like UO...WHen they introduced Trammell it got alot better I heard. THe community was just flat out rude and awful. I wouldn't play that game if they paid me.
It was a huge problem. I loved the rest of the game though.
The economy in UO was very realistic, and an interesting thing if a person took a long look at it. It provided a different sort of strategic game play.
It shouldn't be either or. Two great games, as I see it.
Yes, two great games. Except for the individual's choice. They both had their problems.
UO's being the most grievous with the rampant PKing (until they added Trammel, which was a mirror duplicate but without PKing (still allowed Guild Wars).
EQ had a systemic problem based on D&D levels and huge Power Gaps, creating social interaction problems typical of Themeparks, and "where do I go next?" But that was far superior to UO's PKing that robbed players of their rewards for playing.
Moving on to WoW, they did some really great things. And they fixed the "where do I go next" problem by zoning content and quests, but greatly enhanced the social interaction problems. Or at least it became much more obvious.
But when I say "problem", in any of these cases, it depends on whether an individual sees them as problems. And they don't seem to mix for most gamers.
My bet for the next great game is a mix of the best of the above games. A class based game like EQ, with low Power Gaps like UO to fascilitate it's Worldly Sandbox and Social interaction, and polished to a tee like WoW.
UO was a living breathing world. You will see evidence of my characters existence a decade after deleting it. The world is changed by what you do and you exist in it. If every player was deleted an archaeologist could create a character and actually piece together the history of these players in many ways.
EQ is a theme park. The world remains static before and after you pass through it. If every character was gone the world would be in it's pristine launch state(minus any updates) with no trace of anyone ever having existed in it.
UO was a living breathing world. You will see evidence of my characters existence a decade after deleting it. The world is changed by what you do and you exist in it. If every player was deleted an archaeologist could create a character and actually piece together the history of these players in many ways.
EQ is a theme park. The world remains static before and after you pass through it. If every character was gone the world would be in it's pristine launch state(minus any updates) with no trace of anyone ever having existed in it.
Did you get a book "published" so it became official and spawned with the other official books? I'm just curious. There are players who still have their names as authors in books in the game after so many years. That's pretty cool, but to get one of the rare ones that were "published" (and put into the spawn) would be a really neat thing. I'm sure there are still old Player Libraries with the great contest winner's books too.
The original players who discovered the one-of-a-kind Rare Items way back in the beginning are still named at Stratics on the page where they shared pics of them.
And on Great Lakes, the Museum Of Memories still has their fantastic collection of Rare GM Event items, much of it "on loan" from the owner players just like a real world museum. I don't know if they show the stuff anymore, but after what they went through to keep the items from hackers and thieves, over so many years, I have no doubt that they still hold that stuff.
I wonder if Kazola's Tavern (the first ever player owned tavern in MMO's) is still there? That place was a hoppin' spot in the early years when Kazola was still actively playing.
Yes, UO was, and still is, alive. Living and breathing. Like no other game.
The 3rd gen MMO = Not release yet, and I don't see it coming soon...I wish I will be surprised.
My take on the "eras" of the massively multiplayer online genre.
First Gen - Pre-WoW - "The Age of Experimentation"
The birth of the MMOG genre was really characterised by small groups of idealistic geeks experimenting with the potential of persistent online games. The games themselves varied wildly in design and focus, as well as quality.
Second Gen - Wow to SW:TOR - "The Refinement of the Themepark" A.K.A. "The (WoW) Clone Wars"
Blizzard was really the first company to have learnt the lessons from the first gen MMOs. They examined what worked, what didn't, then narrowed their focus into making a great themepark. Whilst not exactly original, they brought a professional attitude and polish to the genre that had previously been missing. Their subsequent success spawned an era of very similar themeparks, each trying to refine the themepark concept for the mass market.
