Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What do you all want ?
ThomasN7
87.18.7.148Member CommonPosts: 6,690
We all heard the screams and cries, Don't play AOC, Don't play WAR, Don't play Aion, Don't play FFXIV, Don't play TOR and Don't play GW2. There is really no pleasing anyone out there today I understand most of those mmos I mentioned turned out to be disappoitments but even before they were released most of you out there didn't want people to play these other mmos. So to keep it simple without a wall of text, can some of you please explain to us what you really want mmos to be ?
30
Comments
Futuristic, scifi, western, alternate reality...just no more elfs.
a true sequel to the best MMO ever made.
Asherons Call
Wierd that you are asking this since you always seems to be negative against all released games (but like to hype games far from release)
So maybe you are the best one to answer that question!
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Nice try but I played most of those games I mentioned. Having an opinion is one thing but blatenly telling people not to play these other mmos is entirely another. Perhaps you can lend us your expertise on what mmos should be ?
The thing is OP every aspect of an MMO will have someone that dislikes it and thinks it is negative and people are more vocal about negatives. This same thing happened here leading up to WoW's launch and every other MMO to come out in the last 7 years. This site especially is pretty angsty. I think it is because everyone has that dream game or that dream memory of their first MMO and no game is going to be their dream game and no game is going to live up to their dream memory of the first time.
I can find the fun and good in any MMO out there and exploit it for at least the box price. People like me are rare though. Most demand something and without it their non existant preorders have just been cancelled.
Cake:
And able to eat it
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
It's a forum, people just want to bitch and moan. I would have thought that was patently evident.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Why is it necessary to trivialize why people are so negative about MMOs nowadays?
Let's face it, the big MMOs since WoW have not been as successful as even pre-WoW MMOs with rare exceptions. If developers continue to put out unimaginative games, this trend will continue.
I don't think we really know what we want.
we want complexity but won't play if its not simple enough.
We want to be the most powerful but want everything balanced
we want future fantasy but won't play unless its high fantasy.
we want deep meaning full stories and quests but really never read any of it, then cry that there is no content.
we want great quests and adventures with meaning and purpose then grind to max level as quickly as possible.
we want raiding and group dungeons and then play alone.
we want soloability and interdependence.
we ask for change and then do everything we can to cling to the past
we want epic battles and mass world pvp, then grind up through instanced battlegrounds
in short there is huge diversity in opinions and preferences in the mmorpg community and we all contradict each other and ourselves. We the players are our own worst enemy. We can and will as a community break the best games made.
I would say I'm in the opposite camp in that I like to try out games whether or not many call for its demise. One thing I do though is take the game for what it was designed for and not for what I may desired it to be. I personally found PotBS and STO to be great fun and even enjoyed Vanguard a great deal after it was fixed up some. To answer your question though I would love to see a new DAoC without the crowd control and combat that would last more than one hit.
Bzzzt!
Most people klnow what they want and a great many have clearly expressed those wishes here and elsewhere. The "problem" is that all of the mainstream game development is chasing the mythical 'common gamer' and trying to make games that appeal to the widest possible audience; largely because the industry expectations have gotten far too high. Every company wants a "WoW-killer" or 1 million subscribers. If that had been the standard all along, virtually no online game in the western market would have "made it".
Trying to please everyone and pleasing no one will only stop when the market it forces it. So long as all the lemmings out there keep buying the next game and "hoping they will get it right" or forgiving past fiascos, the companies will never change.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I have very definite ideas about what *I* want (and don't want) in an MMO, but for all I know, I might end up being the only person in the world that wants it.
nethack, XCom, Spore ... blend and spread across an ever-changing, ever-growing shared frontier of woodland, settlement and ruin.
I both agree with you and disagree with you, people know what they want to a certain extent, and can and will express what they want, but many times go against what they said they wanted when it is presented.
if you take for example, WAR, it has open world PvP with decent balance and many tools for epic battles, in theory. there were a large number of people stating that they wanted this type of game, and it was roses throughout most of Beta, people were having a great time in tier one, two and three RvR there were always lots of people and many epic battles, then they introduced instanced battlegrounds, something many people playing said they wanted, but that many others with a little more foresight warned against. that very day that the scenarios launched the world RvR crashed. one of the many problems with this was human nature, although many people wanted and enjoyed world RvR scenarios were the path of least resistance, fastest leveling and gear. This from the very same people who wanted meaningful PvP and stated that they did not care about getting gear and max level as much as they wanted good PvP.
This is not the fault solely of the developers, it is just as much if not more about we the players.
even a game like vanguard, although unfinished and buggy was a far cry better than EQ was at launch regardless of what both the fanboys and the naysayers said it was a good product that given time improved and if given more time and more money would have improved even more. but our expectations were higher.
