They are ALWAYS getting worse. It doesn't matter what stance you try and take, as you obtain more experience you begin to critique more. Players never settle for "just as good"... it's always got to be better and so even if Blizzard, Turbine, or SOE release a new game that has every bell and whistle available on the market... it will still receive bad marks! There is no "getting better" until there is a whole group of games that release with such poor quality that ANYTHING release with a little though would be better... and even then it's only better than that group. Games will always keep getting worse because you, as a player, keep gaining more experience with the genre... and no development team is a match for your personal taste.
So how would you explain that FPS, RTS, Simulators, platforms, and what not, are in general much better now than 10 years ago?
RTS games have gone downhill as hell. they are all about micro-combat on small maps thesedays with no economical aspect. Give me a remake of AoE 2! Platforms? I have barely seen any platform games in the last couple of years. The last good one i played was Banjo Tooie on N64
Nearly anything that ever has been content in an MMO has been done better in an game of the past and in a better mix than today.
The only step forward is made a) the AoC-combat-system and b)graphic (even that has come to halt in newer games).
........
A few examples:
Daoc had the best PvP-Setup
Ultima the best living world
SWG the best crafting
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
They are ALWAYS getting worse. It doesn't matter what stance you try and take, as you obtain more experience you begin to critique more. Players never settle for "just as good"... it's always got to be better and so even if Blizzard, Turbine, or SOE release a new game that has every bell and whistle available on the market... it will still receive bad marks! There is no "getting better" until there is a whole group of games that release with such poor quality that ANYTHING release with a little though would be better... and even then it's only better than that group. Games will always keep getting worse because you, as a player, keep gaining more experience with the genre... and no development team is a match for your personal taste.
So how would you explain that FPS, RTS, Simulators, platforms, and what not, are in general much better now than 10 years ago?
For me it is a matter percepton. When I started MMORPGs I came from playing MUDs, so for me EQ was a MUD becoming even more alive and colorful. Needless to say that I had a blast and so did any other MUD player who tried out EQ back then, at least the ones I have talked to.
However nowadays you compare MMORPGs to video games in general and if you want to reach the mainstream (aka sell a whole lot of copies and subs) you have to make them user friendly and easy to get into, but the same way you remove the challenge bit by bit. Nobody really has to "learn" the game anymore, not saying that you don't need to master it, however.
But if you look deeper into the matter it is the new features making it easier for new players, that destroy the fun and immersion of an ever decreasing group of players, which has played MMORPGs when the genre was young. The wheel is not going to be turned back, so looking at it objectively you can't say that MMOPRGs got worse, because as a matter of fact they didn't. They just evolved into "something" else, which can't be appreciated anymore by the group of people who played the genre already when it was young. So maybe they got worse for some people, but I would not say they got worse, when looking at it objectively.
I don't think they're getting worse exactly, I think it just seems that way, because they aren't getting better. Most genres improve over time, but this one just keeps playing the same old song over and over.
Imagine if the FPS genre was still like Doom, with nothing new to it, other than better graphics - sure, some shooters are like that, but those tend to be the forgettable ones. Others bring something new to the gameplay that make them stand out. And that can even make the oldschool simplicity seem fun to go back to now and then, but overall, game genres have to keep innovating and evolving to thrive.
This is why retention rates are getting worse and worse. Used to be that most MMOs lost 20-30% after the first month. Now it's more like 70-80% because to so many players, its just more of the same old game they've already played into the ground.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I'd go for 3 because it is true. There are a lot of games that has been released in the market but only a few have something to prove. Personally, I am having a hard time when it comes to choosing the right MMO to play because I have a lot of wants when it comes to its features. So I am still here, wanting to try ouot new games but is still stuck in a game that I started playing 2 years ago.
MMO’s are in a cul-de-sac and they are going to have a real hard time of digging there way out. In many ways MMO’s are not a genre, they are a type of game format. FPS and RPG’s are a genre, MMO’s are games played online with a lot of people.
