What a fantastic post. Usually the MMORPG.com boards give me a headache but this OP was excellent. Great job, man. You summed up the feelings of a huge chunk of the MMORPGer population.
I first got into MMOs with Anarchy Online and it was okay. Then I moved over to SWG and was in love. Until the CU that is. Ever since that day in April of 2005 I haven't been happy, content, or even really interested in a single MMO I've come across.
Terrible shame that such shit products sell so well. I don't think you can blame developers though. It's the consumer that pays their bills and determines what is or isn't successful.
So far consumers have liked some pretty terrible MMORPGs.
I agree. I don't even have time to play MMOs all that often so I'm usually behind the curve in terms of character development but even then I can live with pvp, open worlds, and harsher death penalties. Full looting is even fine when you take away green, blue, purple, etc colored items and replace them with very mundane weaponry.
Good luck with UO. I tried it out once before and as great as even the classic version is I just can't get into it. I need something new. Something where I don't feel like a zombie grinding my life away.
Can I just say a quick word here about game sales. I think companies have a distinct advantage when it comes to the sales of their games because, unless you've beta tested it, most people have little or no clue about how it's going to play. And since everyone is looking for a great game to fill the void of the last game they left, they are willing to give it a try whether it's good or not.
That was the case with in every game I've played since EQ. I played EQ for 2 years and finally got bored with it. I immediately began to look forward to the next great MMO. Since that was my first, I figured they would continue to improve. They would keep adding more content, more options and the graphics would just keep getting better. Well the graphics did get better, but that was about the only thing that improved.
At the time I quit playing EQ, EQ II was well in development. Most single player games I played got better with each version. It was only natural to assume that MMOs would be the same way. 2 would be better than 1. Boy was I wrong about that. So I gave up on EQ II and was so let down that I didn't even bother with WoW.
As a result, the void never got filled. I waited for the next game and was disappointed by that one. And then the next game and that was disappointing as well. By the time AoC came out, I had very low expectations for that game, but since there was nothing else on the horizen, decided to give it a try. Sure enough, it turned out to be poor.
So if there are a lot of people out there like me who are hungry for a game that gives them exactly what they want, companies are going to continue to get decent sales numbers upon the release of their games. It's how long those numbers last that will better tell how good it is.
WoW? I can't explain why WoW's numbers are so high and stay that way other than it being the first MMO for so many people. And being the first, that is their impression of what MMOs are supposed to be like and so are not as disappointed as those of us who have more experience with them. Also, in fairness to Blizzard, it did do some things extremely well, like make a relatively bug free game and also make a game that doesn't require high specs. So that probably compensates for the mediocre gameplay.
Boy, I thought this was going to be a quick word. Guess I was wrong there.
Can I just say a quick word here about game sales. I think companies have a distinct advantage when it comes to the sales of their games because, unless you've beta tested it, most people have little or no clue about how it's going to play. And since everyone is looking for a great game to fill the void of the last game they left, they are willing to give it a try whether it's good or not. That was the case with in every game I've played since EQ. I played EQ for 2 years and finally got bored with it. I immediately began to look forward to the next great MMO. Since that was my first, I figured they would continue to improve. They would keep adding more content, more options and the graphics would just keep getting better. Well the graphics did get better, but that was about the only thing that improved. At the time I quit playing EQ, EQ II was well in development. Most single player games I played got better with each version. It was only natural to assume that MMOs would be the same way. 2 would be better than 1. Boy was I wrong about that. So I gave up on EQ II and was so let down that I didn't even bother with WoW. As a result, the void never got filled. I waited for the next game and was disappointed by that one. And then the next game and that was disappointing as well. By the time AoC came out, I had very low expectations for that game, but since there was nothing else on the horizen, decided to give it a try. Sure enough, it turned out to be poor. So if there are a lot of people out there like me who are hungry for a game that gives them exactly what they want, companies are going to continue to get decent sales numbers upon the release of their games. It's how long those numbers last that will better tell how good it is. WoW? I can't explain why WoW's numbers are so high and stay that way other than it being the first MMO for so many people. And being the first, that is their impression of what MMOs are supposed to be like and so are not as disappointed as those of us who have more experience with them. Also, in fairness to Blizzard, it did do some things extremely well, like make a relatively bug free game and also make a game that doesn't require high specs. So that probably compensates for the mediocre gameplay. Boy, I thought this was going to be a quick word. Guess I was wrong there.
I can help you understand this a bit better. EVERY MMO offers mediocre gameplay. To try and metaphor this....
If all restaurants cooked the same dish, you'd choose the one with the shortest drive and best seats. WoW is just that, the easiest MMO to get to (Low Reqs) and has the best seats (fluid UI with easily the most user-friendly functionality every produced). Blizzard didn't change the dish, they just made everything else better. This formula shouldn't surprise you, as its the same principle they have applied to EVERY game they make.
The RTS games were, after all, the same dish as well...simply served in a setting that was much more appealing to its customer. Hell, the most innovative GAMEPLAY they have actually done was with the Diablo series. Realistically, they still didn't invent the hack n' slash. They just, essentially, invented the fully randomized dungeon. I'm not even completely sure about THAT. I think some sega RPG's actually did it first...but I can't remember.
You know what, I take that back. The actual gameplay was still borrowed from other games. The combat was fairly borrowed from the "legend of -" games and everything else was, basically, UI changes to make it easier and faster for the user to work with. Blizzard have long been kings of taking the wheel already invented, and placing it effectively on a bicycle that is much easier to use than everyone else's B.C. "spoke" to ride on.
