Yes. It would be even more interesting if it restarts soon after. I think if EQ restarted with the zone map changed and every mob position changed, it would very interesting.
If I have time to burn and the MMO is fun and I can play absoultely free I don't see why not. Otherwise no. So A Tale in the Desert is a "no" to me. Not only does it cost money and lose my efforts in the game after say 6 months, I am left with no achievement and progress to show for. To me it is like playing a fantasy sport game. Once when the season is over I don't have anything to even remember because there is next season in my mind, but next season is just another blend new game.
That reminds me on a browsergame I once played. The strongest players could aquire there an Armageddon spell. If a player invoked that spell, every other player saw a huge message, saying something like "a mage has started invoking armageddon, 1/3 of the sea turned to blood". The player had then it's status, location etc known to all other players and could be attacked by everyone. If he survived, another player could one week later invoke armageddon again, with a message like "the sun and moon turned dark" and could also be attacked. And so on, if enough players survived to invoke the spell long enough, lots of restrictions in the game would get removed. Like restrictions whom to attack and so on. About one week later the game then ends, with the mages invoking the armageddon beeing mentioned as heroes or something. Then some time later the game would start anew. To some degree it would be fun if an MMORPG would do the same. Of course the stuff to invoke the spell would have been that hard to get, that it could only happen once every few years, but it surely would be impressive.
The game was called Archmage--and it was quite possibly one of the best browser games of all time. Recruit / summon your army, attack people, form guilds, amass wealth, explore / conquer new territory to build--the game was pure awesome.
If WoW announced it was shutting down in three months, I would play it to the bitter end. If they decided to take out "endgame", I would probably still play it off and on. I think alot of players start over (reroll) anyway since endgame is such a headache in many MMORPGs these days.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I might buy/play it, It seems ive never played any single mmo for longer than 4-5 months anyways considering how boring and repetitive they get. Especially if there was an actual storyline/plot because we all know mmorpg quest/mission writers are of the same caliber as the ones you find filling the pages of teen magazines. The rpg in mmorpg is missing.
The MMO "A Tale in the Desert" is a game like that. The game runs for like 2 years after the start, and after the players reached some goals it ends. A new version of the game ( called telling) starts again after some days, all the characters are wiped, u can get some title though, which depends on what did you achieve in the former telling. In the new telling your character may get the title of being the grandchild of your former character. The MMORTS Travian is like that too, the players play to win the server, and about after 1 year one guild builds the final building, the Wonder of the World, and the game ends 1 day later.
I really do not see much difference with multiplayer game, beside the longativity of a game session. In a multiplay game a game can last from a few minutes to a few hours, after with you have to start a new. An MMO with such a structure give you months or even years before reseting. In fact I believe this system to be better then you traditional "end-game". First of all this is easier for the programmer as you do not have to constantly create end-game of make your game longer (like what WoW is doing with ever expension). However those games do need to be a bit more complex, as you need to want to play it all over again, maybe playing an other race, different strategy or whatever to keep you playing.
So yes, I would play such a game, if the game is suitable for it. To the subject if I would play a game I know that would end in a few weeks/months. Well if it is good why not.
In Regards to existing games that do a server wipe and restart or games that spawn new severs from scratch giving the illusion of a fresh start they have thier place I'll grant.
But I think some of the charm of this would be that the is one start and one end and thats it, there no second chances, no do overs. I mean sure the company could take the same engine rmodify the core mechains of gameplay have it go from fantasy to sci-fi setting create a whole new story and start another 5 year game.
I probably would pay for it. I think that all MMOs have to come to an end at some point. At least then you will know when instead of being blindsided by a random ending that came from nowhere. It would be less appealing, but there are benefits to it.
It would only slightly diminish my decision to keep subscribing/paying.
More than anything, I pay to play fun games. If this month Game X gives me more fun than the alternatives, I'm going to pay and play that game. It doesn't matter if it's scheduled to close the very next month.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Allods online is basically going through this right now. The answer? No. Hell, I won't even bother wasting time on a game that I know is going to be patched into oblivion let alone shut down due to horrible management this side of a month.