With decent graphic MMO’s having a huge cost I see no way out of the cookie cutter MMO format and one MMO size suits all mush we get these days.
My oppinion on the subject is that MMOs are getting better in the way of technical and visual aspect. We have better graphic, better sound. Also story telling in them is way better that once it was, so that aspect is improved as well. Ambient design and surroundings are also better, developers pay more attention to details and not just using some generators to create forest for example and leave it that way. Only thing I really do not like is that they are way too much simplyfied, there days all MMOs seem to me like giant lobbys where you assemble group and then you go into game (raid, dungeon or whatever). I need more interaction between me and world, housing for example. Also I think it woulb be nice if anyone would introduce player bussiness model, where players coould open their own store, blacksmith and other stuff. In EVE for example you can be miner and you can do that all of your time, no need to raid, no need to do anything you do not like and nothing is forced on you.
That said I do not know how to answer really, my felling is that they are getting better but sometimes I just want to be potion maker in some kingdom and profit from all of wanna be heroes
They are getting worse because it's about developers telling a story, it's supposed to be about the players making the story happen. That's roleplaying for you.
Also the fact they are combat-oriented and has nothing else to do (simplistic, bland crafting does not count as it mostly relies on combat). They have taken a really deep and immersive genre and turned it into an arcade game party for casuals. It was much better back in the days when the "RP-Nerds" played.
They are getting worse because it's about developers telling a story, it's supposed to be about the players making the story happen. That's roleplaying for you.
I do not understand this? What players making the story happen has to do anything with developer telling a story. Developer is telling the story and players go trought the story making it happen, I do not see how thouse two thing do not stand together. Even in sandbox game like EVE you have developer telling a story. Even in pen and paper you have GM telling the story. Players go trought the story and thus they are making it happen. If no one would go trought the story, the story would not happen, so I do not understand what you wanted to say with this. I agree that maybe we do not like some stories but than again no one is forcing us to play games with storys we do not like.
They are getting worse because it's about developers telling a story, it's supposed to be about the players making the story happen. That's roleplaying for you.
I do not understand this? What players making the story happen has to do anything with developer telling a story. Developer is telling the story and players go trought the story making it happen, I do not see how thouse two thing do not stand together. Even in sandbox game like EVE you have developer telling a story. Even in pen and paper you have GM telling the story. Players go trought the story and thus they are making it happen. If no one would go trought the story, the story would not happen, so I do not understand what you wanted to say with this. I agree that maybe we do not like some stories but than again no one is forcing us to play games with storys we do not like.
We cannot alter the story set up, that's the problem. In pen and paper role playing you still have the power of decision. You cannot decide to completely alter the story in a current-gen mmo.
Let's say for instance you are to help some peasant with killing rats (ridiculous example i know). In any game today you do his quest and get a reward. If the game story was driven by players i could choose to kill the peasant instead and loot his stuff (possibly have a moral-system for this as well to make it even better).
We cannot alter the story set up, that's the problem. In pen and paper role playing you still have the power of decision. You cannot decide to completely alter the story in a current-gen mmo.
Let's say for instance you are to help some peasant with killing rats (ridiculous example i know). In any game today you do his quest and get a reward. If the game story was driven by players i could choose to kill the peasant instead and loot his stuff (possibly have a moral-system for this as well to make it even better).
Good example, however I do not believe we will ever see anything like that, it requires too much coding and thinking and development time in general to think of every possible option that one player can think of. This is main reason that pen and paper role play is still light years superrior comparing to MMO.
But after better thinking, this would be nearly impossible in MMO, if that peasant would spawn again, you could kill him over and over again and we would have a ton of player raid villages in order to have some quick cash. If however peasant would not spawn (it would stay dead) we could be facing vitual playground where player base would prolly slaughter all population and all that would be then will prolly look something like some post apocalipse movie where we have clans fightning each other for territory.
They are getting worse because it's about developers telling a story, it's supposed to be about the players making the story happen. That's roleplaying for you.