Aside from the love of full-on, full loot, FFA PvP; I agree with what the OP said. I personally think that pre-Trammel style PvP is not necessary for a sandbox. In fact, I think it is the #1 reason why nobody seems to want to touch sandbox. It's hard to justify why new players two weeks out of the box need to get ganked, robbed, and /defecated on for sandbox to work. I do, however, think that PvP these days doesn't give PvP players what they want. I always liked the pre-CU SWG way of handling PvP: you could go around as a card-carrying member of a faction for full PvP, or you could go "incognito," and be safe as long as you don't blow your cover by shooting at members and NPCs of the opposite faction. It made sense in a Star Wars universe to do it that way. It might make less sense in a fantasy MMO (hard to play a "covert ork" when your skin is green).
This is why I'd love to see more MMOs designed to accomodate different rule sets. Why not have a PvE server and a Faction vs Faction PvP server and a FFA server? A sandbox style MMO with all of these servers would make many of us happy...
Yes yes, I agree with some of the points stated above, but not all of them.
First of all, I would like to ask you a question: "Have you ever made an MMO before?"
-Assuming you haven't (which is 99.99% true) I can boldly state this: It's not a walk in the park to make a SANDBOX MMO.
Seccondly, you know why UO was a sandbox? Hello? Graphics!! Yes, graphics, that's the answer...And i'm sure that the 1/3 of the MMO population currently on WoW will agree with you in that they want cheezy graphics over a non-sandbox game...(Sarcasm)
Thirdly, these MMOs that are comming out now are pretty much prototypes, have you seen the ones that are currently being made? Phew, those will be the big ones!
Oh and by the way, by the time those are released, I will be old enough to be a game devoloper myself. And then the next gen MMOs will come out then.
So I get what your saying, but I would like to see you try and make a Sandbox MMO with graphics like Age of Conan. I know they said it would be, but they also said that if it was, they would degrade the graphics greatly. Which is sorta silly saying Amazing Graphics over Quality, but I enjoy the Conan graphics, and I will for a while.
So yes, I respect your opinion on how you want your MMO, but I would not like to think of this as a Devolution, but a Change. Because Evolution is a rash concept. So your title will be well fit as "From UO to AoC: The Change of the MMORPG.
Other than the FFA PVP i agree with everything you said. My best friend and his brother play UO and I can remember watching for hours as they would do whatever they pleased in that game. I never purchased it but I did purchase Asherons call and played it for close to 5 years. I loved that I had a choice in making my character and doing what I wanted in the game. I could choose to lvl in one of the hundreds of dungeons spread out all over the world and I might have to compete with someone for the monsters or not, but either way it was exciting.
I played other's DAoc, SWG, EQ2, but none kept me for as long as Asherons call did. I picked up wow about 6 months after its release because my two best friends were playing it. I enjoyed wow for the 2.5 years I played it but it always felt empty to me. It was fun no matter what but I always felt when I logged in if I wasnt lvling another character to max lvl then I had two options, raid or pvp. Raiding as we all know takes hours and hours and pvp while fun in some mmo's just isnt the best in class/gear games such as WOW. I recently left wow after my guild broke up and my rl friends quit playing, it was sad to me that they were all that was holding me in game. I realised over the last few months I had logged on soley to raid and that was it, id log in, raid, and log off. Not what I think an mmo should be about.
I have been playing Lotro for a few months now and some say it is just a wow clone. I agree in some respects but I think they are doing some great things with Lotro and there are alot more rpg options in it than wow ever had in it. I do hate the class game play, I dont mind lvling as long as I can get alot of customization options(AC). Im enjoying Lotro while im waiting for a sand box game to delve into.
I agree that most people now days have only ever played wow as there mmo experience. I recently converted a cop buddy of mine over to Lotro from wow, which was his only experience with mmo's. I had always told him, while wow was fun it was actually a very empty game and I dont think he realized it until logging into Lotro and playing a few hours. I know its not as in depth as some but it is much more in depth than wow. The funny part is he immediatly cancelled his wow account with numerous raiding 70's and has played Lotro non stop since. I found great joy and kinda showing him the light about mmo's that they arent just about raiding, and daily quests that they can be about just sitting in a town and chatting with complete strangers about nothing at all.
Sorry for the long rant I started typing and things just kept coming. I wanted to leave with this wow forum post link because I think it illustrates a good point over all about new mmo's.
I guess it's the same with every post on these boards, but yes, your thread title is very subjective. By no means is AoC some radical step in MMO's but it's definitely not a "Devolution". You are not going to see a game like UO by a well known game company until someone else proves it can be as successful as WoW.
I think the reason MMOs have taken the route the OP is talking about is because once the genre got popular the majority of the player base was heavily more casual players than hardcore players. UO and EQ required a crazy amount of gametime to achieve anything and that doesnt appeal to the casual player. the devs are aiming at the majority of the player base. cant say i dont blame em. I myself have become a much more casual player over the years so games like AOC work for me. I guess it is what it is. I would love a more open ended MMO but if it requires endless hours upon hours to achieve some of the more basic goals I simply wouldnt have the time to do it
The sandbox is dead because the players that lived in it chose to make the game miserable. I hate the EQ style, but it at least gave new players a game they could actually play. FFA-Full Loot games do not, and thus will never again work to the degree we wish it would.
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
The sandbox is dead because the players that lived in it chose to make the game miserable. I hate the EQ style, but it at least gave new players a game they could actually play. FFA-Full Loot games do not, and thus will never again work to the degree we wish it would.
