the only problem with todays mmos's is wow. plain and simple. We would have much better games if wow never existed.
They'd just be in another themepark MMO or in EQ II or similar. World of warcraft is great because it showed the industry you really need to polish what you have while you have it.
the only problem with todays mmos's is wow. plain and simple. We would have much better games if wow never existed.
They'd just be in another themepark MMO or in EQ II or similar. World of warcraft is great because it showed the industry you really need to polish what you have while you have it.
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Top 3 MMO's PRE-CU SWG GW1 GW2
Worst 2 wow and Lotro Under standing stones it went woke
the only problem with todays mmos's is wow. plain and simple. We would have much better games if wow never existed.
They'd just be in another themepark MMO or in EQ II or similar. World of warcraft is great because it showed the industry you really need to polish what you have while you have it.
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Agreed.... Asheron's Call is best mmorpg for me. And its my 1st mmorpg game and I'm very happy it was my first!
I think world of warcraft is the shining pinnacle of MMOs in general, and the champ of the themepark style, but star wars galaxies is a very good sandbox pre NGE. (and somewhat after as well). However, the types of people who will play these are two very different groups, these are two very different styles of play, and everyone of the 12 million plus subscribers for World of Warcraft cast their vote a long time ago, they won't be swayed by any glorious sandbox because it's not their style.
3. Lack of emphasis on incentives for grouping up with other adventurers at low to mid levels.
4. It takes too little time and effort to hit level cap.
5. The way in which NPCs behave is lacking.
1. There is another factor to this: Difficulty.A really hard game with no death penalty or a eassy game with hard death penalty works fine in both cases. It is when a game gets both easy and have no or close to none death penalty it gets boring. So I agree with you that risk Vs reward could be better but the question is more complex than you say.
2. As a pen and paper RPG player I really agree with the point but your talk about EQ is far from enough for me, even EQ had this issue, it just have gotten worse now. When I play P&P I have loads of options and not even in D&D (which is the worst in this aspect) are characters of the same class so similar, There need however to be a auto select button for people who don't want to customize. I want to select my skills myself from a list. I want to create a close to unique character instead of mirroring the rest of my class, at least in PvE centered games.
3. Well, I do think that grouping should be encouraged but I don't like when games force me to do things no matter what it is, so this have to be encouraged carefully.
4. Agreed. Ibn fact it might be time to get rid of levels altogether and let people slowly advance as long as they play instead. Not too much so it get's totally unbalanced but a little at time.
5. Agreed. Mobs should react as close to humans as possible,
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Programming is one way and if you think SWG ever had better coding than Wow you have very rose colored glasses on you.
The reason SWG started losing players in the first places which lead to the idiot decision were because it was coded by drunk monkeys, like all other SOE games.
If EQ2 would have been good coded, it would have been the big now, the IP already had the MMO fans and most people thought it were going to be the next big.
The solution for players who like this this kind of game: Remake Everquest with better graphics. How many do you think would play? Enough to make it worth making? It wouldn't be my kind of game, but I'm sure many would like it. In fact, I remember when Vanguard was being developed and all of these things were being planned. Vanguard is still around for you people. However, it didn't make the big splash they hoped.
Only in niche games (i.e. sandboxes the majority of the time) do you find that occurring. AAA mmos are developed to get as many subs as possible, hence they are made to appeal to the 'casual' crowd. Take a look through this forum, people care more about soloability and how rapidly they can get their shinies in the next game then they really care about any community driven interaction.
By aiming games at the item shop buying, instance running, solo casual crowd who shy away from any risk levels or need for community support ala crafting and decay systems then you pretty much ensure your games are going to have garbage communities in them.
That's fine for 'plug n play' games like rts and fps, but for persistent world games it really isn't.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
The solution for players who like this this kind of game: Remake Everquest with better graphics. How many do you think would play? Enough to make it worth making? It wouldn't be my kind of game, but I'm sure many would like it. In fact, I remember when Vanguard was being developed and all of these things were being planned. Vanguard is still around for you people. However, it didn't make the big splash they hoped.
That's because the game was released in a terrible fashion and was never able to rebound from it. Not to mention, not many people were able to run the game well when Vanguard was released.
1. Games become your second full-time job, if you like to be succesful and competitive (How much do you play? 8h a week? OMG dude, we don't need tards like you in our guild)
2.LF Healer/Tank. Sitting in front of the dungeon entrance and waiting for one, or disbanding, because one just had left.