Third Gen - GW2 to 2020 - "The Era of Action Combat" A.K.A. "The Asian Invasion"
This era has definitely been categorized by the rise of action combat and the global appeal of Asia-developed MMOGs. The core design paradigms of the genre haven't changed much, except to replace the combat mechanics and a change of aesthetics.
Fourth Gen - 2015201620182020 2021 - ??? - "The Era of Indies"
Assuming they ever get released, the next era is likely to be categorized by a horde of crowd-funded indie titles. The big studios have mostly given up on the genre and all we have in the pipeline is a bunch of indies.
This is assuming they release.
If they don't release, or not enough release to dominate the next era, then my backup prediction (hope) is that the next era will be "the second coming", another era of experimentation except this time, it'll be done by larger companies with bigger budgets. In the same way that Blizzard is to themeparks, these firms will be looking to be the new Blizzard to a new design paradigm (e.g. being the Blizzard of sandboxes, or the Blizzard of MMORTS's). However, my hunch is that the era of indies needs to come first, to do that experimentation first, so that the big companies can steal the good ideas and polish/streamline.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Simply put these were the ground breakers, and very unique in their own way individual way.
Gen 2: WoW, DAoC, CoH, EVE, DDO, Age of Conan.
Like any kind of evolution, you are dealing with survival of the fittest, and EQ was the more successful of the Gen 1 MMO, so The Gen 2 were mainly EQ spawns. Owing their game style to how EQ was made, and while Wow was the most famous of them, it was during this time that I believe developers were willing to take the most risks, try new things, and these games had a huge amount of diversity because of that.
Gen 3: BDO, ESO, GW2, etc.
Again, like Gen 1 to Gen 2, when we get to Gen 3, the most successful of the Gen 2 will have the most impact on the Gen 3, making all these WoW spawns.
Gen 4: Trove, ARK, Albion, H1Z1
We see at this point, that the Evolution has changed a lot here, this is because like any kind of evolution, when the gene pool gets stagnant there needs to be a some influx of new blood for things to continue to grow and evolve. And that is what we saw with WoW, it made things too homogeneous that a massive change needed to happen.
The WoW Stagnation is also what Spawned Offshoot Genres, like: MOBA - LoL BR's - Fortnight. Arena Games - Dead By Daylight.
This is just how I see it.
yea that about sizes it up imo
UO and EQ
Then all Downhill from there
These 2 games continue to deliver good content to there audiences for over 20 years , while the next great thing continue to shutter
To me, EQ represented a devolution of what UO tried to do.
That wasn't such a big deal, except the entire genre more or less went the way of EQ - with WoW being the big trendsetter.
So, in a way, because of EQ - we haven't actually seen what a true AAA "world simulation" could have looked like.
Of course, EQ isn't to blame - as it's just a game.
But I never wanted a gamey hand-held approach for the genre. I wanted an alternate world with a ton of player agency.
However, I'm not into the whole one versus the other mindset. Both approaches do things well and other things less well.
Ultimately, they were both very early examples of things that could still be infinitely improved - and I happen to believe there are nearly infinite other approaches that would be entirely different.
To me, EQ represented a devolution of what UO tried to do.
That wasn't such a big deal, except the entire genre more or less went the way of EQ - with WoW being the big trendsetter.
So, in a way, because of EQ - we haven't actually seen what a true AAA "world simulation" could have looked like.
Of course, EQ isn't to blame - as it's just a game.
But I never wanted a gamey hand-held approach for the genre. I wanted an alternate world with a ton of player agency.
However, I'm not into the whole one versus the other mindset. Both approaches do things well and other things less well.
Ultimately, they were both very early examples of things that could still be infinitely improved - and I happen to believe there are nearly infinite other approaches that would be entirely different.
When we take a look at the history, there are two things that I see that pushed the MMORPG genre into this mold. D&D. And SP games, naturally based on D&D. It's little wonder that the Massively Multiplayer games have followed that suit. But there's something missing in the Worldliness of it all, and the "massively" part of it highlights that effect through the other aspects like economies and social glues of other flavors.