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
I support this post, to speak like a politician.
Especially: "In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days."
These guys that bitch and moan about every single MMO to come to light will not be happy with anything short of heaven on the PC, and they will most likely bitch about that too.
I guess I'm wasting my breath... or energy? But you guys, that complain about every single MMO, seriously, maybe it's time to look for something else you find enjoyable in life, becuase it's obviously not MMOs anymore.
The sandbox is dead because the players that lived in it chose to make the game miserable. I hate the EQ style, but it at least gave new players a game they could actually play. FFA-Full Loot games do not, and thus will never again work to the degree we wish it would.
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
Thank you Kurush for saying what needed to be said.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
I personally think that pre-Trammel style PvP is not necessary for a sandbox. In fact, I think it is the #1 reason why nobody seems to want to touch sandbox.
I really agree with you.
Sadly today (and in eyes of most fans) this two are fused together. Infact only other sandbox game worth mention is hardcore PVP game of war , EVE.
To make it even worse, all sandbox games planned along the way , look like hardcore PVP games - Shadowbane , Earthrise ....
It could easily be different - if those games were not based on "War thorn land in constant conflict"
A melting pot....
PVP that should be free , should also be governed by law , just like in real life ...
It could easily be different - if those games were not based on "War thorn land in constant conflict" A melting pot.... PVP that should be free , should also be governed by law , just like in real life ...
Just like Second Life and Entropia Universe you mean?
Originally posted by Lobotomist It could easily be different - if those games were not based on "War thorn land in constant conflict" A melting pot.... PVP that should be free , should also be governed by law , just like in real life ...
Just like Second Life and Entropia Universe you mean?
Well....no
Second life is not really a game.
More in lines that killing, and stealing is possible. But there is law enforcement system punishing and hunting down fugitives.
I agree to the OP, MMORPG should be open-ended not linearly.
MMO played (paid): AION DragonRaja Dungeons & Dragons Online Lineage Lineage 2 Tibia Ultima Online Warhammer Online World of Warcraft
MMO tried: Atlantica Online Darkfall Dead Frontier Dungeon Runners EverQuest Lord of the Rings Online Monster Hunter Frontier Online Ragnarok Online Requiem Runes of Magic Runescape The 4th Coming
Originally posted by i_own_u Seccondly, you know why UO was a sandbox? Hello? Graphics!! Yes, graphics, that's the answer...And i'm sure that the 1/3 of the MMO population currently on WoW will agree with you in that they want cheezy graphics over a non-sandbox game...
Sorry but that is utter crap. Ever heard of SWG? Any idea what the graphics is like in that game? Sandbox MMOS can be done with better (in the eye of the beholder, mind you) graphics then WoW. SWG even launched before WoW. Too bad the game died on nov 15, 2005 though. Dont blame graphics, blame lazy developers.
M M O S S I N C E |1998| P L A Y I N G F A L L E N E A R T H T I M E I N V E S T E D |uo|swg|wow|fe| B E T A T E S T E R |rz|tr|hgl|potbs|potc|gw|hz|wish|fe|wow|df|war|allods|cog|lu| w w w . c l o w n g u i l d . o r g
On September 25th, 1997, Ultima Online was released, giving birth to the modern age of MMORPGs. Anyone lucky enough to be sitting at their computer that day with a copy of UO in their hands got to experience one of the most interesting days in video game history. There were glitches, crashes, bugs, exploits, and unbearable lag in the path of anyone who dared log in to Origin's servers. But behind all the problems was a bold new game, filled with fresh ideas and a scope that no prior game could compare with. The world of Britannia was open to any who wanted to face its challenges. You could explore, craft, hunt, socialize, and die. With the success of Ultima Online, the future of the genre certainly looked bright. This was only the beginning. With time the genra would grow and mature, and soon there would be games that blew Ultima Online away, leaving it to only be remembered as the game that sparked the genra alive. Right?
Well, Maybe Not. I'm sitting here almost 11 years later looking at the account management page for Age of Conan. It's been out barely two weeks, and I'm about to cancel my subscription and head back to the world of Britannia. Not on an official server, but one that emulates the feel of the game as it was back in 1998. From the time I first entered Ultima Online up to the time I'm writing this, I have spent hours and hours playing every single MMORPG I could manage to provide time for. I've explored the worlds of Everquest, Asheron's Call 1 and 2, Final Fantasy XI, Anarchy, Eve and Shadowbane. I was there for the rise of Warcraft, the scams of Dark and Light, the patches that destroyed Star Wars: Galaxies, and the bot farming of Lineage II. I've seen it all. My list of cancelled subscriptions could stretch for miles. So why have I gone full circle back to the game I began with. What happened?
The problem as I see it began on March 16th, 1999, with the release of Everquest. Now don't get me wrong, I had a lot of fun playing Everquest. It was a good game for its time, but it was also the biggest factor in the destruction of the genre. Everquest provided players with a much less open-ended experience than that of Ultima. The game's mechanics were less complex, the choices a player could make were more restricted, and the gameplay was more structured. All this would have been fine except for the fact that Everquest made a lot more money than Ultima. They were both a commercial success, but Everquest was an absolute jackpot for the producers. Now any company looking to fund a new MMORPG had to face a depressing fact: The production companies were a lot more likely to provide money for an Everquest style game than an Ultima one.
