Well as you can see... everyone can fuck up everything.
There are two IP that should not have failed in the mmo world but did and thats dungeons and dragons and star wars.
People have evolves past pen and paper, and if people cant turn something on paper into an exciting 3d world then it cant possibly be superior to all other MMORPGs.
Quotations Those Who make peaceful resolutions impossible, make violent resolutions inevitable. John F. Kennedy
Life... is the shit that happens while you wait for moments that never come - Lester Freeman
Lie to no one. If there 's somebody close to you, you'll ruin it with a lie. If they're a stranger, who the fuck are they you gotta lie to them? - Willy Nelson
True. And in business, often the goal is NOT to maximize profit, but to hit a certain target for sure instead. In this model, catering to the KNOWN masses is a good strategy.
That's only true as far as the immediate future, but overall the MMO industry is being very short sighted. As we can see here, most people will join a game, play a couple months, grind to level 70, get bored and move on. There's no impetus to stay with a game for the long term because it's all achievement based. There's nothing about any one particular game that makes people call it "home". You have a generally consistent number of players that just move from one game to the next to the next without any "brand loyalty". That's not a good business strategy, it's just putting off the inevitable crash of the entire industry when everyone runs out of games to switch to.
True. And in business, often the goal is NOT to maximize profit, but to hit a certain target for sure instead. In this model, catering to the KNOWN masses is a good strategy.
That's only true as far as the immediate future, but overall the MMO industry is being very short sighted. As we can see here, most people will join a game, play a couple months, grind to level 70, get bored and move on. There's no impetus to stay with a game for the long term because it's all achievement based. There's nothing about any one particular game that makes people call it "home". You have a generally consistent number of players that just move from one game to the next to the next without any "brand loyalty". That's not a good business strategy, it's just putting off the inevitable crash of the entire industry when everyone runs out of games to switch to.
Aaahh but the producers, or who ever is calling the shots, is pretty much sure that they are going to get a certain return on their investment. Hence they stick to the model or recipe. They do not want to risk their money on a game or idea that has more chance to bomb out.
I agree with what has been said above.
I would love a Fantasy Sandbox game where I can create a place for me (or my Avatar). None of this look who has the highest level or biggest sword. Clever game play over UBER character. MMO's have become the ultimate in min-maxing.
True. And in business, often the goal is NOT to maximize profit, but to hit a certain target for sure instead. In this model, catering to the KNOWN masses is a good strategy.
That's only true as far as the immediate future, but overall the MMO industry is being very short sighted. As we can see here, most people will join a game, play a couple months, grind to level 70, get bored and move on. There's no impetus to stay with a game for the long term because it's all achievement based. There's nothing about any one particular game that makes people call it "home". You have a generally consistent number of players that just move from one game to the next to the next without any "brand loyalty". That's not a good business strategy, it's just putting off the inevitable crash of the entire industry when everyone runs out of games to switch to.
That you are wrong. It is a GREAT business strategy. A single player game, often costing $10-15M to make (AAA 360 title, for example), sells for $60 (per person).
An AAA MMORPG, say costs $50M to make, assuming people stay for 6 months, gets $40 + $15 * 6 = $130 for a player. Even if you add in the server/support costs (which is much lower than the development costs), it still makes out much better than a SP game ROI given the same number of players. Thus, MMORPGs can survive on much LOWER player numbers than SP games.
There is really no need to "milk" a player for more than 6-12 months. It is better to develop new games and hook them again. It is certainly a viable strategy to keep chunking out new games for people to play for 6-12 months.
It is particularly true when the masses of players are aimed at consuming content. Don't think of MMORPGs as worlds. They are not. And true worlds may not be that entertaining anyway. Think of them as a platform to deliver content.
There are two IP that should not have failed in the mmo world but did and thats dungeons and dragons and star wars.
Unlike SWG, DDO is doing extremely well again actually. It's a VERY different game than most of the MMO's on the market, and pretty true to the PnP experience, IMO.
