To me, the veteran mmo players are being segratated because of the new design and philosophy of the new age of mmos. There are four major aspects that veterians are looking for that can't be found within new titles.
Without sounding offensive the things below are what some people are looking for but not all Veterans, these are the things YOU would like.
A: Challenge/Strategy --- Simply speaking I am not talking about player min and maxes (linear combat). I am talking about non linear combat where the AI adapts to your actions in combat. Where you don't have access to all of your abilities at one time. Where a player must think and become a tactician to outwit and out perform their opposition. The combat pace of this philosophy will be along the lines of medium. Medium combat pace is not fast nor slow. Combat pace can be fast or slow depending on the wisdom of the player using the combat mechanics. There should be a nice consistent flow of player input.
This sort of thing would be nice, however there are more people who complain about things than there are those that actually play the game for what it is. unfortunately the complainers are the ones most companies listen to and therefore changes happen all the time. can't win.
B: Community --- This entity of game design is being negated. Mmo's are becoming instanced lobbies where solo gameplay is rewarded as opposed to grouping gameplay. There are many aspects that could strengthen a community. Grouping is one major aspect. Forced grouping is one attribute that has helped community. However, I don't believe in forced grouping nor strickly solo content. I believe you should have the option to do either.
I too prefer an option of what i'd like to do in games i choose to buy and pay a sub for, however i must say that this above section you put is a bit false m8, games cater to the raiders (groupers) by design, most games are item specific and without the so called uber gear from group raids you may as well scream out "i don't want to be competative"
However, grouping should be immensly rewarded versus solo content. Penalties can tie into community vigor because it helps players work together so they can muff those penalties. Grouping enhances a server reputation which is a good and bad thing. This works well because you know who to group with and who not to group with.
Why should grouping be rewarded more than solo players? i see grouping and community as 2 entirely different things. you can be a part of the community without ever grouping.
C: Longevity --- This one may not please many but it's not what your thinking. I am talking about down time between combat. Where players can take strides within their adventures and take breaks. Longevity also enchances the community principle because in down time you can converse within your group. Who knows, you may find a good friend. I still have some good friends I still keep in touch with from EQ because of grouping.
I don't personally pervieve Longevity as being connected with the community, to me Longevity means that i continue to enjoy the game i play and pay for and for this everyone is different in what they view as enjoyment.
Longevity also can be considered on how long it takes you to progress to "end game". I would propose that the majority of verterian mmo gamers are not there to race to the end game but rather enjoy the journey.
This i agree with, the journey is just as enjoyable if not more so than when you reach so called "end game". I for one do not race to max level, this is one of the reasons i missed out on being elder jedi in SWG, i was enjoying the game for what it was and playing various combinations before i started the path to Jedi.
Exploration --- There has been some titles that focused on exploration. Instances are blighting the exploration of mmo worlds. However, I do see the other side of the coin where instances are a good thing. If I had to choose, and speak for the veteran community, instances should be omitted because it takes away from the immersion of the world. Instances also create contingencies for players to feel like after a few runs they have to blow through it. Makes it feel more like a job rather than a dangerious dungeon that should be explored.
I'm going to use my SWG experience again here and say that it is possible for both instance and open world to be used in creating a solid exploration experience. The reason for this is although SWG is/was open world it was still instanced in a way, you passed the boundary of each instance whenever you launched to space, changed planet etc.
Another aspect is exterior exploration. I truly believe a huge seamless world should be the standard for world building. This captivates the player to feel as if they are in a world. A lot of mmo titles are failing to make the world alive and enriched with lore. Veterian players love to feel rewarded for exploration.
This i agree with but in order to satisfy those who enjoy exploring (myself included) most games would have to be extremely huge, i mean at least 10x bigger than what they are now, specifically for fantasy games with only the one world. This i don't see as doable without it being sectioned off, or instanced, otherwise the server load would be too great and the game would encounter massive failings such as downtimes or extreme lag.
-----------
All of these things I have listed are principles that the verterian mmo gamer is looking for. This does not mean the design and philosophy has to take a step back but rather focus on those four with innovative ideas. I have a lot of the preproduction done for my mmorpg design. This game will be for the veterian players and new age gamers who are sick of the design that has been spewing out. All four of these principles I have taken into consideration and will be implemented. There is a market for the veterian players. It's larger than most expect. It's there and I wil grasp it and won't let go. To fortify this, a smooth launch and being loyal to the fan base will be essential keys to success.
I should also state that there are two types of verterian mmo players. Themeparks (EQ, DaOC) and Sandbox (AC and UO). These four principles can be used in any type of mmo design. I will say that I am more of an old school EQ player so that should tell you what type of design I am fond of.
The parts i've wrote explain another side to things but in a way agree with what you say to some degree.
Things evolve for a reason. Otherwise we would still be plowing fields with an Ox while living in a grass hut.
The games do not make the community, the players do. In a modern game players can choose to either interact with their fellow gamers or ignore them. The game mechanics do not enforce that and never will. When I am in a random dungeon in WoW, I often times do not interact with the people in my party. Why? Because I am too busy socializing with my guild that has been together for 5 years and meets annually for a backyard BBQ. The game mechanics in WoW (instancing, random dungeon queue) never prevented me from doing that.
WoW and other newer games are not neccessarily easier. They are just more accessible. Older games like EQ1 were not accessible for the average player with 15-20 hours to burn a week. I typically only play now about 20 hours a week and was able to see most of the content in WoTLK, which in my opinion was a good thing. Games that cater to the "Loyal Hardcore" player have to assume that the player base has 50+ hours a week to play and tune their content progression for those high numbers, which will drive away everyone else. Most "Loyal Hardcore" gamers never realize they are in the minority and they cost more money to the game company per user in development and bandwidth costs. Some companies, like Blizzard, got smart and realized this and started catering to a different crowd.
I for one will stick to driving my car to the grocery store and bringing my food back to my condo...
I think part of the problem is new MMOs(WoW) try to improve systems from older MMOs(EQ) that destroy the human element.
Take for example WoW's default loot order. In EverQuest, if someone was taking all the loot, like minded people would interact and decide how to handle this jerk taking all the loot. You would then remember the people you interacted with and continue to interact with them as you saw them throughout the game, whether it was the jerk or the rest of your groupmates.
Maybe you needed to ask somebody for help retrieving your corpse? You might need help fighting your way to it while naked to retrieve your armor or maybe you need to trust someone to drag it to you. Again, these may be perceived by some as nusciences, but they are what created the feeling we are all looking for.