Those kind of stories are always bland and uninteresting, unlike dev made stories since the devs have no limitations as to what they could do with the story. Players are always limited by the game. I very much disagree with you.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
None of your options appeal to me. They are getting better in some ways, worse in others. That'd be the option I'd choose. They're getting better in the content department, but worse in the freedom of choice, and character advancement department. While there's more content in todays MMORPG's, the developers put a character on rails to play through that content. There's really no freedom in how to complete that content, or when. You do the content as you encounter it, because it's your level, and if you do content above or below your level, you'll find no challenge or instant death. So you do content when they tell you to do it. Character advancement is all about the levels and gear now. Gaining levels grant you skills. Skills that every class the same as yours has. Some games offer alternative advancement options, such as Traits and Talents. That adds some choice, but it's still pretty linear.
Same feeling here as huntard and nate1980, from a tech viewpoint they have gotten allot better, but from a freedom of choice viewpoint they have become less atleast in my opion with the playstyle I like to get out a MMORPG.
But then again I also know for a fact that I am a niche gamer when it comes to MMORPG's, so I am sure that for the majority this genre is doing very well. I mean if freedom was the most important aspect of this genre then WOW would never had gained so many players, so linear is what the majority enjoy's and in a way I am glad seeing so many people enjoy their games, just hope one day there will be more options in MMORPG when it comes to MMORPG that offer you choices, and obviously I like a company that brings AAA titles to the table to creat such a MMORPG but have allot of respect for indie devs that atleast are doing all sorts of new innovative things in this genre, just waiting for that AAA title to offer choices/options again and that isn't limited towards a combat only way.
Personally, I chose the second option. I don't know whether it's because I'm relatively new to the genre, or because I'm just easy to please, but I have enjoyed most of the games that I've played in the past. This also includes free to play games, though I have to admit that now that I'm actually paying suscription for the games I've played, I seem to stick to them longer. Listening to all these posts on the forums, I have to admit that I'm relieved that I started gaming rather late, otherwise I would be extremely negative and disgruntled about this genre.
I think there is another option: Great game releases with a long time between them. Think about all the crappy game that released 10 years ago already. There is just a few EQs and UOs releasing for every large bunch of games.
To go back and steal from games like UO and EQ wont make a great game either, that is not what we need. We need something new and fresh, like the old games first felt when we tried them the first time.
Sooner or later will a game offer that experience again but it wont be a copy of any oldschool game.
The real problem is that the MMOs are more copying eachother all the time, making them too close to eachother to offer a new experience.
UO and EQ went their own ways, there were nothing like UO before and the only pre EQ game of that kind was Meridian 59, EQ was a huge step up from that and offered a very different gameplay.
I think the first thing that should be done is changing combat. The mobs are dumber than in any other genre and the old tank, dps and healer system is old by now. If the mobs start acting like more humans we would get a very different gameplay.
We will also need to change the mechanics. The old EQ/D&D based system we use now have been used in almost every MMO for the last 10 years. While it proved it's worth it is now really old. Devs should look on pen and paper RPGs and see how they work (not D&D, that has been done). A mix between levels and skills like Palladium game uses is one possible direction but there are many out there.
The reason that there were a few truly outstanding MMOs in the old days was nothing to copy back then. The devs needs to stop stealing eachothers ideas and make something new.
We cannot alter the story set up, that's the problem. In pen and paper role playing you still have the power of decision. You cannot decide to completely alter the story in a current-gen mmo.
Let's say for instance you are to help some peasant with killing rats (ridiculous example i know). In any game today you do his quest and get a reward. If the game story was driven by players i could choose to kill the peasant instead and loot his stuff (possibly have a moral-system for this as well to make it even better).
Good example, however I do not believe we will ever see anything like that, it requires too much coding and thinking and development time in general to think of every possible option that one player can think of. This is main reason that pen and paper role play is still light years superrior comparing to MMO.