An AAA MMORPG, say costs $50M to make, assuming people stay for 6 months, gets $40 + $15 * 6 = $130 for a player. Even if you add in the server/support costs (which is much lower than the development costs), it still makes out much better than a SP game ROI given the same number of players. Thus, MMORPGs can survive on much LOWER player numbers than SP games.
But that's where you're wrong. A standalone game has development costs once, the initial investment, then it's released and the developer incurs no more cost from the project. People buy it or do not buy it. An MMO has recurring costs every single month that they have to recoup. Server fees, bandwidth, continual content development, online GMs and staff, people to process the credit card payments, etc. They are continually adding to their costs and that has to be offset by lots and lots of people playing the game.
Let's assume that the game attracts 100 new players a month to keep the numbers easy to work with. Is it better that the game gain 100 players and lose 100 players to other games, keeping a constant playerbase, or is it better for the company if they gain 100 new players and only lose 10 players a month?
These games are great at getting new players, it's current player retention that really sucks and that's the whole point. If you're only breaking even on your playerbase every month, are you really succeeding and growing or are you just maintaining your costs?
But that's where you're wrong. A standalone game has development costs once, the initial investment, then it's released and the developer incurs no more cost from the project. People buy it or do not buy it. An MMO has recurring costs every single month that they have to recoup. Server fees, bandwidth, continual content development, online GMs and staff, people to process the credit card payments, etc. They are continually adding to their costs and that has to be offset by lots and lots of people playing the game.
Let's assume that the game attracts 100 new players a month to keep the numbers easy to work with. Is it better that the game gain 100 players and lose 100 players to other games, keeping a constant playerbase, or is it better for the company if they gain 100 new players and only lose 10 players a month? These games are great at getting new players, it's current player retention that really sucks and that's the whole point. If you're only breaking even on your playerbase every month, are you really succeeding and growing or are you just maintaining your costs?
Exactly correct. It is all about Player Liquidity. You need to retain players and get more players in each month than leave. Then you are successful. The trick is to use the growth phase ( or the period just after that game is released) to make up the money lost during development and server purchase. Once you hit more mature phase then it is player numbers. Once they go bleow a critical point of people on the servers the game tends to die.
I still believe, in my old age, that sandbox is the way to go. EvE is still going strong and whether you like the game or not it is one of the longer standing titles and has a solid growing player base. The game is not linear and does not have an ending. There are the usual troubles that come with MMO's but being sandbox it is closer to a PnP game...........true that few people RP but that may be more down to the being in space aspect.
I still believe, in my old age, that sandbox is the way to go. EvE is still going strong and whether you like the game or not it is one of the longer standing titles and has a solid growing player base. The game is not linear and does not have an ending. There are the usual troubles that come with MMO's but being sandbox it is closer to a PnP game...........true that few people RP but that may be more down to the being in space aspect.
Certainly sandbox is the best way to go, it's the only real way to give your players a choice in what they want to do. EVE's problem is that there effectively are no characters, you're really just playing a ship. There's no way to get off the ship and interact with other characters, thus it is really impossible to roleplay effectively on EVE.
Certainly sandbox is the best way to go, it's the only real way to give your players a choice in what they want to do. EVE's problem is that there effectively are no characters, you're really just playing a ship. There's no way to get off the ship and interact with other characters, thus it is really impossible to roleplay effectively on EVE.
Agreed. We need some of the fantasy MMO's to step into the sandbox arena and improve the "crafting" from collecting to crafting. :P
I agree with the OP. But you missed one thing: When playing D&D, you're actually building social bonds with REAL PEOPLE while you play. My best friends today are buddies I played D&D with over 15 years ago. They're also some of the smartest people I know and are capable of great conversations.
- Phos
AAH! A troll fire! Quick, pour some Kool-Aid on it!!!
