Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why do you think the latest crop of games is failing?

124678

Comments

  • Goatgod76Goatgod76 Member Posts: 1,214

    I'd say it's a combination, to one degree or another, of many of the choices you gave.

  • tharkthark Member UncommonPosts: 1,188

    This reason was not among the choices but..

    They make the games far to easy and has to MUCH focus on solo play

  • uquipuuquipu Member Posts: 1,516
    Originally posted by heerobya

    Originally posted by Codenak

    Originally posted by heerobya



    Would you play this game?

     

    Depends, would it deliver in terms of fun?



     

    Well that's the point -

    I am asking, if you take away the achievements and the titles and the uber-cool loot epics and awesome stats and everything that makes one player "better" then another by anything other then their skill at playing the game...

    and are left with.. whatever you want but just a game where the rewards for playing are simply that it is a fun game to play...

    Would you still play without the rewards?

     

    If I find Excalibur, Excalibur should kick serious arse.

     

    Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren

  • heartlessheartless Member UncommonPosts: 4,993
    Originally posted by farfanugon


    no sir there not crap far far from it they are just what they were ment to be fast cheaply made mmo's to hit the market with stunning speed piggy bank up a nice lump of cash very quickly and sold off or left to rot in there own lost luster
    no sir its not the deva's fault we the gamers have let this happen we the gamers dump money into these games and alot of time with pre orders befor the games ever seen
    the speed in which gamers are willing to open the wallets for these "new" mmo's has shown the game dev's a new path to faster return
    if a super hype game can bring in a green profit line in the first 2 months of release while taking less than 6 months to make why push on with the game ? why put more money into it knowing the return will never be as good as the first 3-6 months ?
    will we close our wallets to sub par games ? of course not , and so we enter this new ugly stage of fly by nite mmo games that set great hype fuel our expectations and drop us on our faces upon release .
    the world of great mmo's will most likely never grace the web again and if it does will any of us still be gamers? will we sate our gameing needs on junk/hype mmo's keep playing keep the gaming spark alive in the hope a year 2 years 3 down the road the mmo's grow new life
    my expectations at this point are very low for a return of the mmo

     

    How can you say that these games aren't crap and then in the very first sentence provide proof why they are crap?

    The developers and the players are both at fault here. The developers are trying to make a lot of money quick, so they cut corners, copy other games and release way before the game is ready. The result is crap.

    MMOs are not released as often as other games, almost every month or so a decent single player game is released. We may see one or two MMO launches per year. As such, MMO gamers are so desperate for a new MMO that we buy into the hype and begin to hype up the game ourselves. Unfortunately, once the game goes live, we realize that it's nothing more than crap.

    image

  • LansidLansid Member UncommonPosts: 1,097

     AAA pimps whoring out overhyped games banking on the fact that zealots will pay $ so long as you use convincing debunking advertising on how despite what people say it's the best game evar, or you're just a whiny kid.... so you better fall in formation and worship it too.

    "There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."

  • Daffid011Daffid011 Member UncommonPosts: 7,945

    I don't think developers are necessarily trying to make crap games just to make a quick buck on initial sales.  The real money in mmos is from subs fees pair over time.

    What I think we are seeing is developers getting so cheap in production that they are forced into a position of trying to scramble for recover at launch.  I somehow doubt that game like conan or warhammer came even close to recovering their investments anywhere close to their respective release dates.

    A few of the newer releases are making me reconsider this though as they do appear to be put into an impossible development time frame and seem to be little more than marketing tricks to get some quick sales.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by Teala
     
    Right, those games 100+ subs in the US markets?  LOL  not.

    You might be right. I was making a guess and my memory failed me here a bit.

    I was considering AoC as lowest sub rates from those three. The Funcom Q4/2009 revenues were about 4.3M USD which would be about 95k subs. Take into account AO and retail prices and you can be around 70-75k subscribers. That is a guess again, though.

    I have to admit I am lazy to do the same for other games but I guess they get a bit better numbers or about the same in worst case.

    Even if it was 70k subscribers, I still think it is fine number. The games are still running and I do not see any of them any way near to close down so it is a success, isn't it?

  • EkibiogamiEkibiogami Member UncommonPosts: 2,154

    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.

    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
    —Samuel Adams

  • randomtrandomt Member UncommonPosts: 1,220

    They are failing because they are making mass market watered down please everyone clones of everything that's come before.

    That's not what a game is supposed to be. It's supposed to target a specific audience, and it's supposed to be if not fully originally, at least passably newish.

    In other words niche markets is what games are supposed to target.