Also, grouping to progress should be (almost)necessary. After all, these are MMOs... grouping and interacting to achieve was supposed to be the point. Not just playing a single player game alongside others.
Also, games like Fallen Earth and Darkfall fail when they let people pick up all professions. This also kills the need to interact. People need to be specialized. I need to be forced to interact with people who can produce a good that I cannot. WoW gets this right to some degree.
BRING THE HUMAN ELEMENT BACK PLEASE! Give me EQ with WoW's attention to class design and polish.
While I agree with most everything the OP says, I'm starting to believe there's no going back, so I'm going to try hard to learn to enjoy what is actually being built rather than dwell on what probably will never return.
I concur. Thankfully single player games are still evolving and getting better, in my opinion. MMORPGs are still fun, but not as fun as they used to be to me. The industry has changed, and so have I. Unfortunately we seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum right now. It could conceivably change back, but I would put my money on things becoming easier, more casual, and more anti-social in the future.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Someone will eventually make a game that feels like a living breathing world again instead of a game that goes from 1 menial task (quest) to the next. Most likely it will be because of money. A lot of these games that are just trying to copy WoW or have a similar gameplay haven't been doing too well.
I think eventually companies will get the idea that it is not profitable coming out with a lesser version of something well established and try a different angle. It might not be the same as the old MMOs, but could be better, certainly different than the current crop.
I'm just waiting for a game where the quests are actually quests, epic in scope, not something to merely level up. Also, if the run of the mill quests are made more for gear and story and not the greatest means of progression, we will actually see grouping again that holds some significance beyond end game raiding.
Oh, and as for the old games being a second job, not all of them were and if one managed their time well, none of them had to be. I was able to play EQ in a top raiding guild 15-20 hours a week which is not much. Also daoc one could play as little or as much as they wanted. Didn't need to play at all. People just wanted to.
Things evolve for a reason. Otherwise we would still be plowing fields with an Ox while living in a grass hut.
The games do not make the community, the players do. In a modern game players can choose to either interact with their fellow gamers or ignore them. The game mechanics do not enforce that and never will. When I am in a random dungeon in WoW, I often times do not interact with the people in my party. Why? Because I am too busy socializing with my guild that has been together for 5 years and meets annually for a backyard BBQ. The game mechanics in WoW (instancing, random dungeon queue) never prevented me from doing that.
WoW and other newer games are not neccessarily easier. They are just more accessible. Older games like EQ1 were not accessible for the average player with 15-20 hours to burn a week. I typically only play now about 20 hours a week and was able to see most of the content in WoTLK, which in my opinion was a good thing. Games that cater to the "Loyal Hardcore" player have to assume that the player base has 50+ hours a week to play and tune their content progression for those high numbers, which will drive away everyone else. Most "Loyal Hardcore" gamers never realize they are in the minority and they cost more money to the game company per user in development and bandwidth costs. Some companies, like Blizzard, got smart and realized this and started catering to a different crowd.
I for one will stick to driving my car to the grocery store and bringing my food back to my condo...
I still believe that the genre still needs to go back to niche gaming. However, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Blizzard brought players who were not gamers before to the market. This brings in revenue. Therefore, companies will now conform to to that basis.
The loyal hardcore club is there. I actually think its bigger than most people like to believe. It's an unatpped market now. There are some titles coming out that could captivate that audience. We'll wait and see. I see alot of posters talking about "moving on" with the old and in with the new. I agree. That is absolutely fine. However, you can still have the new with some of the old school principles. Not gameplay, just philosophies. I think that is a common misunderstanding within the thread.
Anyways, I do agree, mmos should hold a players attention for 15-20 hours a week. I think there is a common misunderstanding. Usually the content for the casual crowd has more or less linear and essential gameplay. I think you can still have a player putting in 15-20 hours a week that could also have access to challenging content.
The problem I see with a lot of people that say things like community is essential and you should need to team up to advance and the game shouldn't be so easy is that it sounds good in principle.
The problem with this is it usually ends up where if you're not part of a hardcore gaming guild and willing to commit scheduled times and dates with said guild then you simply don't get to experience content. I don't mind challenging content in the least, but a lot of old school MMOers feel that challenging content is 40 man raids which to me is only challenging because it's impossible to find a group outside of a very cliquey set of elite guilds that only want people willing to dedicate 20-50 hours a week to the game.
If you can find a way to incorporate challenging content into a format where the challenge is actually the content and not accessing the content then I'm all for it. I want challenging content that me and a handful of friends (5 man) can take on. I want the content to be difficult and rewarding.
When you say things like you NEED to group for content all I hear is I'll be waiting for 30 minutes LFG to find a niche class that's role is essential to progression and if things go badly I'll get bitched out by this person because they are a special snowflake class that no one wants to play but everyone needs and has to put up with.
Keeping this in mind GW2 looks like a game I want to play. Some may call it noob friendly or casual friendly because of it's accessibility, but it's precisely that accessibility that I desire but that doesn't mean I don't want challenging content.
This wasn't a very focused post as it was more of a post letting people know that from a somewhat casual (timewise) player's perspective that a lot of the things that were core to old school games make them very inaccessible and I think that will really be the biggest hurdle in going back to the roots of MMO's. How do you make a game accessible while retaining the challenge and doing the other things you say you want to do which generally make content less accessible.
Turbine just needs to make a new Asheron's Call that's true to the original and not allow the 3rd party apps/macros/XP chains to take over the game.
That game IMO was a perfect balance of exploration, community, and longevity. The combat will need some tweaking to make it in todays MMO market, but the skill system, loot system, epic and regular quests, and lore were second to none. The max level was not reached until roughly 2 years into the titles life IIRC.
Sadly, it will likely never happen and if it did, the new culture over at Turbine would try to find some way to work their new freemium F2P business model into it and ruin it.
The reason we will most likely never see the genre return to it's roots is because back then, games were being made by gamers, for gamers.
Now they are being made by businesses, with suits and bean counters making decisions on something they know nothing about other than increasing that bottom line. That's, IMO, why we've seen so many poor games in the last few years. The suits and bean counters see the financial monster that is WoW and they want a piece of that pie failing to realize gamers already have a WoW, they don't want another. In other words we want something different but they can't see past the bottom line.
On top of that, you have AAA developers turned gold sellers changing their games over to F2P with RMT.....again it's all about the money.
MMO's are a source of revenue now and no longer the virtual worlds they started out as.
MMO's are a source of revenue now and no longer the virtual worlds they started out as.
That is for a very true statement. Hopefully one day I can make a ploy to the investers and make it hapen. Start off small with your own ideas and hopefully it will blossom.