Dungeons and Dragons was great, but I'm not sure I would rate is superior to the best in the MMORPG genre. The problem with Dungeons and Dragons is:
1) You needed to seek out other players
2) Everyone needed to sync their time
3) Someone needed to take the effort to "be the computer" (i.e., the referee or games master)
4) Rules misinterpretations and arguments were rampant
5) Character death was character death. Rezzes were rare and usually if your character died, you had to reroll
While some of the best gaming I had was with D&D (one memorable all-night gaming adventure in Tegel Manor. Wow), I can probaby say that all my time playing D&D adds up to a week or two of round-the-clock gameplay.
The above listed problems (i.e., finding folks to play, syncing up our schedules, etc...) made playing time a scarcity. But with a MMORPG, I can sit down at 3 A.M., logon and game if I like.
Pnp was fun when you where 12 but mmorpg games imo is much more immersive cant see that well cant persuade uou either.
I don't know about that. If you had some friends who shared your likeness for D&D P&P then it can still be fun.
You just need to have an imagination [something that is sadly being neglected of late it seems].
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
The reason why you "think" pen & paper are superior to your average MMO of today, is because developers sucks. Plain and simple. If they would take advantage of every possible game mechanics an online persistant world can offer, you would have a different perspective.
In the end, it all comes down to what you said about "imagination is your limit". If you have a bad GM playing DnD, your adventure will suck. If you have a bad game designer designing a MMO, your MMO will suck. Once we see those unimaginative dinosaur developers getting out of business, maybe those with the money will realize that they should support those with true originality. The MMO genre will then shine like pen & paper did. (and still does)
But we need people who creates games for the true reasons first, and like any other art, money shouldn't be the first consideration. I'm pretty sure the best PnP stories haven't make it to the market, because people who did them didn't care to make a bucks with them. And i really don't get why developers are so afraid or taking those so called "risk" of doing something different. In reality, all they are saying is "we don't have the stuff to create something really original, so we must rely on the standard cookie cutter crap in order to survive." A true good original game can't sink if it's done well. The community will give it the attention it deserves.
So stop being afraid, and start producing our dream games already. You don't know how? Just think at those days when you we're being "creative" instead of sick-a-fentic player money suckers.
Creativity : The ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods or interpretations; using originality, progressiveness, or imagination.
An AAA MMORPG, say costs $50M to make, assuming people stay for 6 months, gets $40 + $15 * 6 = $130 for a player. Even if you add in the server/support costs (which is much lower than the development costs), it still makes out much better than a SP game ROI given the same number of players. Thus, MMORPGs can survive on much LOWER player numbers than SP games.
But that's where you're wrong. A standalone game has development costs once, the initial investment, then it's released and the developer incurs no more cost from the project. People buy it or do not buy it. An MMO has recurring costs every single month that they have to recoup. Server fees, bandwidth, continual content development, online GMs and staff, people to process the credit card payments, etc. They are continually adding to their costs and that has to be offset by lots and lots of people playing the game.
Let's assume that the game attracts 100 new players a month to keep the numbers easy to work with. Is it better that the game gain 100 players and lose 100 players to other games, keeping a constant playerbase, or is it better for the company if they gain 100 new players and only lose 10 players a month?
These games are great at getting new players, it's current player retention that really sucks and that's the whole point. If you're only breaking even on your playerbase every month, are you really succeeding and growing or are you just maintaining your costs?
Nope ...
There are two types of ongoing costs. The first is bandwidth and maintenance. That is TRIVIAL compared to the money you are bringing in. Out of the $15 a player is playing WOW, a very very small portion goes to that. Support is a bit more but not much. Blizzard has about 2500 people doing support. That is roughly $10M a month ($4k salary each, which I think is a high estimate). That is less than 10% of their monthly subscription take.
That leaves us to the adding content & expansion development. However, that is development costs, not ongoing upkeep costs. If you develop a new expansion and get people to play another 6 months, you recup your investment many times over.
And new people comes in all the time. The key is that you don't need EVERY player to stay forever. That is not a substainable model. But they don't have to. If you have 1M customers, each staying just 6 months and you run the game for 2 years total, you come out ahead and makes tones of money
1M * ($40 box game + 90 for six months) you get $130M .. 10% (or even less if u have worse support) is upkeep & maintaance .. you have $107M left. The development costs is ~ $50M .. you still make a 100% ROI on your investment. Long term subscribers obviously are DESIRED but NOT a must.