So the years rolled on, and many new MMORPGs began to hit the market. I purchased game after game eagerly anticipating the successor to Ultima; a game that would take Ultima's core principals and extend them to create an even greater immersive experience. Asheron's Call showed some promiss with a seamless 3D world and an open ended PvP server called Darktide. Siege warfare and harsh PvP were anticipated from Shadowbane. Star Wars: Galaxies offered an open style economic system, and a skill structure similar to Ultima. There was hope in the air, but that hope would quickly transform into despair.
In April 2000, Ultima Online, in an attempt to inscrease subscription numbers, begins a series of steps to make Ultima a lot more like Everquest. The world is also doubled in size, but not by new content. Instead they jusy create a second instance of the existing land. PvP is ruined. A year later, Dark Age of Camelot and Anarchy Online are released. Camelot is almost an exact replica of Everquest, except that it adds an extremely static and close-ended team PvP system. It becomes a huge commercial success anyways. Anarchy offers a fresh new Sci-fi theme into the genre, but I sensed trouble on my first trip to the instanced dungeons. This was touted as a feature. It seemed to me to be a cheap way for the developers to create less content and stretch that to more players.
Soon enough, Everquest clones were being released every few months. Asheron's Call II, Final Fantasy XI, Everquest II, Lineage II, City of Heroes. There was no room left in the market for another game just like Everquest right? I thought so, and just when I was convinced of it, World of Warcraft came out, proving me to be as nieve as they come. I played Warcraft day and night and watched the list of servers grow beyond belief. This game was hugely popular, but at its core, it still remained just a highly polished copy of Everquest. Sure it looked different, but the gameplay was largely the same. I couldn't understand why anyone thought it was so good.
So what's wrong with all these games? Well nothing if you like them. But if you are like me and yearn for open- ended MMORPGs, then none of these new games will really do it for you. What happened to having a challenge? Games should actually penalize death. Death!... Death should be bad. There is no need for zones and instancing. Ultima and Asheron's call, two of the first MMOs, had seamless worlds. Why is the technology for it absent today? Crafting should be as much a part of the game as hunting. You should be able to loot players that you kill, and have them loot you. A MMORPG should offer a feeling of being immersed, which means being part of a living, breathing world. Today's MMOs feel more like single player games than they do their predecessors. How about a skill based system for once and does every single game need to have classes and levels?
Today's games are over designed. Everything is laid out for you from level one so you are never in a situation too hard or too easy. You are guided on a path where you are faced with no challenge and constant repition. I want to be scared in a dungeon. I want the fear of being Pkd, and I want the exhilaration of success when I finally make it through these challenges. I'm sick of the expected, and this is why I find myself on the Age of Conan account management page today, cancelling my subscription.
Age of Conan is a terrible game. It is the most banal experience I've had in years. It will outsell almost every other current MMORPG and turn the developers into millionaires. It offers no interesting ideas of its own and simply repeats the same old crap we've seen for years. I don't blame the developers though, because this is apparently what people want. This is what people buy and love to play. I didn't understand it years ago and I certainly don't understand it today. The MMORPG market, despite a few brave souls like Eve, is devoid of interesting ideas. The open-ended MMO is dead. It died a long time ago. The genre is in a sad state and will continue to be so until some developer is brave enough to try something new. Until then, I'll be hiding out in Britannia, circa 1998. Sorry for the rant.
I think the important part is your wrong. Yes just plain wrong. In your world everything has to be your way. theres no room for different play styles and any player that disagrees with you is obviously wrong, or stupid. This is of course is because you are too self absorbed to see there is room in the world for different opinions, different likes, and yes different play styles. Your first game was UO, much like a first love it will always be your first that you judge everything thing else against and you can't even start to understand your viewing it through rose colored lenses. In a way its sad you've become so inflexable so set in stone that you will miss out on new experiences, outlooks, and the happyness, and sadness they bring.
Simply put you hate because its not what you are comfortable with, it maybe too hard for you, or not hard enough, but in any case it is different and you dislike change because simply put you are old and set in your ways. You dislike change, and your view point is ridgedly set to the point no amount of facts will ever change it. Nothing will ever be your first again so you hold onto UO endlessly hoping for a new FIRST high that you will never get. Meanwhile life moves on without you weither for better or worse.
There is no "devolution" or distruction of the genre there are just changes that you don't like and don't want anyone else to like, as your opinion is all that matters to you. Sorry but the reality is your just unknown poster X23497. Your opinion is not truth, its not fact, its just your opinion, and many many many people disagree with you.
Taking the viewing angle of your original post, I think that you will never be satisfied with any MMO ever released, for a couple of reasons.
The main reason is that you have idolised the times you had in UO. The first MMO we play usually defines our expectations and needs for anything we play after that. Like the first love, impossible to forget and defining of what we are to expect from that point on.
There is a lot of nostalgia involved with the games of the past. Time tends to make us forget all the bad things and remember the good things. A month going back to UO will be enough to remind you the reason(s) that made you leave the game.
Regarding the thread title, I don't think that any evolution is present in the gender. In fact, it's more akin to time-jumps. You get one game with innovations, that then spawns imitators. Then you have your next innovation jump, which again is followed by more imitators. The last jump was done by WoW. I don't believe we have gone past the imitators phase, not yet.
As for MMOs and graphics, there is art and there is graphics engine. Those two need to complement each other. When one is bad or outdated, the other suffers. And when those two suffer, the immersion suffer. I sense a trend in these boards lately that suggests that a good MMO should have an outdated graphics engine. The people who say that, are still stuck with the imitators. Sometime, hopefully in the near future, we'll see a new innovator coming along.