MMO's are a source of revenue now and no longer the virtual worlds they started out as.
That is for a very true statement. Hopefully one day I can make a ploy to the investers and make it hapen. Start off small with your own ideas and hopefully it will blossom.
the only way to impliment that "ploy" is to improve on something that AO has started. ingame advertising and the ACCEPTANCE of that concept by the MMO community as a whole. instead of drinking a haste potion, you are drinking red bull:D or instead of drinking a heal potion, you are drinking pepsi:D the key to making a good MMO is to make the funding possible from multiple sources so the designers are free to focus on the gameplay rather then pleasing the old corporate dollar.
EQ wrote themselves out of the MMO business chasing after the mighty dollar by constantly pushing out brokeware they call expansions and nevermind the gameplay or bugs that makes the game unplayable. if EQ had an independent source of income, they would have actually tried to put out a quality product because the overall design of the game was done by someone who cared about the project. it was a dream before its time and once objectified as a cash cow, it was too late to rescue from corporate oblivion.
it's unfortunate that even today, EQ still has the best raiding system of any game in existance. people wont go back to it because they burned too many bridges over the last decade and now it's just waiting for attrition to finish the job. it's sad that due to the lessons learned from EQ that new generations of MMO'ers will never experiance what a true raid should be and wont see what is involved in large scale planning and execution of a plan to prefection. if EQ wasn't so tight aresed about their VISION(tm) and their attitude of "you are in THEIR world now" and actually got up their buttz and fixed the bugs in the game rather then pushing out another episode of brokeware for $25, it would have put a HUGE damper on the success of WoW:D
There are many threads on the pub about how to bring back grouping, the demise of the genre because of the new path developers have taken, RMT, grind, leveling is bad, the old design is too old and we need new, instant gratification ect. This thread is for the veteran mmo players before 2004. It's obvious that the design for the mmo genre is on a constent spin that may not bring it back to it's roots.
To me, the veteran mmo players are being segratated because of the new design and philosophy of the new age of mmos. There are four major aspects that veterians are looking for that can't be found within new titles.
A: Challenge/Strategy --- Simply speaking I am not talking about player min and maxes (linear combat). I am talking about non linear combat where the AI adapts to your actions in combat. Where you don't have access to all of your abilities at one time. Where a player must think and become a tactician to outwit and out perform their opposition. The combat pace of this philosophy will be along the lines of medium. Medium combat pace is not fast nor slow. Combat pace can be fast or slow depending on the wisdom of the player using the combat mechanics. There should be a nice consistent flow of player input.
B: Community --- This entity of game design is being negated. Mmo's are becoming instanced lobbies where solo gameplay is rewarded as opposed to grouping gameplay. There are many aspects that could strengthen a community. Grouping is one major aspect. Forced grouping is one attribute that has helped community. However, I don't believe in forced grouping nor strickly solo content. I believe you should have the option to do either.
However, grouping should be immensly rewarded versus solo content. Penalties can tie into community vigor because it helps players work together so they can muff those penalties. Grouping enhances a server reputation which is a good and bad thing. This works well because you know who to group with and who not to group with.
C: Longevity --- This one may not please many but it's not what your thinking. I am talking about down time between combat. Where players can take strides within their adventures and take breaks. Longevity also enchances the community principle because in down time you can converse within your group. Who knows, you may find a good friend. I still have some good friends I still keep in touch with from EQ because of grouping.
Longevity also can be considered on how long it takes you to progress to "end game". I would propose that the majority of verterian mmo gamers are not there to race to the end game but rather enjoy the journey.
Exploration --- There has been some titles that focused on exploration. Instances are blighting the exploration of mmo worlds. However, I do see the other side of the coin where instances are a good thing. If I had to choose, and speak for the veteran community, instances should be omitted because it takes away from the immersion of the world. Instances also create contingencies for players to feel like after a few runs they have to blow through it. Makes it feel more like a job rather than a dangerious dungeon that should be explored.
Another aspect is exterior exploration. I truly believe a huge seamless world should be the standard for world building. This captivates the player to feel as if they are in a world. A lot of mmo titles are failing to make the world alive and enriched with lore. Veterian players love to feel rewarded for exploration.
-----------
All of these things I have listed are principles that the verterian mmo gamer is looking for. This does not mean the design and philosophy has to take a step back but rather focus on those four with innovative ideas. I have a lot of the preproduction done for my mmorpg design. This game will be for the veterian players and new age gamers who are sick of the design that has been spewing out. All four of these principles I have taken into consideration and will be implemented. There is a market for the veterian players. It's larger than most expect. It's there and I wil grasp it and won't let go. To fortify this, a smooth launch and being loyal to the fan base will be essential keys to success.
I should also state that there are two types of verterian mmo players. Themeparks (EQ, DaOC) and Sandbox (AC and UO). These four principles can be used in any type of mmo design. I will say that I am more of an old school EQ player so that should tell you what type of design I am fond of.
"Veteren" MMO player....
I am rolling on 40 years old, way quick. Yet I see a TON of posts on this site by "hardecore" "vets"... that are a decade PLUS younger than I am....
For real? When I see posts by "lions" that loved UO, "PRE-Trammel", and they are like 5 years old... Really...
Enough, us old schoolers "WERE" there....
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I am rolling on 40 years old, way quick. Yet I see a TON of posts on this site by "hardecore" "vets"... that are a decade PLUS younger than I am....
For real? When I see posts by "lions" that loved UO, "PRE-Trammel", and they are like 5 years old... Really...
Enough, us old schoolers "WERE" there....
Your logic here doesn't quite make sense. So because I or other gamers are not around the same age as you, we can't apprecaite the first virtual mmorpgs? Like Meridian 59, UO and EQ? I haven't played muds before hand because of age. On the other side of the coin, if your saying the term, "hardcore and veteran" is being used too much, I do agree. But yet we are a beast of categorization.
I am rolling on 40 years old, way quick. Yet I see a TON of posts on this site by "hardecore" "vets"... that are a decade PLUS younger than I am....
For real? When I see posts by "lions" that loved UO, "PRE-Trammel", and they are like 5 years old... Really...
Enough, us old schoolers "WERE" there....
Your logic here doesn't quite make sense. So because I or other gamers are not around the same age as you, we can't apprecaite the first virtual mmorpgs? Like Meridian 59, UO and EQ? I haven't played muds before hand because of age. On the other side of the coin, if your saying the term, "hardcore and veteran" is being used too much, I do agree. But yet we are a beast of categorization.
