Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
[Poll] People who Quit Over Changes in their MMO
uquipu
Member Posts: 1,516
A lot of people quit do to changes in their game.
.
If their toon is overpowered and they get a nerf, they quit. These are the same people you see posting 'what is the most over powered character configuration?' posts in the game's forum.
.
Expansions cause a lot of people to quit a game. These are the people who say, 'I was here at release and it was a much better game'. I think these types of people either don't like change or they got a nerf, possibly both.
.
I remember this one guy. He was the guild master of a large powerful guild. With the help of his guild he got 'high warlord' rank in pvp. He bought all of his epic high warlord armor. Then an expansion hit, adding more levels and making his armor worthless, well except for show. He rage quit and he won't play the game to this day. He tried other games, taking his guildies with him, but all the games he tried sucked in comparison. Today he is game-less.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
Comments
Guess I was the first voter. Anyway, I like change in a game. Change keeps it exciting and brings new elements to the table. I do think there are good and bad ways to implement change though. What happened to Star Wars Galaxies is an example of what not to do with change. IE they had a great game where the population was happy, but then they rewrote their whole system. I think games like WoW and EQ2 are masters of change. They nerf where nerfs are needed and they expand on the existing content.
Turbine in my opinion are good at change as well. For both DDO and LOTRO they have managed to steadily add content and tweak the performance without detracting from the gameplay. IMHO I even like what they have done with DDO's pay plan and what they plan to do with LOTRO's. They have found a way to expand their markets without polluting the original experience of the game.
I've always said that change, in and of itself, is neither bad, nor good. The question has to be, "Change from what, to what?" Even if you don't like how things are, there is always the possibility that poorly-thought-out change could make things worse. Imagine a game where the change causes tons of bugs and crashes and renders the game unplayable on 64-bit Windows platforms for months while they try to fix it. Is this a good change? Probably not. On the other hand when that broken system is finally fixed and changed so that it works, that would probably be a good change, because it's fixing a broken system.
So, it's not just "is change good or bad?" You really have to know, change from what, into what?
C
I'm surprised by the number of people that have voted for change is good as opposed to some change. Blind change is a bad thing - we know this on economic, political, social, and so many levels - it is no different with gaming.
I have quit games over changes - I know a lot of people that have quit games over changes. Have we ever quit a game crying, "OMFG, they just changed the game and it is so much better now. Oh noes, this game is just too good for us now - we're not worthy, we're not worthy." or anything of the like?
Um, no...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I voted for sometimes. Most changes are for the better. NGE changes not so much.
For the most part, change is fine. I've only ever quit one game due to change and that was SWG when the CU hit. I might have been a bit premature as, apparently, the NGE was the real fashionable time to quit. I wouldn't call what I did a rage quit though, It was more of a "well, that's sad"-quit. I've even gone back to see if I was just looking through rose-colored glasses, but I just can't seem to enjoy the current state of the game
.
Otherwise, I don't necessarily like how WoW has changed, but I go back from time to time to play and, for the most part, enjoy it. Conversely, I do mostly like how EvE has changed over the years. So, I can't believe in an extreme "change is bad/great" view, but it really does matter the context of the change.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I'm open to change as long as it's not game breaking.
Obviously, "game breaking" is a personal definition. For me, it means unplayable - literally. Maybe they do something and it creates monster lag/low FPS, maybe they nerf my class so much that I can't solo quests anymore, something radical like that - and it usually has to affect almost everything I do before I'll consider quitting over it. Most other stuff I can deal with. Generally change is good, if the devs aren't morons.
If I was around in SWG when the NGE/CU hit, I'd probably quit. If the devs mess with the core mechanics (and make them worse), it feels like a completely different game, and I can understand those who quit SWG.
I'm fine with patches adding new content. However, there's only ever been a handful of expansions I liked. It always seems like when an expansion comes out the devs want to take a 180 on how you do things. FFXI expansions and Shrouded Isles for DAoC are probably the only expansions I can think of off the top of my head I liked. The absolute worse expansions are for WoW. It's nothing like spending months and months getting the elite purple and Orange, epics and artifacts, only to have an expansion that has green items that are twice as good.
Well you have minor changes... such as balancing which is fine (not always lol but mostly)
Then you have major changes like NGE and such.
Whether a change is good or not really depends on the player and the details of the change.
Sometimes change is warranted, such as how I could see the CU in SWG. The HAM bar changes and some of the skill box requirement changes were for the best of the game (think about it, when you hit someone their health should be the only thing taking damage, action should be for abilities and mind for healing).