Not only as you say have the developers expectations changed but so have the players, we want and expect more for less. what was once an expectable launch as far as bugs, amount of content etc no longer is, everyone wants their niche game with top quality graphics and features and pollish that is just the right difficulty and/or ease, that will cost a fortune to make but only gain 100k or so subscribers at best, now I understand that EQ days 100 to 200k subs was a success, but not only have the devcos expectations changed so has the cost of development and more so to get to the level of content and polish we expect, no, demand at launch.
so yes an individual can define what he wants mostly in an ultimate MMORPG but most would not like it then because they were the only one playing it, so the devco would lose their one subscriber. in addition what people say they want and sounds good on paper may or may not be as fun as they thought it would be. in most cases in fact, not. some of the worst games out there are from dev making what they want not what is actually fun to play for many.
I want 3 Hot Redheaded women, a case of Gatorade, and a box of Trojans please :P
But seriously, I want a new MMO with the same polish and development time as WOW has full on in-depth crafting, fishing, world building, real space combat with options to craft ships and capital ships if the genre fits, fully fluid ground combat, trade routes , localized banking, player owned shops and business, real player housing that is non-instanced,, player based economy not loot based. Fully customizable characters like City of Heros and STO customizable, no item or cash shops or C-Store trading card gambling pyramid schemes, Alliances and world politics, the ability to create your own missions (quests), naval battles if the genre fits, etc,etc , oh and a company that bans hackers instantly and people that exploit the game to their advantage punished. 99% of MMOs dont have all of these features at all, the most they have is fight, raid , worthless crafting, and achievements and you wonder why I don't play most of them and people look at them and why most MMOs are mediocore at best or just downright abysymal.
Actually for a really neat idea to have a MMO based off the concepts of X-Com and Deus-Ex think about it for a bit , lots of customization, research, manufacturing, multiple ways to complete objective, fully destructible enviroments, etc, its sounds DELICIOUS!!!
Wow, not asking for much, just the impossible.
Really!?!
so 10 years or so of dev time?
I can't even imagine UO type housing with todays population sizes, it was bad enough back then.
also a lot of what you want is very player dependent... shops, economy, polotics, quest creation, etc.. the thought of thousands of players in this game would be disastrous, let alone millions.
A lot of that though is tailored to the genre type of MMO like naval battles in a fantasy MMO like Darkfall, space combat in a scifi setting I'm not asking for all of that in ONE game :P just take a genre and add it in as time goes on , a lot of that stuff can be added in expansions as other games have done in the past, EVE Online comes to the closest almost perfect MMO, with the additon of Incarna and Dust 514 it will be about flawless then they can work on the core games flaws like PVE and exploits and creating a immersive ground game.
Your comment about player housing as SWG finally addressed in later years post-NGE dealing with large masses of player housing and abandoned building was them implmenting a player pack-up feature if a account holder didnt log in for 90 days the buildings were marked in red and any player could tag and the houses would be taken down and pack-up in the account holders datapad for when they did log on or return if ever all their stuff is safely in their datapad/inventory, a system like that could be implmented and prevent massive ghost towns or abanonded houses, also SWG's engine was flawed from the get go so the problems with lag wasnt due to players but bad coding and SOE's cheap servers.
ok that makes alot more sense if you ar not talking about at launch. The problem is that if its not something close to what WoW is now after 10ish years of dev time it does not get enough subs. and that is not a problem of the developers it is the the players that expect the impossible. and even when the framework is in place for what players want they dont use it. and then drop thier sub. and then wonder why devs arent investing more into breaking the mold. well frankly it is not worth the risk, we have shown many times over that going outside of the accepted norms of mmorpgs can be extremely expensive mitakes.
If you look at the most successful mmorpgs, be that EQ with 150k subs or WoW with thier million, I can only think of one that did not stick to the accepted norms, and that would be Eve, but even they barely made it through long enough to eventually grow to what it is today.
Even if your game was made, would there really be enough players to support it? are there enough players with the same Ideas of what is enjoyable? would enough of the players stick with it after launch to sustain long term development to achieve everything you want. is it really worth the risk to the investors to find out if you are right let alone the developers who pour thier souls into developing it just to watch it die?
how much of that is the fault of the devs staying with known successful models and how much is the fault of the players who have killed so many titles without giving it a chance because it had not already been through 10 years of development?
the reality is, what we say we want and we are willing to pay and wait for are two differnt things.
We the players say we know what we want, But we also want everyone else to want the same things. We want that elusive "common Gamer" to be just like us so that our game is the one worth making. and then hope that what you thought was fun as an idea really is that fun.
the only thing we ever wanted is pre-cu back.
the rest of the games are several levels below.
We want....
Gameplay over graphics, but then complain if a game doesn't feature high-end graphics.
A serious hardcore gaming experience, but then buy the game with the box having the girl with the biggest bewbs.
It really is a tough market to please anyone.
I'd donate a testicle for a Dune MMO.
________________________
Two atoms walk out of a bar. The first exclaims, "Damn, I forgot my electrons." The other replies, "You sure?". The first explains, "Yea, I'm positive."
I want Vanguard to be relaunched with a huge new dev team and a whole lot of marketing.
mmmmmm... Bewbs...
i think your right