ACTUALLY... i've seen old school MUD players who became casuals and never really seen large scale end game raids, and i've seen some 14 year olds who are old EQ vets that made it as far as being an officer in an end game raiding guild:D
MMO's are a source of revenue now and no longer the virtual worlds they started out as.
That is for a very true statement. Hopefully one day I can make a ploy to the investers and make it hapen. Start off small with your own ideas and hopefully it will blossom.
Actually making a MMO without a great virtual world is a good way to burn money. We have seen that too often now, copying wow and catering for the casuals = FAIL. Destroying the community by focusing on PvP = EPIC FAIL. Too many games now lasted only two or three months, where are the games we want to sub for five years?
OP: It has been said for years, by many MMORPG gamers, that the genre needs to go back to its root however it will not happen. And the reason is simple, WoW. MMORPG has became big bussiness with the success of WoW and now beancounters all over are trying to recreate that success.
In their minds: potential millions of subs > good, solid MMORPG
Things evolve for a reason. Otherwise we would still be plowing fields with an Ox while living in a grass hut.
The games do not make the community, the players do. In a modern game players can choose to either interact with their fellow gamers or ignore them. The game mechanics do not enforce that and never will. When I am in a random dungeon in WoW, I often times do not interact with the people in my party. Why? Because I am too busy socializing with my guild that has been together for 5 years and meets annually for a backyard BBQ. The game mechanics in WoW (instancing, random dungeon queue) never prevented me from doing that.
WoW and other newer games are not neccessarily easier. They are just more accessible. Older games like EQ1 were not accessible for the average player with 15-20 hours to burn a week. I typically only play now about 20 hours a week and was able to see most of the content in WoTLK, which in my opinion was a good thing. Games that cater to the "Loyal Hardcore" player have to assume that the player base has 50+ hours a week to play and tune their content progression for those high numbers, which will drive away everyone else. Most "Loyal Hardcore" gamers never realize they are in the minority and they cost more money to the game company per user in development and bandwidth costs. Some companies, like Blizzard, got smart and realized this and started catering to a different crowd.
I for one will stick to driving my car to the grocery store and bringing my food back to my condo...
This is the contradiction that always galls me. If a player tells me "Look, I admit it. I'm lazy. I don't want a challenge. I want easy rewards in an easy game for very little to no effort. That's what entertains me." I can understand that. I can respect the honesty of that. I have no criticism of such a person. They are entitled to like or want whatever kind of game floats their boat.
But that's not what they do. They play their easy games for their easy, quickie rewards then tell a fantastic lie - that what they are doing is no less challenging or complex than EQ or UO. Rubbish. Pure and simple unadulterated rubbish. And it's those false claims that draw the ire of those of us who have actually played both kinds of games and know the difference.
But of course these discussions don't get very far before the WoW players pull out the subscription card and say "12 million people have spoken, so WoW > EQ." Really? Have you considered how many people had computers and internet access now versus in the early EQ days? Have you conidered how many countries WoW has been released in versus EQ, and the size of those markets? Have you considered that it took time to popularize online computer gaming, a trend that EQ and earlier games were still having to establish?
So NO, the last chapter has not been written on the future of these games. Easy is not necessarily the be all and end all of computer gaming. And it damn sure doesn't represent an evolution of the genre, any more than 1,000 saccharine tweener pop stars represents an evolution or improvement over The Beatles or The Rolling Stones.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
One thing that you omitted in your response Amathe...
EQ and UO are still available as options for players to choose over WoW to this very day. The vast majority of players that have chosen to play WoW would not be interested in any other MMO. For better or worse, WoW brought many more players into the MMO genre. Those players were not all that interested in MMOs until WoW came along.
Like you I was around for the beginning days of UO and then EQ, AC, and then DAoC. I agree those games in their day were different than WoW and the MMOs similar to it. WoW did make quite a few things easier for players... hence the reason for the increase in players. WoW was designed to appeal to as broad a player-base as possible. UO and EQ... not so much.
I personally think the vast array of MMOs available is a good thing. Each person should be able to find an MMO that they find enjoyable. If a game that you find enjoyable is closed down or changed (looking at you pre-CU SWG)... there are others to fill the gap.
Have you considered how many people had computers and internet access now versus in the early EQ days? Have you conidered how many countries WoW has been released in versus EQ, and the size of those markets? Have you considered that it took time to popularize online computer gaming, a trend that EQ and earlier games were still having to establish?
So NO, the last chapter has not been written on the future of these games. Easy is not necessarily the be all and end all of computer gaming. And it damn sure doesn't represent an evolution of the genre, any more than 1,000 saccharine tweener pop stars represents an evolution or improvement over The Beatles or The Rolling Stones.
actually... EQ wrote its own ticket for a very long time. it was the "only game in town" for like 4 years:D yah there were other games, but they werent real competitions:D as a result, EQ got arrogant and started to focus more on pushing out brokeware and less on making a game that people paid to play.
yah lets split the dev in half and make them push out EQ2. in the mean time lets also work on garbage like planetside and oh wait lucas wants to do something with starwars so lets get less people to work on EQ which is paying the bills:D and in the mean time, we need to push out more expansions so EQ can carry EQ2 for a few years before it can stand on its own... then lets split the company and get some people to work on vangard so we can milk more $ from a broken down system....
was EQ a great game? absolutely. did it piss off all their customers and drove them to seek other options like WoW, definately:D EQ didnt have the kind of subs WoW did because it burned way too many bridges, not because WoW was a superior game:D WoW simply had superior company attitide towards what they need to do. blizzard didnt do anything for a long time to focus their full attention on WoW to make it what it became. SoE, on the other hand, diluted themselves to nothing but a bad reputation.
Things evolve for a reason. Otherwise we would still be plowing fields with an Ox while living in a grass hut.
The games do not make the community, the players do. In a modern game players can choose to either interact with their fellow gamers or ignore them. The game mechanics do not enforce that and never will. When I am in a random dungeon in WoW, I often times do not interact with the people in my party. Why? Because I am too busy socializing with my guild that has been together for 5 years and meets annually for a backyard BBQ. The game mechanics in WoW (instancing, random dungeon queue) never prevented me from doing that.
WoW and other newer games are not neccessarily easier. They are just more accessible. Older games like EQ1 were not accessible for the average player with 15-20 hours to burn a week. I typically only play now about 20 hours a week and was able to see most of the content in WoTLK, which in my opinion was a good thing. Games that cater to the "Loyal Hardcore" player have to assume that the player base has 50+ hours a week to play and tune their content progression for those high numbers, which will drive away everyone else. Most "Loyal Hardcore" gamers never realize they are in the minority and they cost more money to the game company per user in development and bandwidth costs. Some companies, like Blizzard, got smart and realized this and started catering to a different crowd.