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Where's Anarchy Online in that list? That was around 2002 I believe.
Added.
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Perhaps it could be so now,. Back when it was a major player that was certainly not the case. Regardless, the question isn't about which game has the best aesthetics or occupies the most space on your hard drive.
Anyway, if am I restricted to the older games, Asheron's Call out of that lot. I liked the setting, the regular story updates, the open world with seasonal changes, and so on.
Without that constraint City of Heroes, for all the reasons.
Excellent original setting true to the comics genre, many good stories with plenty available to provide multiple paths to leveling up, fantastic system for impromptu grouping with radio and newspaper missions (along with a community that made that a pleasure rather than torment), ability to change the difficulty of the game in terms of both quantity and power of foes to suit your desire, ability for players to make custom missions (wonderful for role-play groups), play for both heroes and villains and shades of gray between and the ability to shift along that moral plane through play, and on and on and on.
The 3rd gen MMO = Not release yet, and I don't see it coming soon...I wish I will be surprised.
feh UO is not even 2nd gen, before all that had muds, then you get meridian who was pretty much the first MMO with graphics, then you can say UO came, even though in his launch year it was considerated a failure and then they make U9 just to make sure to kill the ultima game on SP
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Ok folks, I apologize if this issue has been debated before, but if it has, I missed it, so I thought I would raise it myself (and if it hasn't, let the debate begin). The reason I bring it up is because when someone starts a thread like, "What's your favorite MMO of all-time?", these two ground breaking games consistently appear more often than all the others (at least that's the way it seems to me). So, I'm curious to hear from gamers, particularly those who have played both. Which game is the better of the two? If you want to break it down into different categories (graphics, community, etc.) that's fine, but what I'm really wondering is, overall, which game was the more fun to play.
From my perspective, EQ was the first and still the best MMORPG I ever played. I never played UO, but I hear similiar sentiments from those who started with that game. So I'm wondering is it's because it's the first that makes it the best, or is it because the devs of those games had something that others don't. I'd appreciate if you would qualify your response instead of simply saying one was better than the other. And if you happen to think both games sucked and something else is way better than either, feel free to say so as well. Just make sure you back it up with an argument.
They aren't really comparable, one was a level grinding group game, the other was just a open world kill the newbie. They both were garbage and still are which is why wow has millions and uo has 100 and eq like 10000 people.
Which was better everquest, because you could play with out being killed every 3 min by 10 year olds grouping up.
Now they are both just cheat holes ulitma online is just a bunch of cheaters and bots, and everquest is again cheaters and bots. Both groups go well the games 20 years old who cares anything about it lol like its a defense to cheat.
Infact everquest will go so far as to not ban cheaters who sell in game stuff for korno. Also ulitma online does the same thing. I went on ulitma online forum and posted pictures, links, Icq, web pages, and chat transcripts of some one, he posted under me hahaha thanks for the free advertising. They banned my forum account. To this day he still cheats and sells gold and houses freely.
Unless you have a nostalgia itch to scratch these games are horrid garbage, and always were. Eso and wow do everything better with eso being on console so nobody cheats. As for pvp there is a reason why pvp mmos fail and have 5 people. Mobas and br is 10000000 times better. Only a select few people want to grind a bajilion hours getting the sword of ball slapping to actually be able to pvp. When you literally can just start doing it from the start in a moba or br.
Can you take your 3D Virtual Girlfriend to the Inn or the Hotel and tuck her into bed in a Moba or a BR?
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
The 3rd gen MMO = Not release yet, and I don't see it coming soon...I wish I will be surprised.
feh UO is not even 2nd gen, before all that had muds, then you get meridian who was pretty much the first MMO with graphics, then you can say UO came, even though in his launch year it was considerated a failure and then they make U9 just to make sure to kill the ultima game on SP
UO wasn't considered a failure. It was considered a large success, at the time. In fact, their sales numbers shocked everyone. They were projected to sell about 20,000 copies lifetime. They had 260,000 (at least) subs by year 2. They had also lost a lot because of the PKing, Richard Garriott claims they were the first to sell 1 million copies.