But after better thinking, this would be nearly impossible in MMO, if that peasant would spawn again, you could kill him over and over again and we would have a ton of player raid villages in order to have some quick cash. If however peasant would not spawn (it would stay dead) we could be facing vitual playground where player base would prolly slaughter all population and all that would be then will prolly look something like some post apocalipse movie where we have clans fightning each other for territory.
It's a myth that it isn't possible. I sugges you read this, and keep in mind this was back in 1997, hence computers weren't nearly as powerful:
I am still waiting on that one great mmo, I hope it comes soon I am getting tired of waiding through crap. WoW was good, Lotro was good, everquest was good when it was new. I havent seen anything great, the new stuff coming out is just one disaster after another. But I guess my expectations may be just too high.
Comments
So how would you explain that FPS, RTS, Simulators, platforms, and what not, are in general much better now than 10 years ago?
RTS games have gone downhill as hell. they are all about micro-combat on small maps thesedays with no economical aspect. Give me a remake of AoE 2! Platforms? I have barely seen any platform games in the last couple of years. The last good one i played was Banjo Tooie on N64
MMOS are getting worse bcs they only excell in one area but lack in every other.
>AoC has a great world, great classes, the best combat and good quests but thats it.
Crafting is substandard.
Virtual Living in the AoC-world is substandard.
Raids are average at best.
PvP is set up wrong way - doesnt work - has no "Greater Goal".
>Lotro has a great world, good quests, offers avarage crafting, average virtual living in the Lotro-world.
It has ugly chars, badly defined classes, boring combat and PvM is a jackass feature.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nearly anything that ever has been content in an MMO has been done better in an game of the past and in a better mix than today.
The only step forward is made a) the AoC-combat-system and b)graphic (even that has come to halt in newer games).
........
A few examples:
Daoc had the best PvP-Setup
Ultima the best living world
SWG the best crafting
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
So how would you explain that FPS, RTS, Simulators, platforms, and what not, are in general much better now than 10 years ago?
For me it is a matter percepton. When I started MMORPGs I came from playing MUDs, so for me EQ was a MUD becoming even more alive and colorful. Needless to say that I had a blast and so did any other MUD player who tried out EQ back then, at least the ones I have talked to.
However nowadays you compare MMORPGs to video games in general and if you want to reach the mainstream (aka sell a whole lot of copies and subs) you have to make them user friendly and easy to get into, but the same way you remove the challenge bit by bit. Nobody really has to "learn" the game anymore, not saying that you don't need to master it, however.
But if you look deeper into the matter it is the new features making it easier for new players, that destroy the fun and immersion of an ever decreasing group of players, which has played MMORPGs when the genre was young. The wheel is not going to be turned back, so looking at it objectively you can't say that MMOPRGs got worse, because as a matter of fact they didn't. They just evolved into "something" else, which can't be appreciated anymore by the group of people who played the genre already when it was young. So maybe they got worse for some people, but I would not say they got worse, when looking at it objectively.
I don't think they're getting worse exactly, I think it just seems that way, because they aren't getting better. Most genres improve over time, but this one just keeps playing the same old song over and over.
Imagine if the FPS genre was still like Doom, with nothing new to it, other than better graphics - sure, some shooters are like that, but those tend to be the forgettable ones. Others bring something new to the gameplay that make them stand out. And that can even make the oldschool simplicity seem fun to go back to now and then, but overall, game genres have to keep innovating and evolving to thrive.
This is why retention rates are getting worse and worse. Used to be that most MMOs lost 20-30% after the first month. Now it's more like 70-80% because to so many players, its just more of the same old game they've already played into the ground.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Only 6% of you are having a blast playing MMOs nowadays.
Only 20% think they are just good.
This is an incredible failure for the whole genre.
third choice. most companies are just making MMOGs for profit. so their quality has dropped.