The ONE thing I wish any new MMO could do that hasnt been able to do it yet is make me feel apart of the world regardless of my level. I had this feeling in AC for the first 5 or so years. I played it for nearly 7 solid and off and on since then (yes I still go back every 3-4 months now for a month or so). AC made me feel important regardless of what level I was. During there story arcs they made sure all level ranges (within reason) where involved in the story arc.
The greatest arc IMO was the BZ story. BZ (who I cant remember how to spell) was a big badass. Now sure, everyone knew that he would be taken down by the highest levels BUT they added in items that ONLY lower levels could obtain that the higher levels HAD to have. Not only did the dungeons have the item the higher levels needed to stop BA but they also had items that where usefull to you regardless of what level you are. BZ himself was Dev controlled. He didnt just walk around owning higher level players oh no......he would appear in a noob zone and wipe anyone that got in his way!
Its that feeling I miss the most. I havent had that feeling in any other MMO to date. Thats one reason I am such a huge supporter of WAR. Yes its going to have alot of the cookie cutter things you see in current MMO's but with every little thing you do regardless of your level I think this game will offer that feeling. Sure your max level guild mates may be having a blast capturing the last keep before a city siege, I will feel a sense of accomplishment knowing that I helped them get to that point even if I am still in the tier1 warzone.
I know we all have our likes and dislikes in an MMO but that is the feeling I am longing for in an MMO that I havent had since Asheron's Call.
The problem with MMOs are not necessarily the developers, rather the community. UO if you recall, I was there, was controlled by hordes of gankers. You couldn't safely set foot outside of a town without dying.
I recall spending all morning mining, only to have two guys come up to me, kill me and take all of my hours of work away. I remember a high level mage (strangely enough ran into him in EQ years later) who asked if I wanted some spells. I of course said yes, brought a friend along, he proceeded to kill both of us and take our house key. We lost everything.
The problem with UO was that someone who could spend 12+ hours a day in the game ruled the game. There were no punishments and no controls to prevent outright murder. A few people who had more time to spend in UO ended up ruining the experience for countless others. I'm quite sure it was fun for those taking, but those being killed ended up terminating their accounts and developers do not like that.
Secondly a focus on graphics has created issues with MMOs. Graphics trump game play for many players and developers feed this frenzy with pretty colors. Unfortunately this leads to instances and such in order to add more pretty colors but not increase lag.
So we as an MMO community have received what we asked for. Controlled worlds and pretty graphics. Don't blame the developers, blame yourselves.
Actually the thing about UO player justice is a big problem no game has yet managed to solve.
I think DAoC was the first one with a work around that opposing players could not talk with each other, so avoiding smack talking. This is an accepted feature these days in pvp games and I doubt it will leave soon.
Problem with Trammel was that the conversion was crap too. They expected at most 50% to move and were surprised when more than 80% moved. (I still claim for years that UO is not a pvp alone but also belongs to crafters and other social types)
I still agree with the poster that all following mmorpgs tried to be more games than their first counterparts which tried to be worlds. And I hope that some developers decide to go more for a world feeling where customers stay longer than just games feeling where people leave for the next better looking one.
I guess this http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1.html says it all. No need to use more words on this thread, so typcal for young frustrated adults on MMORPG.COM You know PAY to play, that's the holy grail of gaming. A lot think they can do it, very few are choosen. And Conan is certainly not one of them. How in the world anyone could compare Wow/TBC anno 2008 with any other MMORPG project outthere. MMORPG.COM users have lost ALL reality in game design, fun and polished game development. As for UO: ask its developper Lord British: he made a mess out of his own Tabula rasa MMORPG in 2007. And those who say that ALL elements of Wow anno 2008 were already present in UO are out of their minds. Auction houses anyone? Arenas anyone? Battlegrounds anyone? Its the same as saying every shooter brought nothing new to the genre since Space Invaders. So I only like space invaders and the rest is a copy. What are you all smoking I sometimes wonder....
Comments
What a fantastic post. Usually the MMORPG.com boards give me a headache but this OP was excellent. Great job, man. You summed up the feelings of a huge chunk of the MMORPGer population.
I first got into MMOs with Anarchy Online and it was okay. Then I moved over to SWG and was in love. Until the CU that is. Ever since that day in April of 2005 I haven't been happy, content, or even really interested in a single MMO I've come across.
Terrible shame that such shit products sell so well. I don't think you can blame developers though. It's the consumer that pays their bills and determines what is or isn't successful.
So far consumers have liked some pretty terrible MMORPGs.
I agree. I don't even have time to play MMOs all that often so I'm usually behind the curve in terms of character development but even then I can live with pvp, open worlds, and harsher death penalties. Full looting is even fine when you take away green, blue, purple, etc colored items and replace them with very mundane weaponry.
Good luck with UO. I tried it out once before and as great as even the classic version is I just can't get into it. I need something new. Something where I don't feel like a zombie grinding my life away.
Can I just say a quick word here about game sales. I think companies have a distinct advantage when it comes to the sales of their games because, unless you've beta tested it, most people have little or no clue about how it's going to play. And since everyone is looking for a great game to fill the void of the last game they left, they are willing to give it a try whether it's good or not.
That was the case with in every game I've played since EQ. I played EQ for 2 years and finally got bored with it. I immediately began to look forward to the next great MMO. Since that was my first, I figured they would continue to improve. They would keep adding more content, more options and the graphics would just keep getting better. Well the graphics did get better, but that was about the only thing that improved.
At the time I quit playing EQ, EQ II was well in development. Most single player games I played got better with each version. It was only natural to assume that MMOs would be the same way. 2 would be better than 1. Boy was I wrong about that. So I gave up on EQ II and was so let down that I didn't even bother with WoW.