It would defeat the whole purpose of MMO's if it ended. An MMO gives up the depth of a regular video game and trades it in for the advantages of providing an environment generally catered for interactions across large amounts of players at once. If it ended, I would feel like I played a very shallow single-player RPG.
Possibly the only way you could pull this off and feel justified to make money monthly off players is if you created a world and ran live events that influenced how the world literally changed with the eventual final end-of-the-world type battle where players can decide whether their world is saved from ultimate evil or perishes in a great big ball of fire. That would take an incredibly flexible (and probably large) development and community team to pull off though and it probably wouldn't justify its potential for profit for the cost required.
Comments
Wha---What are you saying Lokto???
Oh my god...
Nooooooooooo!
Yes. It would be even more interesting if it restarts soon after. I think if EQ restarted with the zone map changed and every mob position changed, it would very interesting.
If I have time to burn and the MMO is fun and I can play absoultely free I don't see why not. Otherwise no. So A Tale in the Desert is a "no" to me. Not only does it cost money and lose my efforts in the game after say 6 months, I am left with no achievement and progress to show for. To me it is like playing a fantasy sport game. Once when the season is over I don't have anything to even remember because there is next season in my mind, but next season is just another blend new game.
The game was called Archmage--and it was quite possibly one of the best browser games of all time. Recruit / summon your army, attack people, form guilds, amass wealth, explore / conquer new territory to build--the game was pure awesome.
If WoW announced it was shutting down in three months, I would play it to the bitter end. If they decided to take out "endgame", I would probably still play it off and on. I think alot of players start over (reroll) anyway since endgame is such a headache in many MMORPGs these days.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I might buy/play it, It seems ive never played any single mmo for longer than 4-5 months anyways considering how boring and repetitive they get. Especially if there was an actual storyline/plot because we all know mmorpg quest/mission writers are of the same caliber as the ones you find filling the pages of teen magazines. The rpg in mmorpg is missing.
I really do not see much difference with multiplayer game, beside the longativity of a game session. In a multiplay game a game can last from a few minutes to a few hours, after with you have to start a new. An MMO with such a structure give you months or even years before reseting. In fact I believe this system to be better then you traditional "end-game". First of all this is easier for the programmer as you do not have to constantly create end-game of make your game longer (like what WoW is doing with ever expension). However those games do need to be a bit more complex, as you need to want to play it all over again, maybe playing an other race, different strategy or whatever to keep you playing.
So yes, I would play such a game, if the game is suitable for it. To the subject if I would play a game I know that would end in a few weeks/months. Well if it is good why not.
In Regards to existing games that do a server wipe and restart or games that spawn new severs from scratch giving the illusion of a fresh start they have thier place I'll grant.
But I think some of the charm of this would be that the is one start and one end and thats it, there no second chances, no do overs. I mean sure the company could take the same engine rmodify the core mechains of gameplay have it go from fantasy to sci-fi setting create a whole new story and start another 5 year game.
I probably would pay for it. I think that all MMOs have to come to an end at some point. At least then you will know when instead of being blindsided by a random ending that came from nowhere. It would be less appealing, but there are benefits to it.
www.ryzom.com
It would only slightly diminish my decision to keep subscribing/paying.
More than anything, I pay to play fun games. If this month Game X gives me more fun than the alternatives, I'm going to pay and play that game. It doesn't matter if it's scheduled to close the very next month.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Yes, I would.
EDIT: If it was worth it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Allods online is basically going through this right now. The answer? No. Hell, I won't even bother wasting time on a game that I know is going to be patched into oblivion let alone shut down due to horrible management this side of a month.
Bans a perma, but so are sigs in necro posts.
EAT ME MMORPG.com!
It would defeat the whole purpose of MMO's if it ended. An MMO gives up the depth of a regular video game and trades it in for the advantages of providing an environment generally catered for interactions across large amounts of players at once. If it ended, I would feel like I played a very shallow single-player RPG.
Possibly the only way you could pull this off and feel justified to make money monthly off players is if you created a world and ran live events that influenced how the world literally changed with the eventual final end-of-the-world type battle where players can decide whether their world is saved from ultimate evil or perishes in a great big ball of fire. That would take an incredibly flexible (and probably large) development and community team to pull off though and it probably wouldn't justify its potential for profit for the cost required.