I'd go for 3 because it is true. There are a lot of games that has been released in the market but only a few have something to prove. Personally, I am having a hard time when it comes to choosing the right MMO to play because I have a lot of wants when it comes to its features. So I am still here, wanting to try ouot new games but is still stuck in a game that I started playing 2 years ago.
How about a "It only can get better from now on because there is a all time low"?
MMO’s are in a cul-de-sac and they are going to have a real hard time of digging there way out. In many ways MMO’s are not a genre, they are a type of game format. FPS and RPG’s are a genre, MMO’s are games played online with a lot of people.
With decent graphic MMO’s having a huge cost I see no way out of the cookie cutter MMO format and one MMO size suits all mush we get these days.
When you are at the bottom the only way to go is up.
This is interesting thread OP, really.
My oppinion on the subject is that MMOs are getting better in the way of technical and visual aspect. We have better graphic, better sound. Also story telling in them is way better that once it was, so that aspect is improved as well. Ambient design and surroundings are also better, developers pay more attention to details and not just using some generators to create forest for example and leave it that way. Only thing I really do not like is that they are way too much simplyfied, there days all MMOs seem to me like giant lobbys where you assemble group and then you go into game (raid, dungeon or whatever). I need more interaction between me and world, housing for example. Also I think it woulb be nice if anyone would introduce player bussiness model, where players coould open their own store, blacksmith and other stuff. In EVE for example you can be miner and you can do that all of your time, no need to raid, no need to do anything you do not like and nothing is forced on you.
That said I do not know how to answer really, my felling is that they are getting better but sometimes I just want to be potion maker in some kingdom and profit from all of wanna be heroes
They are getting worse because it's about developers telling a story, it's supposed to be about the players making the story happen. That's roleplaying for you.
Also the fact they are combat-oriented and has nothing else to do (simplistic, bland crafting does not count as it mostly relies on combat). They have taken a really deep and immersive genre and turned it into an arcade game party for casuals. It was much better back in the days when the "RP-Nerds" played.
MMOs have gone from being made for hardcore nerds with alot of time who likes to wave their epeens, to something for everyone to enjoy.
That is good imo (even if Im a hardcore nerd
)
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
I do not understand this? What players making the story happen has to do anything with developer telling a story. Developer is telling the story and players go trought the story making it happen, I do not see how thouse two thing do not stand together. Even in sandbox game like EVE you have developer telling a story. Even in pen and paper you have GM telling the story. Players go trought the story and thus they are making it happen. If no one would go trought the story, the story would not happen, so I do not understand what you wanted to say with this. I agree that maybe we do not like some stories but than again no one is forcing us to play games with storys we do not like.
I do not understand this? What players making the story happen has to do anything with developer telling a story. Developer is telling the story and players go trought the story making it happen, I do not see how thouse two thing do not stand together. Even in sandbox game like EVE you have developer telling a story. Even in pen and paper you have GM telling the story. Players go trought the story and thus they are making it happen. If no one would go trought the story, the story would not happen, so I do not understand what you wanted to say with this. I agree that maybe we do not like some stories but than again no one is forcing us to play games with storys we do not like.
We cannot alter the story set up, that's the problem. In pen and paper role playing you still have the power of decision. You cannot decide to completely alter the story in a current-gen mmo.
Let's say for instance you are to help some peasant with killing rats (ridiculous example i know). In any game today you do his quest and get a reward. If the game story was driven by players i could choose to kill the peasant instead and loot his stuff (possibly have a moral-system for this as well to make it even better).
Good example, however I do not believe we will ever see anything like that, it requires too much coding and thinking and development time in general to think of every possible option that one player can think of. This is main reason that pen and paper role play is still light years superrior comparing to MMO.
But after better thinking, this would be nearly impossible in MMO, if that peasant would spawn again, you could kill him over and over again and we would have a ton of player raid villages in order to have some quick cash. If however peasant would not spawn (it would stay dead) we could be facing vitual playground where player base would prolly slaughter all population and all that would be then will prolly look something like some post apocalipse movie where we have clans fightning each other for territory.