    Instead we get tons of dev groups who decide to try to cash in on the mmo craze, make something crappy, and then the community goes and gives them some cash before realizing that they are crap.

    These days I think MMOs make their money off the initial sales, before people realize what the game actually is or isn't. Subscriptions are just icing on the cake.

    For instance Xsyon that just appeared out of no where, and is asking you to pre-order without any kind of proof that the game exists, other than screenshots and fancy feature lists. Mortal Online is another example of this disgusting money grab.

    Fallen Earth on the other hand is an example of an MMO that did the right thing, and let people play for free for a while to try it out, so you knew what you were getting before shelling out the cash.. plus if you were in since alpha, that was years of free play heh

  • MalcanisMalcanis Member UncommonPosts: 3,297
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.

     

    Well said.

    Give me liberty or give me lasers

  • LansidLansid Member UncommonPosts: 1,097

     Problem is, most of the "games" are not "fun".

    "There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."

  • Rockgod99Rockgod99 Member Posts: 4,640

    Whats the average subscription number for mmorpg in the west? Not counting Wow obviously? About 120k? 100k?

    All those games fall in that area of subs.

    so I ask you are all those games failures or just what you would expect from todays mmo genre?

    image

    Playing: Rift, LotRO
    Waiting on: GW2, BP

  • farfanugonfarfanugon Member Posts: 419
    Originally posted by heartless

    Originally posted by farfanugon


    no sir there not crap far far from it they are just what they were ment to be fast cheaply made mmo's to hit the market with stunning speed piggy bank up a nice lump of cash very quickly and sold off or left to rot in there own lost luster
    no sir its not the deva's fault we the gamers have let this happen we the gamers dump money into these games and alot of time with pre orders befor the games ever seen
    the speed in which gamers are willing to open the wallets for these "new" mmo's has shown the game dev's a new path to faster return
    if a super hype game can bring in a green profit line in the first 2 months of release while taking less than 6 months to make why push on with the game ? why put more money into it knowing the return will never be as good as the first 3-6 months ?
    will we close our wallets to sub par games ? of course not , and so we enter this new ugly stage of fly by nite mmo games that set great hype fuel our expectations and drop us on our faces upon release .
    the world of great mmo's will most likely never grace the web again and if it does will any of us still be gamers? will we sate our gameing needs on junk/hype mmo's keep playing keep the gaming spark alive in the hope a year 2 years 3 down the road the mmo's grow new life
    my expectations at this point are very low for a return of the mmo

     

    How can you say that these games aren't crap and then in the very first sentence provide proof why they are crap?

    The developers and the players are both at fault here. The developers are trying to make a lot of money quick, so they cut corners, copy other games and release way before the game is ready. The result is crap.

    MMOs are not released as often as other games, almost every month or so a decent single player game is released. We may see one or two MMO launches per year. As such, MMO gamers are so desperate for a new MMO that we buy into the hype and begin to hype up the game ourselves. Unfortunately, once the game goes live, we realize that it's nothing more than crap.

    no no no

    you are missing the point the games are not made any long to provide enjoyment to the gamer there now made to make fast bank

    and sir they are doing just that so crap they can not be

    are they fun nope they were not made to be are the great {even good} nope werent made to be

    they are 100% what they were made to be cheap fast ez bank rolls and they do just that

    and sir the game deva's know just that fact the mmo players long for a great game so hard that if they make the hype pad the pockets of a few review groups spread the woohooo acrost the web and gamer stations they will have plenty of pre orders to set there books in the black and open day jumpers to push it to the green  and that sir is why mmo's today are made there isnt 1 thats came out this year or last that has been a made to stay mmo there fast cash sell off or dump games that make big bucks with in months instead of steady cash flow over years

    there not fail or crap sir they are just what we made them the new worthless age of fly by nite mmo's 

    image

  • AumHybridAumHybrid Member UncommonPosts: 75

    I have yet to find another game that can grab my attention as well as EQ of DAoC.  I always had such a great time exploring those worlds, and the fact that everyone grouped made for fun communities. 

    FFXI was one of the only other MMO's I enjoyed, and that was almost purely for the strategic group play and the atmosphere which I knew was going to be great from the start.

     

    I am very excited for the new FF mmo and hopefully that isn't just nostalgia.

    SOE overall have pumped out the highest amount of quality games in my eyes though.  No matter how much they are hated by some people lol

  • farfanugonfarfanugon Member Posts: 419
    Originally posted by Rockgod99


    Whats the average subscription number for mmorpg in the west? Not counting Wow obviously? About 120k? 100k?
    All those games fall in that area of subs.
    so I ask you are all those games failures or just what you would expect from todays mmo genre?