I for one will stick to driving my car to the grocery store and bringing my food back to my condo...
I still believe that the genre still needs to go back to niche gaming. However, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Blizzard brought players who were not gamers before to the market. This brings in revenue. Therefore, companies will now conform to to that basis.
The loyal hardcore club is there. I actually think its bigger than most people like to believe. It's an unatpped market now. There are some titles coming out that could captivate that audience. We'll wait and see. I see alot of posters talking about "moving on" with the old and in with the new. I agree. That is absolutely fine. However, you can still have the new with some of the old school principles. Not gameplay, just philosophies. I think that is a common misunderstanding within the thread.
Anyways, I do agree, mmos should hold a players attention for 15-20 hours a week. I think there is a common misunderstanding. Usually the content for the casual crowd has more or less linear and essential gameplay. I think you can still have a player putting in 15-20 hours a week that could also have access to challenging content.
Why don't people just understand this part, this part of Eronakis post!
Did you all know this was going to happen? Blizzard sure didn't? They were given an opportunity to Capitalize and they just did that.. And we can only speculate not be certain about the future of WoW.
You really think that other companies would never do this at all?
You don't think any other MMO company would jump on the opportunity like this? You'd be foolish not to.
When you say going back to its roots do you mean, spawn camping jogging simulators.
here are the issues I have with your arguments
A. Strategy, this will only happen for the first few people that see the encounter. After that the strategy is on the net and everyone copies it. If the developers could script a different battle every time that could work or a randomized dungeon with random boss spawns, but that is not going to happen.
B community, yes comunities could be better or at least civil. but groups are rewarded over solo players by access to harder encounters and better loot at lower lvls.
C, longevity,I just dont see the appeal of fighting one spawn for 5 minutes then having to rest for 10. But to each their own.
D. Exploration. I like to explore from time to time and check out the world, but I dont like having riding on a boat for 30 minutes to get somewhere, or having to run just as long to get to the next location.
There are reasons why things have changed, the things you want back re some of the very same things people were complaining about 7 + years ago.
I dont know why people are so quick to curse the game either. Vanilla WoW was an actual GREAT game, with tons of things to do and easy to pick up. im sorry EQ was just freaking dated at that point. Blame it on whatever you want but Blizzard has a history of making freaking awesome games, and backing them up.
I will always stick to this, Blizzard just messed up the progression in wow. They make it to easy to "skip" (i guess thats the 'easy' part that every refers to) right to the end of every expansion to automatically go for the biggest and baddest. If they had tiered it better, and Made you take baby steps to where players would feel accomplished to getting that far, then most of these "easy mode" people wouldnt be nearly as loud. If you take the time to explore and actually do all the little quests and things in between there is TON of stuff to do in those games. Which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for just about every other game out.
Just because they arent my cup of tea anymore, doesnt mean i am going to sit around and bitch like most of you ass holes out there that just love to hate because thats what all the cool kids are doing these days.
A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.
When you say going back to its roots do you mean, spawn camping jogging simulators.
here are the issues I have with your arguments
A. Strategy, this will only happen for the first few people that see the encounter. After that the strategy is on the net and everyone copies it. If the developers could script a different battle every time that could work or a randomized dungeon with random boss spawns, but that is not going to happen.
B community, yes comunities could be better or at least civil. but groups are rewarded over solo players by access to harder encounters and better loot at lower lvls.
C, longevity,I just dont see the appeal of fighting one spawn for 5 minutes then having to rest for 10. But to each their own.
D. Exploration. I like to explore from time to time and check out the world, but I dont like having riding on a boat for 30 minutes to get somewhere, or having to run just as long to get to the next location.
There are reasons why things have changed, the things you want back re some of the very same things people were complaining about 7 + years ago.
Very real post and I couldn't have said it better myself. But have to add that these things are not impossible to do in the modern mmorpg's people complain about.
A. If one's concern was to not have a boss battle be an easy mode fight, don't look up the strategy for it before hand.
B. Community, Honestly I think alot of the community reputation issues can be over emphasized. The difference between now and then that people don't like to mention while complaining that newer mmo's are "gating" people away from socialization is that older mmorpg's actually "gated" people into social interaction. I can't argue that doing that is a bad thing but I won't blame a developer for not forcing grouping onto it's playerbase.
C. Longevity. Why is this impossible every mmo has a built in difficulty slider usually in your stats and equipment, if you find a game a bit easy on the battles put your time into other endeavours than getting the best equipment out.
D. Exploration. This is the one that often get's me, it's aughable to hear people complain about systems like swift travel and the like. In every game I've played I've seen community members (and have even done so myself) who avoid using these options and take the scenic route. It's possible to do this solo or with a group of like minded players.
At the end of the day every complaint lobbied against the practices of newer mmo design are self serving because as pointed out the have little to nothing to do with how that person is able to enjoy the game but everything to do with hpw everyone is allowed to play the game. For me it's not an issue of if swift travel is good or not but more along the lines of if it's possible why should the devs force it on everyone so you can build your friends list?
If you don't like quest pointers and all the other easy mode stuff available in an mmo you have every tool available to not use them but the devs and the masses out there shouldn't be denied entertainment or a decent living just for the sake of those five percenters out there.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
My rose colored glasses are on and I'm nostalgic for times of yore!
Could we just pretend that WoW never happened—that there isn't a ton more competition now than there was ten years ago—and go back to making games that only appeal to a relatively small, captive audience of shut-ins, uber nerds and 40-year-old virgins?
Let's bring back +50-man raids and forced grouping too, since I'm socially awkward and don't want to learn how to be outgoing or make friends on my own.
Also, could we get more content gating and time-sinks? It won't bother me, as I'm a dedicated, hard-core gamer who'd like to put the spare +14 hours a day I have into maintaining my obvious superiority over those so-called "casual" players (who we all know aren't *real* gamers). Plus, if the gameplay is more boring, then everyone will realize how fascinating I am and want to chat with me!
Oh and bring back exhaustive player-interdependence too! That way I can leverage multi-boxing several accounts to my advantage over those who don't.
Last but not least, don't forget we want:
1) Graphics that are 10x better than the latest edition of Call of Duty.
2) AI that's smart enough to beat Garry Kasparov at chess.
3) A seamless world with thousands of miles to explore, but without ANY load screens or instancing that can also have hundreds of players on screen at the same time (without lag).