Its simple, MMORPGs online developed to be popular because people for whatever reason don't want to play PnP games or can't for personal reasons commit the time to such a hobby.
They are more popular because they are more convient and more accessable and offer an experience that can be accessed at a moments notice and ended just a quickly.
Its just a branch of the same tree which has grown because of the advantages it offers.
I'm not saying its better or worse its different and has a place. Its a personal choice.
Its simple, MMORPGs online developed to be popular because people for whatever reason don't want to play PnP games or can't for personal reasons commit the time to such a hobby.
It's more a matter of the MMO market appealing mostly to people who have never and would never engage in a PnP game. There's little similarity between an MMO and a PnP game, one requires actual interaction and game immersion, the other is a video game where you're just moving a character around on the screen, just like playing Mario Bros. The fact that MMORPG has "RPG" in the title doesn't mean that it has anything to do with actual roleplaying.
<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Seen_Justice</i> <br><b><p>I must disagree with the OP here.</p> <p>The reason why you "think" pen & paper are superior to your average MMO of today, is because developers sucks. Plain and simple. If they would take advantage of every possible game mechanics an online persistant world can offer, you would have a different perspective.</p> </b></blockquote> <br>
Well, MMOs can't be superior if the medium allows them to be superior but the creative teams fail to make them superior.
Your point is still made, of course, but then again look at what Magic: The Gathering brought to card games. Wizard keeps trying to merge PnP DnD with Magic cards, and, who knows, maybe they'll eventually get it right.
Nope. PnP is based on imagination of the DM + a few players. MMO is the result of imagination of a large team of dedicated developers. I will pick a large Blizzard team laboring years over one DM spending one afternoon setting up an adventure any time any day.
Good for you. I won't. In fact, I much prefer a GM who creates a game for a particular group of players, balancing it for their strengths and weaknesses, making sure it's interesting to the people who will be playing through it over a group of impersonal programmers who are trying to make a generic setting that is likely to appeal to a large number of people.
Comments
Well as you can see... everyone can fuck up everything.
There are two IP that should not have failed in the mmo world but did and thats dungeons and dragons and star wars.
People have evolves past pen and paper, and if people cant turn something on paper into an exciting 3d world then it cant possibly be superior to all other MMORPGs.
Quotations Those Who make peaceful resolutions impossible, make violent resolutions inevitable. John F. Kennedy
Life... is the shit that happens while you wait for moments that never come - Lester Freeman
Lie to no one. If there 's somebody close to you, you'll ruin it with a lie. If they're a stranger, who the fuck are they you gotta lie to them? - Willy Nelson
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
That's only true as far as the immediate future, but overall the MMO industry is being very short sighted. As we can see here, most people will join a game, play a couple months, grind to level 70, get bored and move on. There's no impetus to stay with a game for the long term because it's all achievement based. There's nothing about any one particular game that makes people call it "home". You have a generally consistent number of players that just move from one game to the next to the next without any "brand loyalty".
That's not a good business strategy, it's just putting off the inevitable crash of the entire industry when everyone runs out of games to switch to.
Aaahh but the producers, or who ever is calling the shots, is pretty much sure that they are going to get a certain return on their investment. Hence they stick to the model or recipe. They do not want to risk their money on a game or idea that has more chance to bomb out.
I agree with what has been said above.
I would love a Fantasy Sandbox game where I can create a place for me (or my Avatar). None of this look who has the highest level or biggest sword. Clever game play over UBER character. MMO's have become the ultimate in min-maxing.
That's only true as far as the immediate future, but overall the MMO industry is being very short sighted. As we can see here, most people will join a game, play a couple months, grind to level 70, get bored and move on. There's no impetus to stay with a game for the long term because it's all achievement based. There's nothing about any one particular game that makes people call it "home". You have a generally consistent number of players that just move from one game to the next to the next without any "brand loyalty".