As a result, the void never got filled. I waited for the next game and was disappointed by that one. And then the next game and that was disappointing as well. By the time AoC came out, I had very low expectations for that game, but since there was nothing else on the horizen, decided to give it a try. Sure enough, it turned out to be poor.
So if there are a lot of people out there like me who are hungry for a game that gives them exactly what they want, companies are going to continue to get decent sales numbers upon the release of their games. It's how long those numbers last that will better tell how good it is.
WoW? I can't explain why WoW's numbers are so high and stay that way other than it being the first MMO for so many people. And being the first, that is their impression of what MMOs are supposed to be like and so are not as disappointed as those of us who have more experience with them. Also, in fairness to Blizzard, it did do some things extremely well, like make a relatively bug free game and also make a game that doesn't require high specs. So that probably compensates for the mediocre gameplay.
Boy, I thought this was going to be a quick word. Guess I was wrong there.
I can help you understand this a bit better. EVERY MMO offers mediocre gameplay. To try and metaphor this....
If all restaurants cooked the same dish, you'd choose the one with the shortest drive and best seats. WoW is just that, the easiest MMO to get to (Low Reqs) and has the best seats (fluid UI with easily the most user-friendly functionality every produced). Blizzard didn't change the dish, they just made everything else better. This formula shouldn't surprise you, as its the same principle they have applied to EVERY game they make.
The RTS games were, after all, the same dish as well...simply served in a setting that was much more appealing to its customer. Hell, the most innovative GAMEPLAY they have actually done was with the Diablo series. Realistically, they still didn't invent the hack n' slash. They just, essentially, invented the fully randomized dungeon. I'm not even completely sure about THAT. I think some sega RPG's actually did it first...but I can't remember.
You know what, I take that back. The actual gameplay was still borrowed from other games. The combat was fairly borrowed from the "legend of -" games and everything else was, basically, UI changes to make it easier and faster for the user to work with. Blizzard have long been kings of taking the wheel already invented, and placing it effectively on a bicycle that is much easier to use than everyone else's B.C. "spoke" to ride on.
This is why I'd love to see more MMOs designed to accomodate different rule sets. Why not have a PvE server and a Faction vs Faction PvP server and a FFA server? A sandbox style MMO with all of these servers would make many of us happy...
Yes yes, I agree with some of the points stated above, but not all of them.
First of all, I would like to ask you a question: "Have you ever made an MMO before?"
-Assuming you haven't (which is 99.99% true) I can boldly state this: It's not a walk in the park to make a SANDBOX MMO.
Seccondly, you know why UO was a sandbox? Hello? Graphics!! Yes, graphics, that's the answer...And i'm sure that the 1/3 of the MMO population currently on WoW will agree with you in that they want cheezy graphics over a non-sandbox game...(Sarcasm)
Thirdly, these MMOs that are comming out now are pretty much prototypes, have you seen the ones that are currently being made? Phew, those will be the big ones!
Oh and by the way, by the time those are released, I will be old enough to be a game devoloper myself. And then the next gen MMOs will come out then.
So I get what your saying, but I would like to see you try and make a Sandbox MMO with graphics like Age of Conan. I know they said it would be, but they also said that if it was, they would degrade the graphics greatly. Which is sorta silly saying Amazing Graphics over Quality, but I enjoy the Conan graphics, and I will for a while.
So yes, I respect your opinion on how you want your MMO, but I would not like to think of this as a Devolution, but a Change. Because Evolution is a rash concept. So your title will be well fit as "From UO to AoC: The Change of the MMORPG.
Other than the FFA PVP i agree with everything you said. My best friend and his brother play UO and I can remember watching for hours as they would do whatever they pleased in that game. I never purchased it but I did purchase Asherons call and played it for close to 5 years. I loved that I had a choice in making my character and doing what I wanted in the game. I could choose to lvl in one of the hundreds of dungeons spread out all over the world and I might have to compete with someone for the monsters or not, but either way it was exciting.
I played other's DAoc, SWG, EQ2, but none kept me for as long as Asherons call did. I picked up wow about 6 months after its release because my two best friends were playing it. I enjoyed wow for the 2.5 years I played it but it always felt empty to me. It was fun no matter what but I always felt when I logged in if I wasnt lvling another character to max lvl then I had two options, raid or pvp. Raiding as we all know takes hours and hours and pvp while fun in some mmo's just isnt the best in class/gear games such as WOW. I recently left wow after my guild broke up and my rl friends quit playing, it was sad to me that they were all that was holding me in game. I realised over the last few months I had logged on soley to raid and that was it, id log in, raid, and log off. Not what I think an mmo should be about.
I have been playing Lotro for a few months now and some say it is just a wow clone. I agree in some respects but I think they are doing some great things with Lotro and there are alot more rpg options in it than wow ever had in it. I do hate the class game play, I dont mind lvling as long as I can get alot of customization options(AC). Im enjoying Lotro while im waiting for a sand box game to delve into.
I agree that most people now days have only ever played wow as there mmo experience. I recently converted a cop buddy of mine over to Lotro from wow, which was his only experience with mmo's. I had always told him, while wow was fun it was actually a very empty game and I dont think he realized it until logging into Lotro and playing a few hours. I know its not as in depth as some but it is much more in depth than wow. The funny part is he immediatly cancelled his wow account with numerous raiding 70's and has played Lotro non stop since. I found great joy and kinda showing him the light about mmo's that they arent just about raiding, and daily quests that they can be about just sitting in a town and chatting with complete strangers about nothing at all.