The reason most people consider UO to be 1st Generation is because it was the first truly massive MMO. UO had 10,000 accounts per server. Meridian had, what, 100-200? Meridian had sold less than 15,000 copies by june, 1999. And they shut down about a year later, before going open source and someone else started it back up after some added development.
It was UO that kicked the MMORPG scene into gear. EQ (and AC to a lesser extent) added gears, although that may have been because of UO's bleeding from PKing. And WoW brought the MMO scene into it's prominence.
But all that's why UO has been considered 1st Gen.
UO definitely was not for the average gamer, it was for the hardcore....That sent the rest of us reeling for another game and luckily a couple came along within the next couple of years after UO released.
Comments
My thinking is centered around how the game played. Was it "worldly"? Social? Did non-combat aspects like the economy work right? Was there changes to the world that players could bring about? Did the Lore actually play in the game, outside of special events? Etc.
I see UO as first gen. EQ brought in the D&D style (Diku in text based, as opposed to MUD, which is what UO was based on), and that caused a huge change. However, EQ still held to the worldly concept. So it was sort of like a mix of old and next gen.
But in the end, I see EQ as the 2nd generation of MMOs because of that overall basic design foundation of D&D.
Wow was the refinement, and worse (also better in many ways), of the D&D style that EQ brought in. So it falls into that 2nd generation that EQ brought.
I haven't seen a true 3rd generation game yet. I'm not sure there is such an animal, under my train of thought.
However, if UO was "worldly", and EQ was "linear level based" (for lack of a better definition), then maybe the next generation game might be the one that expands one or the other into an all new feel?
In that case, I don't see anything for the EQ side, Themepark. That's probably why it all feels so "cloned." (Technology aside.)
I do see great advancements in the UO, MUD, Worldly side, as very possible.
Expanding the social play into Player Group/Social aspects.
Player built and run cities, with actual social involvement. The interactions between cities, agreements and trade, alliances and cooperative actions, competition and/or wars.
Even inside of cities. If you have 15 guilds and a slew of independent players, there's going to be social interactions in such a next gen game.
Lots of it.
This is what I see as the next generation.
Once upon a time....
Gen 1:
UO, EQ.
Simply put these were the ground breakers, and very unique in their own way individual way.
Gen 2:
WoW, DAoC, CoH, EVE, DDO, Age of Conan.
Like any kind of evolution, you are dealing with survival of the fittest, and EQ was the more successful of the Gen 1 MMO, so The Gen 2 were mainly EQ spawns. Owing their game style to how EQ was made, and while Wow was the most famous of them, it was during this time that I believe developers were willing to take the most risks, try new things, and these games had a huge amount of diversity because of that.
Gen 3:
BDO, ESO, GW2, etc.
Again, like Gen 1 to Gen 2, when we get to Gen 3, the most successful of the Gen 2 will have the most impact on the Gen 3, making all these WoW spawns.
Gen 4:
Trove, ARK, Albion, H1Z1
We see at this point, that the Evolution has changed a lot here, this is because like any kind of evolution, when the gene pool gets stagnant there needs to be a some influx of new blood for things to continue to grow and evolve. And that is what we saw with WoW, it made things too homogeneous that a massive change needed to happen.
The WoW Stagnation is also what Spawned Offshoot Genres, like:
MOBA - LoL
BR's - Fortnight.
Arena Games - Dead By Daylight.
This is just how I see it.
The economy in UO was very realistic, and an interesting thing if a person took a long look at it. It provided a different sort of strategic game play.
Once upon a time....
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Except for the individual's choice. They both had their problems.
UO's being the most grievous with the rampant PKing (until they added Trammel, which was a mirror duplicate but without PKing (still allowed Guild Wars).