3. Where the hell is Role Playing gone? I haven't seen the guy for ages.
4. Raiding is the only option for endgame.
5. General lack of freedom. Pick one of the fightink classes, go out and fight, get best gear possible via rinse and repeat mode.
1. Inadequate penalties for dying. A 10% durability loss on equipped items (World of Warcraft)--or being able to die 10 times before your stats are reduced by 50% for only 4 mins (Rift. Although you can heal yourself for a minute amount of money before it gets to the point where you stats are reduced by 50%)--are not adequate penalties for dying in any game, let alone a MMORPG. Imagine if Nintendo had made it so dying in Super Mario Bros 3 meant respawning at an earlier checkpoint without the loss of anything; so, anyone, even your grandma, could beat the game because everyone would be given an infinite number of extra lives. Is that superior game design? Is that fun? Solid penalties for dying make games exciting, challenging, and encourage you to become better. Unfortunately as of late, the game developers for MMORPGs have been dropping the ball in this regard.
I totally disagree with this. In fact the removal of this unhealthy negative-feedback mechanism is imo one of the rare advancements MMO genre achieved in the past 5-10 years.
Characters who take risks inevitably die. If you make dying painful then you discourage players from taking risks. This is particularly poignant in PvP where the harsher the death penalties the more ganking there is. Not to mention the godawful blackmail inherent in this mechanic when you have to "work out" your death penaltiy... in essence the game is not allowing you to play what you want until you perform the pennance by doing something invariably dull (like grinding mobs so you get the money to repair gear so you can finally PvP, which is actually what you bought the game in the first place). Good riddance I say.
2. Not enough ways to develop your character.
Agree.
3. Lack of emphasis on incentives for grouping up with other adventurers at low to mid levels.
Maybe. But not all mmos are WoW. There are games that reward grouping from level 1. Most sandboxes for example. WAR as well. And GW2 will definitely be group-friendly from the beginning.
4. It takes too little time and effort to hit level cap.
I disagree. Imo leveling+endgame paradigm is a thing on the way out. Good riddance I say. Leveling "journey" is a throwback to singleplayer limited-gametime RPGs. While there should always be ways to improve and advance your character as well as to unlock new content and explore, leveling dingedy-ding is soo dull a way to achieve this. And besides the vast majority of mmo players usually rush through this carefully prepared "journey" to start playing the "proper game" which is the endgame. Lets just ditch this leveling crap altogether because it serves no other purpose but to delay the beginning of the real game.
5. The way in which NPCs behave is lacking.
I agree. Especially in WoW where all the mob behaviour except bosses is controlled by a single extremely dull AI algorithm. Thankfully there are new games on horizon which might finally put some fresh breath into this.
6. Faction is uninteresting.
Maybe. But factions do have some positives to them... Imo it depends on the game itself and how its done rather than being true in all cases.
To all of those who have read my entire post, thanks.
Basically the gist of your post is that EQ is the best mmo there ever was because all your negatives are points of divergence from EQ. Imo this is a very narrow-minded view and maybe you should open your mind a bit..
Basically the gist of your post is that EQ is the best mmo there ever was because all your negatives are points of divergence from EQ. Imo this is a very narrow-minded view and maybe you should open your mind a bit..
I don't see how thinking EQ is a good or the best MMORPG is narrow-minded. I've played plenty of MMORPGs and I liked EQ the most. How is that narrow-minded?
However, calling somebody narrow-minded for having a different opinion than your own is narrow-minded.
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Programming is one way and if you think SWG ever had better coding than Wow you have very rose colored glasses on you.
The reason SWG started losing players in the first places which lead to the idiot decision were because it was coded by drunk monkeys, like all other SOE games.
If EQ2 would have been good coded, it would have been the big now, the IP already had the MMO fans and most people thought it were going to be the next big.
Because wow NEVER had any bugs in it at all now did it. I never said SWG was perfect just better than wow. Yes SWG had to many bugs in and the combat system needed work. BUT bugs can be fixed . The problems with wow can't be.
Anyone who thinks wow its the best mmo ever and has 12+ million subs is clearly delusional and therefor can be ignored.
Loke doesn't think WoW is the best MMO ever. He is just taking issue with your statement that SWG is better than WoW in every way.
I would think it would be nearly impossible for an MMO to be better in EVERY single way, simply because... well, sometimes there are ways to be better that are incompatible.
Anyone who thinks wow its the best mmo ever and has 12+ million subs is clearly delusional and therefor can be ignored.