Sorry for the long rant I started typing and things just kept coming. I wanted to leave with this wow forum post link because I think it illustrates a good point over all about new mmo's.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6136325779&sid=1&pageNo=1
I guess it's the same with every post on these boards, but yes, your thread title is very subjective. By no means is AoC some radical step in MMO's but it's definitely not a "Devolution". You are not going to see a game like UO by a well known game company until someone else proves it can be as successful as WoW.
I think the reason MMOs have taken the route the OP is talking about is because once the genre got popular the majority of the player base was heavily more casual players than hardcore players. UO and EQ required a crazy amount of gametime to achieve anything and that doesnt appeal to the casual player. the devs are aiming at the majority of the player base. cant say i dont blame em. I myself have become a much more casual player over the years so games like AOC work for me. I guess it is what it is. I would love a more open ended MMO but if it requires endless hours upon hours to achieve some of the more basic goals I simply wouldnt have the time to do it
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
I support this post, to speak like a politician.
Especially: "In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days."
These guys that bitch and moan about every single MMO to come to light will not be happy with anything short of heaven on the PC, and they will most likely bitch about that too.
I guess I'm wasting my breath... or energy? But you guys, that complain about every single MMO, seriously, maybe it's time to look for something else you find enjoyable in life, becuase it's obviously not MMOs anymore.
exactly you see that on any FFA PVP game, as if playing there gives someone the right to be the biggest douchebag on the net. player A kills player B even though player B is 30 levels lower than player A. player A says "hey if you don't like it roll on a PVE server".
Then player A wonders why no body plays PVP and why when things like trammel came out for UO the subscription actually DOUBLED (don't believe me LOOK IT UP).
Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that about UO. For those who don't know, Britannia in the beginning was the wild west. The only justice was player justice, which mostly meant no justice for the lowbie. Then Trammel was added. Trammel basically disallowed PK. Guess where most everybody went once it appeared? Yeah. Guess what it did for the game's growth? Yeah.
To be clear, this wasn't anything forced onto the players. They merely added a new mirror of the world without PK. And just about everybody in UO, and everybody who didn't want to be part of the old UO, wanted to play on that one instead. People voted with their feet that UO's FFA PvP was shit, which it was.
Mostly, it was the people who got their rocks off by ganking that bitched about this. I laugh so hard when morons here mention Trammel like it killed UO. It prevented them from killing it.
Anyway, I don't think a sandbox has to be like that. It's only like that if you adopt failed ideas like putting FFA PvP and player loot into the wrong kind of game. Personally, I like myself a nice sandbox every now and then.
Honestly, SWG had nearly the worst-looking combat ever. It was barely better than EQ, by the tiniest margin, and by comparison, EQ2's combat looks smooth, which is really saying something horrible. CU and NGE made it so much worse that it's almost sickening now. If they had gotten that one aspect right, I seriously think SWG would have been a massive hit. I know I would have played it.
Forget SWG, though. When you guys had a modern, skill-based sandbox which had some truly powerful and unique tools for player-generated content, you didn't play it. Now it's dead. And that one didn't even have any major flaws like SWG.
People honestly want to have their cake, eat it too, and get a tax rebate for buying it. You bitch about not having a certain kind of game, even while you let what you want die under your noses because one or two small things are off about it. You will never, ever be satisfied. The OP will not even be satisfied with UO. He will go play it for about twenty-five days, then quit, telling himself that it was some flaw with the private server he was on. In reality, it will be because he, like all the other people clamoring for magical sandbox game, are just burned-out on the genre and are looking to relive their old glory days.
Thank you Kurush for saying what needed to be said.
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
I really agree with you.
Sadly today (and in eyes of most fans) this two are fused together. Infact only other sandbox game worth mention is hardcore PVP game of war , EVE.
To make it even worse, all sandbox games planned along the way , look like hardcore PVP games - Shadowbane , Earthrise ....
It could easily be different - if those games were not based on "War thorn land in constant conflict"
A melting pot....
PVP that should be free , should also be governed by law , just like in real life ...
Sorry for the rant, and hjackin the topic.
Just like Second Life and Entropia Universe you mean?
Im disappointed with AoC, i thought i was buying a mmo
Just like Second Life and Entropia Universe you mean?
Well....no
Second life is not really a game.
More in lines that killing, and stealing is possible. But there is law enforcement system punishing and hunting down fugitives.
I agree to the OP, MMORPG should be open-ended not linearly.
MMO played (paid):
AION
DragonRaja
Dungeons & Dragons Online
Lineage
Lineage 2
Tibia
Ultima Online
Warhammer Online
World of Warcraft
MMO tried:
Atlantica Online
Darkfall
Dead Frontier
Dungeon Runners
EverQuest
Lord of the Rings Online
Monster Hunter Frontier Online
Ragnarok Online
Requiem
Runes of Magic
Runescape
The 4th Coming
and some other Chinese/Korean or beta MMOs
Sorry but that is utter crap. Ever heard of SWG? Any idea what the graphics is like in that game? Sandbox MMOS can be done with better (in the eye of the beholder, mind you) graphics then WoW. SWG even launched before WoW. Too bad the game died on nov 15, 2005 though. Dont blame graphics, blame lazy developers.