     

    sir never rely on sub count a sub thats long long expired is still counted in these totals not 1 game will give you a active players {those that have logged in with in 7 days} sub count  its just not done the numbers then fall to a level that takes the oh my out of the number

    sub count its just a diversion it is in its self hype one of the leading couses of the mmo's we see today

    image

  • SkarothlockSkarothlock Member Posts: 89

    How about... player expectations?

    We want it all, now and we want it cheap.

    When I changed my expectations from the games all of a sudden I was having fun again... go figure.

     

    See the violence inherent in the system!

    image
  • TealaTeala Member RarePosts: 7,627
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.



     

    This...we're leaving persistent worlds behind as we once had and they are making single player games you play with others online.   Their are no virtual persistent worlds anymore and that is what is ruining this genre.

  • EkibiogamiEkibiogami Member UncommonPosts: 2,154
    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.



     

    This...we're leaving persistent worlds behind as we once had and they are making single player games you play with others online.   Their are no virtual persistent worlds anymore and that is what is ruining this genre.



     

    Im just glad some people agree with me :P

    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
    —Samuel Adams

  • qazymanqazyman Member Posts: 1,785
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami

    Originally posted by Teala

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.



     

    This...we're leaving persistent worlds behind as we once had and they are making single player games you play with others online.   Their are no virtual persistent worlds anymore and that is what is ruining this genre.



     

    Im just glad some people agree with me :P



     

    I think the reason for this is because persistent worlds may have history, but they usually don’t provide a strong story line with lots of lore. It’s to bad too, because I think your absolutely right.

  • AgtSmithAgtSmith Member Posts: 1,498
    Originally posted by elocke


     
     
    Why do you think the latest crop of games is failing?

    Overhype.

    Failure to deliver on what was promised.

    Community.

    Instanced vs. open world.

    Immersion factors i.e. Graphics/Sound/Controls

    Missing MMORPG staples like true exploration, meaningful character progression, group oriented tasks etc.

    Bad Marketing.

    PTP vs. FTP reasons

    Over saturation of game types, i.e. Fantasy/Superheroes, etc.

    Failure to be faithful to the I.P.
     

     

    Yes to all.

     

    I think the real problem with MMOs, and games in general, these days is it has become to much about dollars.  Now, I am not decrying profit nor am I suggesting some anti capitalist type rant - I believe in the pursuit of profit as fundamental to economics.  But that said, in creative endeavors the pursuit of profit has to be coupled with an equally zealous pursuit of a vision.  Today's MMOs/games are so expensive that they are manged and spun and commoditized in much the same way that movies and TV are and what emerges is not a product of a great idea or great development but a focus group, market analysis, homogenized product.  Along with this the increase in production costs comes the lack of time to get things done right before going live as well as the lack of a willingness to take chances and stick to an idea and see it through along with a tendency to follow a formula.

     

    The only real hope for MMOs and games, much like with movies and TVs, are the indie type studios and those more outside the larger industry structure.  Sure, some good titles still get through the big studios but even they are less than what they should be for the reasons above.

     

    Greed is a good thing when it motivates someone to invent a better mousetrap or otherwise realize a vision and innovate.  But there are those companies, SoE & Cryptic are two of the worst, that look at a game only as a vehicle to separate consumers form their cash instead of looking at games as the better mousetrap that when done right will have people beating a path to their door.

    --------------------------------
    Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
    Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD

  • AgtSmithAgtSmith Member Posts: 1,498
    Originally posted by Pelu


    ??? Lets say, released in a more respectable state... not finished, as mmos are never finished... new content better be added lol...

     

    Just wanted to comment on this even if outside the OP a bit.  The idea that MMOs are never finished is accurate but coupling that thought with the thought of when they are ready to launch is absolutely wrong.  All MMOs, software in general really, clearly does reach a point where it is ready for a general audience, a version 1.0 if you will - this is a totally separate thought or circumstance than the fact that the game will be added to and further developed post launch.  LotRO I think is a good example.  The game went live with a good level of polish, with the basic game good to go even though there where certainly issues and things needed down the road and even though the game has grown quite a bit since launch you can look at that game from start to now and see that it was indeed launched at the right time (and I am no great LotRO fan).  But since that game, I have yet to see a game go live that seems much closer to 'ready' for live than maybe version 0.7 or maybe not much better with incomplete systems, poorly fleshed out mechanics, and other glaring issues.  Live is for taking version 1.0 and working to add to it to get to version 1.x and 2.x and beyond - not for finished the development that never got done prior to launch.