However, as most of us can tell you, the NGE wrecked the bejeezus out of that game. You can't change a game's speed like that, unless you want horrible looking animations, unrealistic movement, huge lag spikes due to sped up data streams and misfires of abilities. Not to mention taking the ability to mix and match professions away and adding those ridiculous effects in. That's the kind of changes that have no merit whatsoever.
Change for the better, or improvement, is always welcomed in my book.
The only game I ever quit due to it being "changed" was SWG of course. Only because they made my doctor useless, and removed the whole system of crafting my buff packs. There was simply no reason to be a doctor, thus no reason to continue playing.
Change - adding new content, tweaking combat for balance, network and graphic performance patches = GOOD
Change - redesigning the game to make it something completely different that in turn brings a host of new problems = BAD
Exactly.
Look at the P2P vs. F2P thing with LOTRO. That is a big change. Is it good? It depends on your perspective as a player, as well as on how they actually execute the change. The devil is in the details, as they say.
C
See, I kind of disagree with that in regard to WoW. With BC, it was a case of going 4-6 levels before any gear was worth it. With WotLK, it was a case of going as much as 7-8 levels before needing to replace epics. Course, once you reached the level cap - it was all about replacing gear and any pseudo content expansions at that point were about replacing gear.
Yes, there are all sorts of things wrong about WoW expansions - but what you describe did not really take place.
Will be interesting with Cata only having 5 additional levels, will it be at 83 or even 84 before folks have to replace gear... will the standard quest/dungeon gear follow the same pattern that we see in WotLK - where you have 80 levels of content and 80 levels of gear, so that the quest greens/blues will be garbage...or will some of the gear actually be useful.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I like changes, even if some of them have a negative impact on the way you play, it will also open a path for new ways to play, not to mention preventing the game becoming stale and boring.
I don't like payment changes though, one thing is to change the way I play in the world, another is changing the way I pay. That is a reason I dislike item malls, while I am very optimistic regarding new patches, this optimism doesn't apply to item mall additions. And I am not very optimistic either regarding services with a price-tag attached, though I will think about them - it's a service after all, you're getting something out of it and that's not a virtual item (not going to get into the whole "why I dislike paying for virtual items in a MMO" thing).
I don't quit because of changes. I quit because it never changes. In every MMO I've ever played there were always one or two HUGE features missing or broken which, IF FIXED, would have made the game simply brilliant.
"If the combat was just more fun..."
"If they would just add a time limit to the instance to prevent THIS..."
"If they would just release an ORIGINS server..."
Imagine if Ultima Online released a Pre-Rennaisance server, or DAoC released their Origins server, or if SWG released a Pre-CU server.
The amount of players who would return would be well worth the low cost of doing such a feature. In fact, in UO it would take less than a week to set it up.
It's not what they do, it's what they DON'T DO that makes me quit.
Add to the game or change it up as much as you want- JUST PLEASE FIX THE REAL ISSUES FIRST.
ex. They release patch after fix after rehaul, yet never even TOUCHED the real problems. It's like... "We have a problem with Ice freezing all of the water pipes, so we poured more gas into our unrelated vehicles and will continue to do everything except fix the ice or the pipes."
Dark Age of Camelot? Year after year, there still was no change to the unbalanced populations and needless grinding to PvP.
Champions Online? The overpowered powers never fixed, only ignored or pushed aside by other powers becoming overpowered.
Everquest 2? They don't care about their PvP or the fact it's horrible.
Ultima Online? They don't care about the millions of dollars they'd gain by opening an Origins server.
WoW? It took them forever to fix the Twink problem in PvP-- and by then I was already burnt out for the last time.
Eve Online? Still horrible tutorials and thus a needlessly steep learning curve.
DDO? Still no random dungeons. Still no Dungeon Master players. Still a huge immersion killer when half your group know where every single trap it-- and how even THAT doesn't matter because you can walk through every trap and it doesn't even hurt you.
All MMO's- healing being too important, broken or non-existent PvP in some way or another, and last but certainly worst of all: It always takes 100x longer to get from levels near max to max than it did to get from 1 to max. Oh yea...and the fact levels still exist, as if no one can clearly see it is one reason why PvP is often unbalanced.
It's extremely subjective depending on the nature and degree of the change/s.
It depends on what is changed.
Fundamental changes to a class can completely change the game experience. I can understand players quitting in these circumstances. For example, what it if you had a direct damage build and a fundamental change to your class was made forcing you to be a healer or quit the game? Yes, this did actually happen to me.
Option missing: Sometimes change is bad.
I'll chime in here as someone who quit over a change to their mmo. I have to say that (as others have argued), it really depends on what is changed, not that change happens. Anyone who plays MMOs knows that change in the game is inevitable. The factor for each of us is "Do those changes make the game continue to be fun, or do the changes make the game not fun anymore?"