That's not a good business strategy, it's just putting off the inevitable crash of the entire industry when everyone runs out of games to switch to.
That you are wrong. It is a GREAT business strategy. A single player game, often costing $10-15M to make (AAA 360 title, for example), sells for $60 (per person).
An AAA MMORPG, say costs $50M to make, assuming people stay for 6 months, gets $40 + $15 * 6 = $130 for a player. Even if you add in the server/support costs (which is much lower than the development costs), it still makes out much better than a SP game ROI given the same number of players. Thus, MMORPGs can survive on much LOWER player numbers than SP games.
There is really no need to "milk" a player for more than 6-12 months. It is better to develop new games and hook them again. It is certainly a viable strategy to keep chunking out new games for people to play for 6-12 months.
It is particularly true when the masses of players are aimed at consuming content. Don't think of MMORPGs as worlds. They are not. And true worlds may not be that entertaining anyway. Think of them as a platform to deliver content.
Unlike SWG, DDO is doing extremely well again actually. It's a VERY different game than most of the MMO's on the market, and pretty true to the PnP experience, IMO.
Let's assume that the game attracts 100 new players a month to keep the numbers easy to work with. Is it better that the game gain 100 players and lose 100 players to other games, keeping a constant playerbase, or is it better for the company if they gain 100 new players and only lose 10 players a month?
These games are great at getting new players, it's current player retention that really sucks and that's the whole point. If you're only breaking even on your playerbase every month, are you really succeeding and growing or are you just maintaining your costs?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I still believe, in my old age, that sandbox is the way to go. EvE is still going strong and whether you like the game or not it is one of the longer standing titles and has a solid growing player base. The game is not linear and does not have an ending. There are the usual troubles that come with MMO's but being sandbox it is closer to a PnP game...........true that few people RP but that may be more down to the being in space aspect.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Agreed. We need some of the fantasy MMO's to step into the sandbox arena and improve the "crafting" from collecting to crafting. :P
I agree with the OP. But you missed one thing: When playing D&D, you're actually building social bonds with REAL PEOPLE while you play. My best friends today are buddies I played D&D with over 15 years ago. They're also some of the smartest people I know and are capable of great conversations.
- Phos
Pnp was fun when you where 12 but mmorpg games imo is much more immersive cant see that well cant persuade uou either.
-Semper ubi sub ubi!
always wear underwear
social bond is a great point
I still get together with same 5 friends from highshcool , *25 years later*
3 or 4 times a year to play a homebrewed version of D&D
EQ2 fan sites
Dungeons and Dragons was great, but I'm not sure I would rate is superior to the best in the MMORPG genre. The problem with Dungeons and Dragons is:
1) You needed to seek out other players
2) Everyone needed to sync their time
3) Someone needed to take the effort to "be the computer" (i.e., the referee or games master)
4) Rules misinterpretations and arguments were rampant
5) Character death was character death. Rezzes were rare and usually if your character died, you had to reroll
While some of the best gaming I had was with D&D (one memorable all-night gaming adventure in Tegel Manor. Wow), I can probaby say that all my time playing D&D adds up to a week or two of round-the-clock gameplay.
The above listed problems (i.e., finding folks to play, syncing up our schedules, etc...) made playing time a scarcity. But with a MMORPG, I can sit down at 3 A.M., logon and game if I like.
You just need to have an imagination [something that is sadly being neglected of late it seems].
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I must disagree with the OP here.
The reason why you "think" pen & paper are superior to your average MMO of today, is because developers sucks. Plain and simple. If they would take advantage of every possible game mechanics an online persistant world can offer, you would have a different perspective.
In the end, it all comes down to what you said about "imagination is your limit". If you have a bad GM playing DnD, your adventure will suck. If you have a bad game designer designing a MMO, your MMO will suck. Once we see those unimaginative dinosaur developers getting out of business, maybe those with the money will realize that they should support those with true originality. The MMO genre will then shine like pen & paper did. (and still does)
But we need people who creates games for the true reasons first, and like any other art, money shouldn't be the first consideration. I'm pretty sure the best PnP stories haven't make it to the market, because people who did them didn't care to make a bucks with them. And i really don't get why developers are so afraid or taking those so called "risk" of doing something different. In reality, all they are saying is "we don't have the stuff to create something really original, so we must rely on the standard cookie cutter crap in order to survive." A true good original game can't sink if it's done well. The community will give it the attention it deserves.