EQ had a systemic problem based on D&D levels and huge Power Gaps, creating social interaction problems typical of Themeparks, and "where do I go next?"
But that was far superior to UO's PKing that robbed players of their rewards for playing.
Moving on to WoW, they did some really great things. And they fixed the "where do I go next" problem by zoning content and quests, but greatly enhanced the social interaction problems. Or at least it became much more obvious.
But when I say "problem", in any of these cases, it depends on whether an individual sees them as problems. And they don't seem to mix for most gamers.
Once upon a time....
A class based game like EQ, with low Power Gaps like UO to fascilitate it's Worldly Sandbox and Social interaction, and polished to a tee like WoW.
Once upon a time....
EQ is a theme park. The world remains static before and after you pass through it. If every character was gone the world would be in it's pristine launch state(minus any updates) with no trace of anyone ever having existed in it.
I'm sure there are still old Player Libraries with the great contest winner's books too.
The original players who discovered the one-of-a-kind Rare Items way back in the beginning are still named at Stratics on the page where they shared pics of them.
And on Great Lakes, the Museum Of Memories still has their fantastic collection of Rare GM Event items, much of it "on loan" from the owner players just like a real world museum. I don't know if they show the stuff anymore, but after what they went through to keep the items from hackers and thieves, over so many years, I have no doubt that they still hold that stuff.
I wonder if Kazola's Tavern (the first ever player owned tavern in MMO's) is still there?
That place was a hoppin' spot in the early years when Kazola was still actively playing.
Yes, UO was, and still is, alive. Living and breathing. Like no other game.
Once upon a time....
First Gen - Pre-WoW - "The Age of Experimentation"
Second Gen - Wow to SW:TOR - "The Refinement of the Themepark" A.K.A. "The (WoW) Clone Wars"
Third Gen - GW2 to 2020 - "The Era of Action Combat" A.K.A. "The Asian Invasion"
Fourth Gen - 2015 2016 2018 2020 2021 - ??? - "The Era of Indies"
That wasn't such a big deal, except the entire genre more or less went the way of EQ - with WoW being the big trendsetter.
So, in a way, because of EQ - we haven't actually seen what a true AAA "world simulation" could have looked like.
Of course, EQ isn't to blame - as it's just a game.
But I never wanted a gamey hand-held approach for the genre. I wanted an alternate world with a ton of player agency.
However, I'm not into the whole one versus the other mindset. Both approaches do things well and other things less well.
Ultimately, they were both very early examples of things that could still be infinitely improved - and I happen to believe there are nearly infinite other approaches that would be entirely different.
D&D.
And SP games, naturally based on D&D.
It's little wonder that the Massively Multiplayer games have followed that suit. But there's something missing in the Worldliness of it all, and the "massively" part of it highlights that effect through the other aspects like economies and social glues of other flavors.
Once upon a time....
feh UO is not even 2nd gen, before all that had muds, then you get meridian who was pretty much the first MMO with graphics, then you can say UO came, even though in his launch year it was considerated a failure and then they make U9 just to make sure to kill the ultima game on SP
Thanks.
Can you take your 3D Virtual Girlfriend to the Inn or the Hotel and tuck her into bed in a Moba or a BR?
In fact, their sales numbers shocked everyone.
They were projected to sell about 20,000 copies lifetime.
They had 260,000 (at least) subs by year 2.
They had also lost a lot because of the PKing, Richard Garriott claims they were the first to sell 1 million copies.
The reason most people consider UO to be 1st Generation is because it was the first truly massive MMO.
UO had 10,000 accounts per server. Meridian had, what, 100-200?
Meridian had sold less than 15,000 copies by june, 1999. And they shut down about a year later, before going open source and someone else started it back up after some added development.
It was UO that kicked the MMORPG scene into gear. EQ (and AC to a lesser extent) added gears, although that may have been because of UO's bleeding from PKing.
And WoW brought the MMO scene into it's prominence.
But all that's why UO has been considered 1st Gen.
Once upon a time....