4) Alpha classes and phat loot that's super incredibly rare (for everyone else but me).
5) No nerfing! EVER! (Unless it's something that I don't have that someone used once to beat me in a duel, but didn't really beat me 'cause I wasn't ready and they are cheaters.)
Thx for reading! And remember if you do this you'll be super rich 'cause everyone will want to play this I swear, plus you owe us and know this is what you have to do to make good games again for real players.
My rose colored glasses are on and I'm nostalgic for times of yore!
Could we just pretend that WoW never happened—that there isn't a ton more competition now than there was ten years ago—and go back to making games that only appeal to a relatively small, captive audience of shut-ins, uber nerds and 40-year-old virgins?
Let's bring back +50-man raids and forced grouping too, since I'm socially awkward and don't want to learn how to be outgoing or make friends on my own.
Also, could we get more content gating and time-sinks? It won't bother me, as I'm a dedicated, hard-core gamer who'd like to put the spare +14 hours a day I have into maintaining my obvious superiority over those so-called "casual" players (who we all know aren't *real* gamers). Plus, if the gameplay is more boring, then everyone will realize how fascinating I am and want to chat with me!
Oh and bring back exhaustive player-interdependence too! That way I can leverage multi-boxing several accounts to my advantage over those who don't.
Last but not least, don't forget we want:
1) Graphics that are 10x better than the latest edition of Call of Duty.
2) AI that's smart enough to beat Garry Kasparov at chess.
3) A seamless world with thousands of miles to explore, but without ANY load screens or instancing that can also have hundreds of players on screen at the same time (without lag).
4) Alpha classes and phat loot that's super incredibly rare (for everyone else but me).
5) No nerfing! EVER! (Unless it's something that I don't have that someone used once to beat me in a duel, but didn't really beat me 'cause I wasn't ready and they are cheaters.)
Thx for reading! And remember if you do this you'll be super rich 'cause everyone will want to play this I swear, plus you owe us and know this is what you have to do to make good games again for real players.
I lolled. Pretty much sums it up.
I especially like the forced grouping part...I play WoW and group all the time, but guess some people don't know how to do things on their own
Check out my nature/animal/relaxing music channel on Youtube!
Comments
The parts i've wrote explain another side to things but in a way agree with what you say to some degree.
Things evolve for a reason. Otherwise we would still be plowing fields with an Ox while living in a grass hut.
The games do not make the community, the players do. In a modern game players can choose to either interact with their fellow gamers or ignore them. The game mechanics do not enforce that and never will. When I am in a random dungeon in WoW, I often times do not interact with the people in my party. Why? Because I am too busy socializing with my guild that has been together for 5 years and meets annually for a backyard BBQ. The game mechanics in WoW (instancing, random dungeon queue) never prevented me from doing that.
WoW and other newer games are not neccessarily easier. They are just more accessible. Older games like EQ1 were not accessible for the average player with 15-20 hours to burn a week. I typically only play now about 20 hours a week and was able to see most of the content in WoTLK, which in my opinion was a good thing. Games that cater to the "Loyal Hardcore" player have to assume that the player base has 50+ hours a week to play and tune their content progression for those high numbers, which will drive away everyone else. Most "Loyal Hardcore" gamers never realize they are in the minority and they cost more money to the game company per user in development and bandwidth costs. Some companies, like Blizzard, got smart and realized this and started catering to a different crowd.
I for one will stick to driving my car to the grocery store and bringing my food back to my condo...
I think part of the problem is new MMOs(WoW) try to improve systems from older MMOs(EQ) that destroy the human element.
Take for example WoW's default loot order. In EverQuest, if someone was taking all the loot, like minded people would interact and decide how to handle this jerk taking all the loot. You would then remember the people you interacted with and continue to interact with them as you saw them throughout the game, whether it was the jerk or the rest of your groupmates.
Maybe you needed to ask somebody for help retrieving your corpse? You might need help fighting your way to it while naked to retrieve your armor or maybe you need to trust someone to drag it to you. Again, these may be perceived by some as nusciences, but they are what created the feeling we are all looking for.
Also, grouping to progress should be (almost)necessary. After all, these are MMOs... grouping and interacting to achieve was supposed to be the point. Not just playing a single player game alongside others.
Also, games like Fallen Earth and Darkfall fail when they let people pick up all professions. This also kills the need to interact. People need to be specialized. I need to be forced to interact with people who can produce a good that I cannot. WoW gets this right to some degree.
BRING THE HUMAN ELEMENT BACK PLEASE! Give me EQ with WoW's attention to class design and polish.
I concur. Thankfully single player games are still evolving and getting better, in my opinion. MMORPGs are still fun, but not as fun as they used to be to me. The industry has changed, and so have I. Unfortunately we seem to be on opposite ends of the spectrum right now. It could conceivably change back, but I would put my money on things becoming easier, more casual, and more anti-social in the future.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Someone will eventually make a game that feels like a living breathing world again instead of a game that goes from 1 menial task (quest) to the next. Most likely it will be because of money. A lot of these games that are just trying to copy WoW or have a similar gameplay haven't been doing too well.
I think eventually companies will get the idea that it is not profitable coming out with a lesser version of something well established and try a different angle. It might not be the same as the old MMOs, but could be better, certainly different than the current crop.
I'm just waiting for a game where the quests are actually quests, epic in scope, not something to merely level up. Also, if the run of the mill quests are made more for gear and story and not the greatest means of progression, we will actually see grouping again that holds some significance beyond end game raiding.
Oh, and as for the old games being a second job, not all of them were and if one managed their time well, none of them had to be. I was able to play EQ in a top raiding guild 15-20 hours a week which is not much. Also daoc one could play as little or as much as they wanted. Didn't need to play at all. People just wanted to.
I still believe that the genre still needs to go back to niche gaming. However, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Blizzard brought players who were not gamers before to the market. This brings in revenue. Therefore, companies will now conform to to that basis.
The loyal hardcore club is there. I actually think its bigger than most people like to believe. It's an unatpped market now. There are some titles coming out that could captivate that audience. We'll wait and see. I see alot of posters talking about "moving on" with the old and in with the new. I agree. That is absolutely fine. However, you can still have the new with some of the old school principles. Not gameplay, just philosophies. I think that is a common misunderstanding within the thread.
Anyways, I do agree, mmos should hold a players attention for 15-20 hours a week. I think there is a common misunderstanding. Usually the content for the casual crowd has more or less linear and essential gameplay. I think you can still have a player putting in 15-20 hours a week that could also have access to challenging content.