Explain to me why it CAN'T have 12 million subs. The video game industry itself is a $10 billion dollar industry, and there are 6-7 billion people on the planet. I think we have large enough numbers here to give them 12 million subs. Honestly, 12 million people just isn't that many anymore.
EDIT: Oh and never ignore people you think are delusional. They still can vote/run for office/do a lot of things that you might disagree with and will leave you whinging.
However, calling somebody narrow-minded for having a different opinion than your own is narrow-minded.
I think on a thread dedicated to an intolerance towards other game styles, talking about people being narrow-minded is deliciously ironic.
Mmm. Tasty.
I don't think you understand what narrow-minded means. Or maybe you don't know what irony means.
In any case, expressing your opinion and giving reasons for why you think the way you do isn't being narrow-minded. If merely expressing an opinion is narrow-minded, then anyone who has ever held an opinion about anything--even if that opinion is that anyone who holds an opinion is narrow-minded--would be narrow-minded.
1) Death Penalties - I do think MMO's need them, but I realize we don't all agree on what is an appropriate death penalty. I prefer ones that make players pause before they take action (yes, even avoid taking action) if the risk doesn't justify the reward. Other players love to throw caution to the wind and try no matter what with little consequence. That's why we need all sorts of games with all sorts of death penalties in order to satisfy the variety of preferences.
2) Character Development or lack thereof - Totally agree, loved how DAOC or Lineage 1's stat choices when creating your character actually affected how they played, what weapons they fought with, what mob types they were strong and weak against and how they fared in PVP in many cases. Now everything is being simplified and it just makes things less interesting.
3) Lack of grouping incentives. - Absolutely, modern MMO's have become single player grinds (which I realize many players enjoy) but I do miss the fun of finding a good group like back in the early days of DAOC. (and no, you can't do that any more, DAOC is now a solo fest, following the modern trends)
4) Time to level cap - Another preference thing, if you are a casual player, you might not get to WOW's level cap for 3 months or more, whereas when I played Lineage 2 at launch I guestimated that it would take me 1.5 years to get to level cap, which was far to slow for me and I left for WOW. I don't it too easy, but then again, if the game is fun at lower levels, then I guess there's no reason for there to be a hurry. In the case of L2 there was the carrot of end game castle seiging for which you needed to be max level to survive and the grind was just plain annoying as it prevented me from getting to the fun stuff.
5) NPC behavior - Actually, in the past I played MMO's that did exactly what you said. If NPCs were follwing someone and finally peeled off they would attack anyone nearby or on the way back, but this lead to the tactic of "training"mobs on other players which players screamed about so now they just rush back to their starting point. As to why they don't follow forever, too easy for ranged to kite which is normally why they reset in the first place.
6) Faction - Definitely agree, faction shouldn't be a grind mechanic, but rather a side you chose which permanently influences the way the game world reacts to you. EVE's got a nice feature on this, kill too many of a certain NPC faction and they'll start shooting at your ships when you enter their space. Same goes for pirates, so player behavior is recognized and rewarded or punished for it.
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
I don't think you understand what narrow-minded means. Or maybe you don't know what irony means.
In any case, expressing your opinion and giving reasons for why you think the way you do isn't being narrow-minded. If merely expressing an opinion is narrow-minded, then anyone who has ever held an opinion about anything--even if that opinion is that anyone who holds an opinion is narrow-minded--would be narrow-minded.
Anything else?
Okay, I stand corrected. You're just horrible at writing/expressing yourself. That's also a possibility.
You could try titling it like '6 things I don't like about modern-day MMORPGs' or '6 things I wish they would change about modern-day MMORPGs', but saying the things are WRONG suggests that there is a right way, and that is not the way they are doing it.
For example, if you went into a restaurant and saw people eating with chopsticks, and said 'You are eating the wrong way', I would say 'You are too narrowminded'. If you said 'You are eating in a way that I cannot, or do not wish to', I would just think you're a little weird for feeling the need to tell me that, but would otherwise accept your statement.
Because you phrased this whole thread in such a way that suggests that MMORPGs (In fact, a majority of them) are being done a wrong way, rather than the right way, that suggests you have a narrowminded view of what is an acceptable MMO style.
However, calling somebody narrow-minded for having a different opinion than your own is narrow-minded.
I think on a thread dedicated to an intolerance towards other game styles, talking about people being narrow-minded is deliciously ironic.
Mmm. Tasty.
