Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
The average gamers are mental midgets
durton
Member Posts: 86
Maybe after playing mmo's for 10ish years I've grown bitter. But often games aree great a few months after releasse for 6 months to a few years. Then Devs put out an upgrade to "please" the fans, and it often changes the entire gae. Then 90% of the people that played and enjoyed the origonal game don't like the changes and leave. Why do companies that create awesome games ruin them by changing the game because of the people who whine? The average person playing a game plays for a reason...They have fun with the game. So dev.s can add content, like the guys at blizzard do, by adding the expanded world and a few additional levels. (Don't play WoW, but respect Blizzard alot.) But dev.s should stop putting so much value into what the pissy gamer has to say and stop making huge changes to gameplay. This happened to UO, SWG, Daoc...etc. Maybe instead of bitching gamers need to find a game they like and shut up and play it. Then the dev.s will stop ruining there games for the actual fans.
Comments
But Dev´s have to have gamers that tell them what´s wrong and right with the game, right? Dev´s need those kind of gamers to give them more ideas, it´s like having people gving you ideas for your big project without having to pay them a single cent, however those ideas most of times aren´t the best ideas. I guess it´s the price you pay for it.
That's why most people on this site are sticking to single player games for the time being by the looks of it.
Me, i'm enjoying Internet mini games, things like mahjong, monopoly, poker. No levels, no subscriptions, no whining. Just fun.
Also looking at MMO's to be released this year. Are they al item shop ones?!
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/MMORPG
I agree partially to this, as sometimes changes are necessarry. But remember it's all about perspective viewpoints. For instance. When I first played Hellgate, I played it mostly for pve, as it's mostly was an instanced pve style game. But because of the whining of pvp'ers complaining about the Templar armor being too strong for pvp, they nerfed it on the final update. In this case it ruined the Tank class for tanking bosses. Made it nearly impossible to tank Moloch in Stonehenge. What's strange is that Hellgate started out as a pve game, but as FSS talked about the next update, it seemed as though they were gearing it up for more pvp implementation.
I think it's generally fine to request changes to something if it's within the context of the game's parameters and style, but in the above case it was just outright prejudice as FSS clearly tried to appease pvp'ers over the pve'ers.
Also in this case, Hellgate was more a pve game to begin with but the whining did seem to start to change that. Well I guess since the game's no longer playable in the US, it doesn't really matter, as it's currently being banalized by Hanbitsoft/Redbana (Off topic: I saw a screenshot where a Templar was using a red giant Toy Hammer... so it looks as though this dark, gritty sci-fi horror game is going the route of Mario Brothers... ugh).
devs don't go out changing single player game in the way they change mmo's they put out new games and give you the choice of which to buy. Like Zelda or Final fantasy, gamers can choose there favorites. If you like the SNES Zelda and play The gamecube version and don't like it you can go back and Play the SNES version. Where as if you loved pre cu swg and not after the "upgrade" you've got nothin to do but find a new game.
The big problem of devs listening to player feed back is where they do their listening. Mostly they get the feedback from official forums. The problem with this is the people who tend to be happy with the game arn't there they are busy having fun in the game. What you get in the forums are those who want something else and so arn't playing as much but creating huge threads about what they want to be changed which makes it look like there is a huge proportion of players who want change when it's usually a vocal minority.
The way I would go about it if I was a dev would be to look at the forums and then create a poll for those in the game to fill out as they log out that way I could get a better picture of who was doing what and if the forums were an accurate sample of my playerbase. Then again thats just me.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
That was also EverQuest or Dark Age of Camelot. I think. I can't remember which game did it, but I do recall polls popping up from time to time at log in time. Not log out time, because players are done with your game when they log out; they don't want to be held onto by a poll.
A few things here...
1. You sound very bitter.
2. Where are you getting this information? Devs put out upgrade to please fans? Often changes the entire game? 90% leave game afterwords? Please enlighten me on where you get this and please link also... Or is this just info that you are pulling out of thin air?
3. Please explain, in your own words, how you feel the Devs listened top the minority and ruined the following games... UO, SWG, DAOC. I am not saying that the Devs did not ruin these games. I am asking how YOU feel they did it by listening to the "minority" of players.
I disagree completely with OPs post, I on the other hand claim the direct opposit and rarely play an mmo before it has passed the 6 months probation period and the games you mention, wow with the expansion... that gotta been what, 1,2 years? SWG well the crap came when SOE took over if Im not mistaken, atleast with the Jedi exp that I know and DaOC is the same, atlantis expansion pretty much pissed over lots of classes and reqed huge grind.
your somewhat contradicting yourself
also mmos need new content so it cant stay the same.. and they are never ever balanced.
The idea that the average MMORPG player is a mental midget isn't something I agree with.
I will agree that a few MMORPG's out there have made some obvious mistakes in making game changes based off of player feedback. What tends to happen is that a given game might have more than one class that's intended to fit into a party or raid role, and then players will compare their classes with the ones they're not playing and complain that they don't measure up.
Example 1 - World of Warcraft originally launched with a class called the Druid that was intended to be a "jack of all trades, master of one" sort of role filler. The one role that the class was constantly tweaked and revised by the Devs to work the best in doing was Healing. The secondary roles of tanking, melee damage dealing, and distance spell use damage dealing were given less attention. From the Devs point of view, this was done for the reason that the class was intended *at game launch* to fill a 5 man party role to "fill in" for one of those other uses. The class was NEVER intended to do melee or spell DPS or tank in a raid situation. And the game launch description as well as Blizzard approved Game Guides confirmed this vision for the class.
As time progressed, players of this class leveled up in either being able to tank or do damage and complained that they should be able to continue in those roles in a Raid environment, instead of just Healing. The Druid class that we see today is a DIRECT RESULT of the game Devs listening to players and altering the Launch vision of the class for the curent version.
This is a single, simple example involving players who play the game voicing their unwillingness to accept a class as it is presented for a role and with its capabilities. Did it lead to making the game better? Did it lead to it making it worse?
Everquest 1 had the same problem with their version of the Druid and Shaman, who were mainline healers that took second place to the cleric... or the hybrid caster tanks of Shadowknight and Paladin being complained about when used in a tanking role and being compared to the Warrior. And so forth.
It's a natural problem for games devs to face, but because other games have knuckled in and listened to player criticism and because of a perverse desire to please the players, the consequences be damned... We have games that travel into goofy directions in terms of character balance.
Games evolving to include more things that are fun and to reduce things that aren't so much fun is kind of a good thing, as long as it doesn't remove the greater portion of challenge to the game. And the players that complain rarely see that.
I would have to say I dissagree with this OP... there are people who complain alot about mmo's... they make a character and its not what they want it to be... so they complain "HEY DEV my shaman doesnt do as much damage as the Rogue" cry cry... there are these types and devs shouldnt listen to them ... but they do... mental midgets hmmm suggestions are warranted but complaining is not.. i agree with the poster who talked about the druid scenario... if you play a certain class a toon PLAY that toon s intended... dont whine that it isnt what YOU think it should be LOL... you want a warrior? play one... you want a main healer ?? play one if anything the devs are more the mental midgets for swaying towards making the classes "blended" or "BAAAAlanced" cant have a healer tanking!!!! lame DEVS pls just design your games and quit listening to the whiners tell you how to create the games maybe take some advice but DONT change whole classes... anyway these are just my opinions other have theirs.... just have fun gaming for pity sakes Kwosh