The problem I see with a lot of people that say things like community is essential and you should need to team up to advance and the game shouldn't be so easy is that it sounds good in principle.
The problem with this is it usually ends up where if you're not part of a hardcore gaming guild and willing to commit scheduled times and dates with said guild then you simply don't get to experience content. I don't mind challenging content in the least, but a lot of old school MMOers feel that challenging content is 40 man raids which to me is only challenging because it's impossible to find a group outside of a very cliquey set of elite guilds that only want people willing to dedicate 20-50 hours a week to the game.
If you can find a way to incorporate challenging content into a format where the challenge is actually the content and not accessing the content then I'm all for it. I want challenging content that me and a handful of friends (5 man) can take on. I want the content to be difficult and rewarding.
When you say things like you NEED to group for content all I hear is I'll be waiting for 30 minutes LFG to find a niche class that's role is essential to progression and if things go badly I'll get bitched out by this person because they are a special snowflake class that no one wants to play but everyone needs and has to put up with.
Keeping this in mind GW2 looks like a game I want to play. Some may call it noob friendly or casual friendly because of it's accessibility, but it's precisely that accessibility that I desire but that doesn't mean I don't want challenging content.
This wasn't a very focused post as it was more of a post letting people know that from a somewhat casual (timewise) player's perspective that a lot of the things that were core to old school games make them very inaccessible and I think that will really be the biggest hurdle in going back to the roots of MMO's. How do you make a game accessible while retaining the challenge and doing the other things you say you want to do which generally make content less accessible.
AGREED !
That is for a very true statement. Hopefully one day I can make a ploy to the investers and make it hapen. Start off small with your own ideas and hopefully it will blossom.
the only way to impliment that "ploy" is to improve on something that AO has started. ingame advertising and the ACCEPTANCE of that concept by the MMO community as a whole. instead of drinking a haste potion, you are drinking red bull:D or instead of drinking a heal potion, you are drinking pepsi:D the key to making a good MMO is to make the funding possible from multiple sources so the designers are free to focus on the gameplay rather then pleasing the old corporate dollar.
EQ wrote themselves out of the MMO business chasing after the mighty dollar by constantly pushing out brokeware they call expansions and nevermind the gameplay or bugs that makes the game unplayable. if EQ had an independent source of income, they would have actually tried to put out a quality product because the overall design of the game was done by someone who cared about the project. it was a dream before its time and once objectified as a cash cow, it was too late to rescue from corporate oblivion.
it's unfortunate that even today, EQ still has the best raiding system of any game in existance. people wont go back to it because they burned too many bridges over the last decade and now it's just waiting for attrition to finish the job. it's sad that due to the lessons learned from EQ that new generations of MMO'ers will never experiance what a true raid should be and wont see what is involved in large scale planning and execution of a plan to prefection. if EQ wasn't so tight aresed about their VISION(tm) and their attitude of "you are in THEIR world now" and actually got up their buttz and fixed the bugs in the game rather then pushing out another episode of brokeware for $25, it would have put a HUGE damper on the success of WoW:D
"Veteren" MMO player....
I am rolling on 40 years old, way quick. Yet I see a TON of posts on this site by "hardecore" "vets"... that are a decade PLUS younger than I am....
For real? When I see posts by "lions" that loved UO, "PRE-Trammel", and they are like 5 years old... Really...
Enough, us old schoolers "WERE" there....
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Your logic here doesn't quite make sense. So because I or other gamers are not around the same age as you, we can't apprecaite the first virtual mmorpgs? Like Meridian 59, UO and EQ? I haven't played muds before hand because of age. On the other side of the coin, if your saying the term, "hardcore and veteran" is being used too much, I do agree. But yet we are a beast of categorization.
ACTUALLY... i've seen old school MUD players who became casuals and never really seen large scale end game raids, and i've seen some 14 year olds who are old EQ vets that made it as far as being an officer in an end game raiding guild:D
age on the internet is a mindset not a number:)
Actually making a MMO without a great virtual world is a good way to burn money. We have seen that too often now, copying wow and catering for the casuals = FAIL. Destroying the community by focusing on PvP = EPIC FAIL. Too many games now lasted only two or three months, where are the games we want to sub for five years?
Currently playing: EverQuest
Waiting for Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen
OP: It has been said for years, by many MMORPG gamers, that the genre needs to go back to its root however it will not happen. And the reason is simple, WoW. MMORPG has became big bussiness with the success of WoW and now beancounters all over are trying to recreate that success.
In their minds: potential millions of subs > good, solid MMORPG
My gaming blog
This is the contradiction that always galls me. If a player tells me "Look, I admit it. I'm lazy. I don't want a challenge. I want easy rewards in an easy game for very little to no effort. That's what entertains me." I can understand that. I can respect the honesty of that. I have no criticism of such a person. They are entitled to like or want whatever kind of game floats their boat.
But that's not what they do. They play their easy games for their easy, quickie rewards then tell a fantastic lie - that what they are doing is no less challenging or complex than EQ or UO. Rubbish. Pure and simple unadulterated rubbish. And it's those false claims that draw the ire of those of us who have actually played both kinds of games and know the difference.
But of course these discussions don't get very far before the WoW players pull out the subscription card and say "12 million people have spoken, so WoW > EQ." Really? Have you considered how many people had computers and internet access now versus in the early EQ days? Have you conidered how many countries WoW has been released in versus EQ, and the size of those markets? Have you considered that it took time to popularize online computer gaming, a trend that EQ and earlier games were still having to establish?
So NO, the last chapter has not been written on the future of these games. Easy is not necessarily the be all and end all of computer gaming. And it damn sure doesn't represent an evolution of the genre, any more than 1,000 saccharine tweener pop stars represents an evolution or improvement over The Beatles or The Rolling Stones.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
One thing that you omitted in your response Amathe...
EQ and UO are still available as options for players to choose over WoW to this very day. The vast majority of players that have chosen to play WoW would not be interested in any other MMO. For better or worse, WoW brought many more players into the MMO genre. Those players were not all that interested in MMOs until WoW came along.
Like you I was around for the beginning days of UO and then EQ, AC, and then DAoC. I agree those games in their day were different than WoW and the MMOs similar to it. WoW did make quite a few things easier for players... hence the reason for the increase in players. WoW was designed to appeal to as broad a player-base as possible. UO and EQ... not so much.
I personally think the vast array of MMOs available is a good thing. Each person should be able to find an MMO that they find enjoyable. If a game that you find enjoyable is closed down or changed (looking at you pre-CU SWG)... there are others to fill the gap.