Those kind of stories are always bland and uninteresting, unlike dev made stories since the devs have no limitations as to what they could do with the story. Players are always limited by the game. I very much disagree with you.
Same feeling here as huntard and nate1980, from a tech viewpoint they have gotten allot better, but from a freedom of choice viewpoint they have become less atleast in my opion with the playstyle I like to get out a MMORPG.
But then again I also know for a fact that I am a niche gamer when it comes to MMORPG's, so I am sure that for the majority this genre is doing very well. I mean if freedom was the most important aspect of this genre then WOW would never had gained so many players, so linear is what the majority enjoy's and in a way I am glad seeing so many people enjoy their games, just hope one day there will be more options in MMORPG when it comes to MMORPG that offer you choices, and obviously I like a company that brings AAA titles to the table to creat such a MMORPG but have allot of respect for indie devs that atleast are doing all sorts of new innovative things in this genre, just waiting for that AAA title to offer choices/options again and that isn't limited towards a combat only way.
Personally, I chose the second option. I don't know whether it's because I'm relatively new to the genre, or because I'm just easy to please, but I have enjoyed most of the games that I've played in the past. This also includes free to play games, though I have to admit that now that I'm actually paying suscription for the games I've played, I seem to stick to them longer. Listening to all these posts on the forums, I have to admit that I'm relieved that I started gaming rather late, otherwise I would be extremely negative and disgruntled about this genre.
Main characters:
Jinn Gone Quiet (Guild Wars)
Princess Pudding (Guild Wars)
I think there is another option: Great game releases with a long time between them. Think about all the crappy game that released 10 years ago already. There is just a few EQs and UOs releasing for every large bunch of games.
To go back and steal from games like UO and EQ wont make a great game either, that is not what we need. We need something new and fresh, like the old games first felt when we tried them the first time.
Sooner or later will a game offer that experience again but it wont be a copy of any oldschool game.
The real problem is that the MMOs are more copying eachother all the time, making them too close to eachother to offer a new experience.
UO and EQ went their own ways, there were nothing like UO before and the only pre EQ game of that kind was Meridian 59, EQ was a huge step up from that and offered a very different gameplay.
I think the first thing that should be done is changing combat. The mobs are dumber than in any other genre and the old tank, dps and healer system is old by now. If the mobs start acting like more humans we would get a very different gameplay.
We will also need to change the mechanics. The old EQ/D&D based system we use now have been used in almost every MMO for the last 10 years. While it proved it's worth it is now really old. Devs should look on pen and paper RPGs and see how they work (not D&D, that has been done). A mix between levels and skills like Palladium game uses is one possible direction but there are many out there.
The reason that there were a few truly outstanding MMOs in the old days was nothing to copy back then. The devs needs to stop stealing eachothers ideas and make something new.
Good example, however I do not believe we will ever see anything like that, it requires too much coding and thinking and development time in general to think of every possible option that one player can think of. This is main reason that pen and paper role play is still light years superrior comparing to MMO.
But after better thinking, this would be nearly impossible in MMO, if that peasant would spawn again, you could kill him over and over again and we would have a ton of player raid villages in order to have some quick cash. If however peasant would not spawn (it would stay dead) we could be facing vitual playground where player base would prolly slaughter all population and all that would be then will prolly look something like some post apocalipse movie where we have clans fightning each other for territory.
It's a myth that it isn't possible. I sugges you read this, and keep in mind this was back in 1997, hence computers weren't nearly as powerful:
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/06/03/uos-resource-system/
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/06/04/uos-resource-system-part-2/
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/06/05/uos-resource-system-part-3/
I agree we won't see it though, big faceless companies don't care about innovation, they care about money.
I am still waiting on that one great mmo, I hope it comes soon I am getting tired of waiding through crap. WoW was good, Lotro was good, everquest was good when it was new. I havent seen anything great, the new stuff coming out is just one disaster after another. But I guess my expectations may be just too high.
MMO gamers are the ones getting worse.