So stop being afraid, and start producing our dream games already. You don't know how? Just think at those days when you we're being "creative" instead of sick-a-fentic player money suckers.
Creativity : The ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods or interpretations; using originality, progressiveness, or imagination.
Let's assume that the game attracts 100 new players a month to keep the numbers easy to work with. Is it better that the game gain 100 players and lose 100 players to other games, keeping a constant playerbase, or is it better for the company if they gain 100 new players and only lose 10 players a month?
These games are great at getting new players, it's current player retention that really sucks and that's the whole point. If you're only breaking even on your playerbase every month, are you really succeeding and growing or are you just maintaining your costs?
Nope ...
There are two types of ongoing costs. The first is bandwidth and maintenance. That is TRIVIAL compared to the money you are bringing in. Out of the $15 a player is playing WOW, a very very small portion goes to that. Support is a bit more but not much. Blizzard has about 2500 people doing support. That is roughly $10M a month ($4k salary each, which I think is a high estimate). That is less than 10% of their monthly subscription take.
That leaves us to the adding content & expansion development. However, that is development costs, not ongoing upkeep costs. If you develop a new expansion and get people to play another 6 months, you recup your investment many times over.
And new people comes in all the time. The key is that you don't need EVERY player to stay forever. That is not a substainable model. But they don't have to. If you have 1M customers, each staying just 6 months and you run the game for 2 years total, you come out ahead and makes tones of money
1M * ($40 box game + 90 for six months) you get $130M .. 10% (or even less if u have worse support) is upkeep & maintaance .. you have $107M left. The development costs is ~ $50M .. you still make a 100% ROI on your investment. Long term subscribers obviously are DESIRED but NOT a must.
Its simple, MMORPGs online developed to be popular because people for whatever reason don't want to play PnP games or can't for personal reasons commit the time to such a hobby.
They are more popular because they are more convient and more accessable and offer an experience that can be accessed at a moments notice and ended just a quickly.
Its just a branch of the same tree which has grown because of the advantages it offers.
I'm not saying its better or worse its different and has a place. Its a personal choice.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
It's more a matter of the MMO market appealing mostly to people who have never and would never engage in a PnP game. There's little similarity between an MMO and a PnP game, one requires actual interaction and game immersion, the other is a video game where you're just moving a character around on the screen, just like playing Mario Bros. The fact that MMORPG has "RPG" in the title doesn't mean that it has anything to do with actual roleplaying.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
<blockquote><i>Originally posted by Seen_Justice</i>
<br><b><p>I must disagree with the OP here.</p>
<p>The reason why you "think" pen & paper are superior to your average MMO of today, is because developers sucks. Plain and simple. If they would take advantage of every possible game mechanics an online persistant world can offer, you would have a different perspective.</p>
</b></blockquote>
<br>
Well, MMOs can't be superior if the medium allows them to be superior but the creative teams fail to make them superior.
Your point is still made, of course, but then again look at what Magic: The Gathering brought to card games. Wizard keeps trying to merge PnP DnD with Magic cards, and, who knows, maybe they'll eventually get it right.
because DnD is a legen..that' it!..hihi
I'm playing WYD Global ^_^
MMO's are not at all immersive, one uses imagination (P&P), the other restricts imagination to the lowest common denominator (MMO's).
some of the MMO's idea came from DnD
MMO's are not at all immersive, one uses imagination (P&P), the other restricts imagination to the lowest common denominator (MMO's).
Nope. PnP is based on imagination of the DM + a few players. MMO is the result of imagination of a large team of dedicated developers.
I will pick a large Blizzard team laboring years over one DM spending one afternoon setting up an adventure any time any day.
I can't imagine anything more boring than that.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None