Anyway... just my 2 cents on the subject.
actually... EQ wrote its own ticket for a very long time. it was the "only game in town" for like 4 years:D yah there were other games, but they werent real competitions:D as a result, EQ got arrogant and started to focus more on pushing out brokeware and less on making a game that people paid to play.
yah lets split the dev in half and make them push out EQ2. in the mean time lets also work on garbage like planetside and oh wait lucas wants to do something with starwars so lets get less people to work on EQ which is paying the bills:D and in the mean time, we need to push out more expansions so EQ can carry EQ2 for a few years before it can stand on its own... then lets split the company and get some people to work on vangard so we can milk more $ from a broken down system....
was EQ a great game? absolutely. did it piss off all their customers and drove them to seek other options like WoW, definately:D EQ didnt have the kind of subs WoW did because it burned way too many bridges, not because WoW was a superior game:D WoW simply had superior company attitide towards what they need to do. blizzard didnt do anything for a long time to focus their full attention on WoW to make it what it became. SoE, on the other hand, diluted themselves to nothing but a bad reputation.
Why don't people just understand this part, this part of Eronakis post!
Did you all know this was going to happen? Blizzard sure didn't? They were given an opportunity to Capitalize and they just did that.. And we can only speculate not be certain about the future of WoW.
You really think that other companies would never do this at all?
You don't think any other MMO company would jump on the opportunity like this? You'd be foolish not to.
When you say going back to its roots do you mean, spawn camping jogging simulators.
here are the issues I have with your arguments
A. Strategy, this will only happen for the first few people that see the encounter. After that the strategy is on the net and everyone copies it. If the developers could script a different battle every time that could work or a randomized dungeon with random boss spawns, but that is not going to happen.
B community, yes comunities could be better or at least civil. but groups are rewarded over solo players by access to harder encounters and better loot at lower lvls.
C, longevity,I just dont see the appeal of fighting one spawn for 5 minutes then having to rest for 10. But to each their own.
D. Exploration. I like to explore from time to time and check out the world, but I dont like having riding on a boat for 30 minutes to get somewhere, or having to run just as long to get to the next location.
There are reasons why things have changed, the things you want back re some of the very same things people were complaining about 7 + years ago.
I dont know why people are so quick to curse the game either. Vanilla WoW was an actual GREAT game, with tons of things to do and easy to pick up. im sorry EQ was just freaking dated at that point. Blame it on whatever you want but Blizzard has a history of making freaking awesome games, and backing them up.
I will always stick to this, Blizzard just messed up the progression in wow. They make it to easy to "skip" (i guess thats the 'easy' part that every refers to) right to the end of every expansion to automatically go for the biggest and baddest. If they had tiered it better, and Made you take baby steps to where players would feel accomplished to getting that far, then most of these "easy mode" people wouldnt be nearly as loud. If you take the time to explore and actually do all the little quests and things in between there is TON of stuff to do in those games. Which is a hell of a lot more than I can say for just about every other game out.
Just because they arent my cup of tea anymore, doesnt mean i am going to sit around and bitch like most of you ass holes out there that just love to hate because thats what all the cool kids are doing these days.
A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.
Very real post and I couldn't have said it better myself. But have to add that these things are not impossible to do in the modern mmorpg's people complain about.
A. If one's concern was to not have a boss battle be an easy mode fight, don't look up the strategy for it before hand.
B. Community, Honestly I think alot of the community reputation issues can be over emphasized. The difference between now and then that people don't like to mention while complaining that newer mmo's are "gating" people away from socialization is that older mmorpg's actually "gated" people into social interaction. I can't argue that doing that is a bad thing but I won't blame a developer for not forcing grouping onto it's playerbase.
C. Longevity. Why is this impossible every mmo has a built in difficulty slider usually in your stats and equipment, if you find a game a bit easy on the battles put your time into other endeavours than getting the best equipment out.
D. Exploration. This is the one that often get's me, it's aughable to hear people complain about systems like swift travel and the like. In every game I've played I've seen community members (and have even done so myself) who avoid using these options and take the scenic route. It's possible to do this solo or with a group of like minded players.
At the end of the day every complaint lobbied against the practices of newer mmo design are self serving because as pointed out the have little to nothing to do with how that person is able to enjoy the game but everything to do with hpw everyone is allowed to play the game. For me it's not an issue of if swift travel is good or not but more along the lines of if it's possible why should the devs force it on everyone so you can build your friends list?
If you don't like quest pointers and all the other easy mode stuff available in an mmo you have every tool available to not use them but the devs and the masses out there shouldn't be denied entertainment or a decent living just for the sake of those five percenters out there.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Hi game developers and publishers!
My rose colored glasses are on and I'm nostalgic for times of yore!
Could we just pretend that WoW never happened—that there isn't a ton more competition now than there was ten years ago—and go back to making games that only appeal to a relatively small, captive audience of shut-ins, uber nerds and 40-year-old virgins?
Let's bring back +50-man raids and forced grouping too, since I'm socially awkward and don't want to learn how to be outgoing or make friends on my own.
Also, could we get more content gating and time-sinks? It won't bother me, as I'm a dedicated, hard-core gamer who'd like to put the spare +14 hours a day I have into maintaining my obvious superiority over those so-called "casual" players (who we all know aren't *real* gamers). Plus, if the gameplay is more boring, then everyone will realize how fascinating I am and want to chat with me!
Oh and bring back exhaustive player-interdependence too! That way I can leverage multi-boxing several accounts to my advantage over those who don't.
Last but not least, don't forget we want:
1) Graphics that are 10x better than the latest edition of Call of Duty.
2) AI that's smart enough to beat Garry Kasparov at chess.
3) A seamless world with thousands of miles to explore, but without ANY load screens or instancing that can also have hundreds of players on screen at the same time (without lag).
4) Alpha classes and phat loot that's super incredibly rare (for everyone else but me).
5) No nerfing! EVER! (Unless it's something that I don't have that someone used once to beat me in a duel, but didn't really beat me 'cause I wasn't ready and they are cheaters.)
Thx for reading! And remember if you do this you'll be super rich 'cause everyone will want to play this I swear, plus you owe us and know this is what you have to do to make good games again for real players.
I lolled. Pretty much sums it up.
I especially like the forced grouping part...I play WoW and group all the time, but guess some people don't know how to do things on their own
Check out my nature/animal/relaxing music channel on Youtube!
My game channel on Youtube!
http://www.youtube.com/vendayn
I read the OP and I instantly thought of Vanguard.
MUNDO!!