For example, the game I quit over changes was WoW. My main was a Deathknight Tank, and I had so much time and effort invested into him. I put up with all the wild changes they made to the class since launch while they were still "experimenting" with the class. Fair enough. I could still always be an Unholy tank even when it wasn't popular, and I did just fine. (I was the MT for my guild's progression through nax and ulduar). I quit because of a number of factors. Firstly, it's become evident to me (and as written in articles) that the team running WoW now are the "B-team". Not the ace developers that made the game great, but the guys who stepped in to take over running the game while the aces went on to other projects. While WLK was good at the start, it wasn't finished when it launched, stuff kept patching in, ICC wasn't available for more than a year after the xpac came out, there are still swathes of land that are basically unpopulated/unused. Cataclysm imo should be a free expansion. The majority of what it's doing is revamping old areas and tying up loose ends that have been in the game since the start, such as the fact that gnomes and trolls were kinda shoe-horned in with the dwarves/orcs respectively, etc. No real new content in Cata beyond a few levels, no new classes, no more hero classes. The homogenization of everything what with classes now sharing buffs, giving away class mounts as drops now, so on and so forth. The final straw came when they basically said "okay, we consider the deathknight class a failed experiment, so we're now making it like all the other classes" with respect to talent trees. All that time and effort and enjoyment I put into my unholy tank, I cannot be anymore. If I want to be a tank, i have to be blood, or be dps if I want to stay unholy. They're essentially taking my specific spec out of the game. That was the final straw for me.
Honestly I think it was just a combination of the game having been changed so much since it started, along with the fact that the developers seem to now be moving the game in a different direction and aiming at a different crowd, and then the removal of the spec with which I had so much enjoyment. It was all just too much for me to continue paying monthly. I no longer enjoyed playing the game.
That's the right that we need to flex most in this genre. When a game isn't fun for you anymore, stop playing and find something else. After all, we're here to have fun aren't we?
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
I resemble your two scenarios.
I recall in Lineage One (my first MMO) I played a pet caster class (called a Bugbear Mage), spent months grinding up the million gold to purchase the spell I needed only to see the Dev's nerf the class 3 weeks after I reached my goal.
I understand that the nerf might have been necessary, but they didn't permit me to respec my mage (who was close to level cap) to adjust for the nerf and coupled with the fact that the price of that million adena spell dropped to 30K within a matter of weeks and I was done with the game. (but I went on to play DAOC, so all for the best)
Same for your gear example and WOW. While I never reached the lofty heights, I did work hard for my vanilla WOW gear doing 40 man raids ad nasuem up through AC 40, only to see it all wiped away by level 62 green world drop gear in the BC expansion. I saw myself on a never ending tread mill of raid, gear up, and do it again, (proven to be true) and I walked away before BC even released.
Well thought out change is essential to an MMORPG's survival, but history has shown us far too often that mis-managed or ill-conceived change and drive away some players or even destroy the games sub base in many cases.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Change from the perspective of new content, new features, ect; is fundamentally ok. The problem though lies with knee-jerk reactions to things, or, heavy-handed nerfing. The concept of "nerf it into oblivion and fix it later" is what most people get more upset about. Generally, this is due to misguided attempts by developers to add something new, but without realizing that while their internal testing may not have found any problems; gamers will find a way to "break" it and exploit it to their desire.
The sad thing is that most nerfs stem from the vocal few that post on forums and whine that their Tanklike-Warrior got beat down by a Tanklike-Druid right after a certain expansion that raised the level cap to a number higher than 69, but lower than 71.
Kidding aside, change are a necessity, but need to be approached with more caution that what is normally given. A quick change to appease the vocal populous will only anger the other half that don't post or are part of the problem that the vocal people are whining about
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Well the poll is lacking some options so:
New content, patches and all stuff that stuff is basically needed.
Things like heavy nerfs, dumping down and continuesly over/underpowering classes are not needed and often lead to rage quits for me.
The last Darkfall patch to me is somewhat comparable to the NGE maybe not equal but close. Changing the pace of a game almost 1 year after release IS A bad thing, because chances are high you'll piss off your current playerbase. Regarding World of Warcraft I should have quit with patch 3.0. Wotlk hasn't been a nice experience for me but well as long as Blizzards B or C team is running the game it wont change for the better.
Another example would have been Vanguard after Sony took over teasering their GU 2 gampeplan which included rest xp, boe all over the place and other stupid stuff like that to me it was a major change so I rage quit.
Personally I'm very cautious to changes I'm more a "If its not broken don't fix it" type of guys RL and VL.
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
If change makes the game better, great. If changes removes whatever it is I find FUN, I quit. I only play fun games.