    --------------------------------
    Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
    Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD

  • just1opinionjust1opinion Member UncommonPosts: 4,641
    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.

     

    This resonates with me. I hear....the ring....of truth.

    President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club

  • AgtSmithAgtSmith Member Posts: 1,498
    Originally posted by girlgeek

    Originally posted by Ekibiogami


    To me they are failing Because they are makeing Games and Not Worlds.
    A Game is fun for a little while. A world can Take years to fully Explore and Conquer.

     

    This resonates with me. I hear....the ring....of truth.

     

    I missed that post, it is a good point though.  I think it goes with what I was saying more generically about them not setting out to build an idea so much as to build a business that sells an idea.

    --------------------------------
    Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
    Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD

  • trancejeremytrancejeremy Member UncommonPosts: 1,222

    Simple - graphics.  As graphics get more and more advanced, it costs more and more and more of the development budget to implement. Which leaves little for the rest of the game.

    R.I.P. City of Heroes and my 17 characters there

  • polodoxpolodox Member Posts: 1

     



    There has been a lot said in this topic about the rise and fall of video games. I have heard that it is in some form the dev's fault, publishers, community, content, or even the subjective idea of "fun". Any one of these may be the reason why a game fails in the sense 'fails to meet expectations'. Now because the entire all the immensity of this subject it is necessary to ask the question "what is a video game in general?" because that is what a MMO is in its basic form.

     

    Back in the 1970's and 80's there were really very few video games compared to today, but if we spend time looking at them they all had one of two things in common. First, they were about the 'achievement', the real sense that what you did mattered, and would have value to those around us. Take the game "Punch-Out", I have never met anyone who actually beat that game. Alternatively, let’s take a text-based game "Beyond the Castle", as a child in the 90's playing that I just called it "castle". My cousin and I beat that game and it was a great achievement for us, and from a friend I had in high school was absolutely shocked and said "that game actually had an end?!?" Second, the other style of games was based upon the story that tagged us just beyond the next corner. These story-based games would often contain hints or logic based problems for us to solve making us feel we achieved greatness because of the difficulty of the problem while feeling swept up in the story. Games such as Indiana Jones and the fate of Atlantis along with the series in Myst come to mind.

    Those two are the very basics of all video games, now some may argue about the new genres, but please remember be it FPS or RTS all games are based on logical algorithms. Meaning I aim here and fire = head shot, or archer beats spearmen, whatever the example you use a computer is based on logical if and else statements, IF particle hits head then character receives 100% damage ELSE miss and go back to step one. (I realize this is an extreme over-simplification) Because of this nature, I will contend that achievement or story-based games are the primary video games and any sub category stems from these.

    I am sorry also to have read that some of you all feel that video game progression is in fact the root of all non-fun games. If you really want to see a game with no progression what so ever, then I suggest looking at the game "Second Life". I admit I am an A type personality and second life would drive me insane because nothing I did really mattered. There would be no purpose to be existence in the world, sure you could say community, but could you honestly say the community needed me?

    Another area that seems to create a little bit of buzz here was the idea of balanced gameplay vs. unbalanced. First I want to say I hate a balanced game, because a balanced game looks like STO. All Captains had access to the same abilities, same weapons and equipment, same stats. I only became aware of this after I got to the commander rank that controls tier-3 ships. now let me explain, money was useless, the only way you could get better weapons and consistently was to pvp. Now when I first entered pvp level 1-29 took real skill to win. Once I got to the next level I realized all the players were using the name ability which was reverse shield polarity which made a player invulnerable to all laser fire. All the battles literally become a slug fest with all players blasting with that skill for a good 3-5 minutes nothing would happen. The thing is there was no way to make a player better or worse all you needed to do was have a ton of shield skills and pray that you can survive longer than their shields. a balanced game does not support creation of better in game tactics rather we try to throw more people at the problem in a WWI style conflict which neither side being stronger in any specific area.

    My own opinion as to the fault of the game cannot lay with the publishers, because they are given expected time-lines by the devs. The devs in general cannot be to blame because they work with what they have been given. The fault of a game is really in one person, the Game Designer. They are the dream for the game, they imagine the content and context, and they literally are the video game personified. They create the hype from their imagination that we become excited by. The dev team cannot do any kind of work until the game designer creates their area of design. I do not think it is too simplistic to say that they control the life-blood of the game and no amount of extra time or money will change a bad game concept from the designer into a good game.

    I really do hope that we all will find a game of our own liking. Perhaps it will be the "Old Republic" or FF14 maybe even Soul and Blade. Whatever it is I wish you all good luck :)

     

Sign In or Register to comment.