M M O S S I N C E |1998|
P L A Y I N G F A L L E N E A R T H
T I M E I N V E S T E D |uo|swg|wow|fe|
B E T A T E S T E R |rz|tr|hgl|potbs|potc|gw|hz|wish|fe|wow|df|war|allods|cog|lu|
w w w . c l o w n g u i l d . o r g
I think the important part is your wrong. Yes just plain wrong. In your world everything has to be your way. theres no room for different play styles and any player that disagrees with you is obviously wrong, or stupid. This is of course is because you are too self absorbed to see there is room in the world for different opinions, different likes, and yes different play styles. Your first game was UO, much like a first love it will always be your first that you judge everything thing else against and you can't even start to understand your viewing it through rose colored lenses. In a way its sad you've become so inflexable so set in stone that you will miss out on new experiences, outlooks, and the happyness, and sadness they bring.
Simply put you hate because its not what you are comfortable with, it maybe too hard for you, or not hard enough, but in any case it is different and you dislike change because simply put you are old and set in your ways. You dislike change, and your view point is ridgedly set to the point no amount of facts will ever change it. Nothing will ever be your first again so you hold onto UO endlessly hoping for a new FIRST high that you will never get. Meanwhile life moves on without you weither for better or worse.
There is no "devolution" or distruction of the genre there are just changes that you don't like and don't want anyone else to like, as your opinion is all that matters to you. Sorry but the reality is your just unknown poster X23497. Your opinion is not truth, its not fact, its just your opinion, and many many many people disagree with you.
To the OP:
Taking the viewing angle of your original post, I think that you will never be satisfied with any MMO ever released, for a couple of reasons.
Regarding the thread title, I don't think that any evolution is present in the gender. In fact, it's more akin to time-jumps. You get one game with innovations, that then spawns imitators. Then you have your next innovation jump, which again is followed by more imitators. The last jump was done by WoW. I don't believe we have gone past the imitators phase, not yet.
As for MMOs and graphics, there is art and there is graphics engine. Those two need to complement each other. When one is bad or outdated, the other suffers. And when those two suffer, the immersion suffer. I sense a trend in these boards lately that suggests that a good MMO should have an outdated graphics engine. The people who say that, are still stuck with the imitators. Sometime, hopefully in the near future, we'll see a new innovator coming along.
The ONE thing I wish any new MMO could do that hasnt been able to do it yet is make me feel apart of the world regardless of my level. I had this feeling in AC for the first 5 or so years. I played it for nearly 7 solid and off and on since then (yes I still go back every 3-4 months now for a month or so). AC made me feel important regardless of what level I was. During there story arcs they made sure all level ranges (within reason) where involved in the story arc.
The greatest arc IMO was the BZ story. BZ (who I cant remember how to spell) was a big badass. Now sure, everyone knew that he would be taken down by the highest levels BUT they added in items that ONLY lower levels could obtain that the higher levels HAD to have. Not only did the dungeons have the item the higher levels needed to stop BA but they also had items that where usefull to you regardless of what level you are. BZ himself was Dev controlled. He didnt just walk around owning higher level players oh no......he would appear in a noob zone and wipe anyone that got in his way!
Its that feeling I miss the most. I havent had that feeling in any other MMO to date. Thats one reason I am such a huge supporter of WAR. Yes its going to have alot of the cookie cutter things you see in current MMO's but with every little thing you do regardless of your level I think this game will offer that feeling. Sure your max level guild mates may be having a blast capturing the last keep before a city siege, I will feel a sense of accomplishment knowing that I helped them get to that point even if I am still in the tier1 warzone.
I know we all have our likes and dislikes in an MMO but that is the feeling I am longing for in an MMO that I havent had since Asheron's Call.
It may seem we're heading for rock-bottom but we have to. There is only one way to go after you hit rock-bottom.
Yours is a pretty bold statement. Devolution? Honey, nothing stays the same. You should know this deep down, especially if you're older of age.
For better or worse (not really, it always comes full circle) it's evolution.
The population's demands changes with the passing of father Time.
What you/we can do is wait for something to come along that shows the genre HAS come full circle.
The problem with MMOs are not necessarily the developers, rather the community. UO if you recall, I was there, was controlled by hordes of gankers. You couldn't safely set foot outside of a town without dying.
I recall spending all morning mining, only to have two guys come up to me, kill me and take all of my hours of work away. I remember a high level mage (strangely enough ran into him in EQ years later) who asked if I wanted some spells. I of course said yes, brought a friend along, he proceeded to kill both of us and take our house key. We lost everything.
The problem with UO was that someone who could spend 12+ hours a day in the game ruled the game. There were no punishments and no controls to prevent outright murder. A few people who had more time to spend in UO ended up ruining the experience for countless others. I'm quite sure it was fun for those taking, but those being killed ended up terminating their accounts and developers do not like that.
Secondly a focus on graphics has created issues with MMOs. Graphics trump game play for many players and developers feed this frenzy with pretty colors. Unfortunately this leads to instances and such in order to add more pretty colors but not increase lag.
So we as an MMO community have received what we asked for. Controlled worlds and pretty graphics. Don't blame the developers, blame yourselves.
Actually the thing about UO player justice is a big problem no game has yet managed to solve.
I think DAoC was the first one with a work around that opposing players could not talk with each other, so avoiding smack talking. This is an accepted feature these days in pvp games and I doubt it will leave soon.
Problem with Trammel was that the conversion was crap too. They expected at most 50% to move and were surprised when more than 80% moved. (I still claim for years that UO is not a pvp alone but also belongs to crafters and other social types)
I still agree with the poster that all following mmorpgs tried to be more games than their first counterparts which tried to be worlds. And I hope that some developers decide to go more for a world feeling where customers stay longer than just games feeling where people leave for the next better looking one.
Blatant WOW fanboi spam...at it's best.