I don't think you understand what narrow-minded means. Or maybe you don't know what irony means.
In any case, expressing your opinion and giving reasons for why you think the way you do isn't being narrow-minded. If merely expressing an opinion is narrow-minded, then anyone who has ever held an opinion about anything--even if that opinion is that anyone who holds an opinion is narrow-minded--would be narrow-minded.
Anything else?
Not all opinions are narrow minded, but there certainly are narrow minded opinions.
If I say "the only acceptable death penalty is permadeath in an MMORPG" I'm probably voicing a narrow minded opinion vs "games should have some sort of penalty for dying however player expectations will likely vary in this regard" is a much broader minded stance.
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
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Programming is one way and if you think SWG ever had better coding than Wow you have very rose colored glasses on you.
The reason SWG started losing players in the first places which lead to the idiot decision were because it was coded by drunk monkeys, like all other SOE games.
If EQ2 would have been good coded, it would have been the big now, the IP already had the MMO fans and most people thought it were going to be the next big.
Because wow NEVER had any bugs in it at all now did it. I never said SWG was perfect just better than wow. Yes SWG had to many bugs in and the combat system needed work. BUT bugs can be fixed . The problems with wow can't be.
Anyone who thinks wow its the best mmo ever and has 12+ million subs is clearly delusional and therefor can be ignored.
This makes me laugh. SWG did not just have bugs. The game had fundamental flaws in its core engine design.
eg. The Rifleman profession was supposed to be long range marksman but the game would not start generating mobs until you were within pistol range. That was not a bug but a resource management system so the game had fewere NPCs to deal with.
The SWG crafting UI was completely incompatible with the long skill-up grind necessary to level the crafting professions.
The reason they had so many problems fixing bugs was beacuse fixing one bug would usually create one or more new ones.
The game was imploding months before the NGE or CU. One of the reasons for the NGE was that the devs decided that it would be easier jsut to rewrite a large chunk of the game raher than having to fix the old code.
Not all opinions are narrow minded, but there certainly are narrow minded opinions.
"Not all opinions are narrow minded, but there are certainly are narrow minded opinions" is an opinion in itself, which may or may not be narrow minded. You're going to have to provide good reasons for why we should believe it is a true statement.
If I say "the only acceptable death penalty is permadeath in an MMORPG" I'm probably voicing a narrow minded opinion vs "games should have some sort of penalty for dying however player expectations will likely vary in this regard" is a much broader minded stance.
No, they're just two different opinions. You're arbitrarily saying one is narrow-minded, which could be considered narrow-minded in itself. Perhaps one game design would be more popular than the other, but that doesn't mean the less popular one is narrow-minded.
To iterate, there is a right and wrong way to do anything.
Anything else?
Don't you mean 'to reiterate'? ... but I digress. Look, the whole basis of our disagreement is a simple thing.
I don't have any problem with the idea of there being a right and wrong way to do things...
I just think that you're picking an area where deciding this is right/wrong makes you narrowminded. It's probably because we have a fundamental disagreement on what an MMO is actually for.
To refer back to your version of my example with the chopsticks, I personally think that the 6 points you brought up are a case of chopsticks vs. other eating utensils. That there are multiple ways to do an MMO, and you are picking only certain ways as being acceptable. (Which would be narrowminded)
YOU appear to think that it's a case of using chopsticks. Up your nose. That these things are wrong in an MMO because they're just... well, wrong. That things like lack of a death penalty are actually anathema to the state of being an MMO. Which wouldn't really make you narrowminded, if that's the way it is.
I think an MMORPG is a specific game genre combined with a technology... basically something massively multiplayer and online (A technology), that is a role playing game (A genre), and its purpose is delivering fun.
You appear to have a more strict definition of what it takes to be an MMORPG, and therefore it is possible to do things wrong (Like in the examples you listed).
If you're suggesting that those things are bad game design, you're actually ignoring all the games that don't do things the way you want, and are perfectly wonderful games. For example, a game with no death penalty that is quite difficult (More so than many of the same genre with a harsher penalty) would be Super Meat Boy. They have made the lack of a death penalty part of the game itself, and it is definitely improved with the way they utilize it, rather than say having a very limited amount of lives and having to restart from 1-1 if you fail.
I can think of lots of ways to still have a good game experience for some people (Not all, obviously), while violating most of your core precepts. So either you're saying 1. It's still bad game design because you personally don't like it, or 2. It is non-MMORPG behavior, and while it may be okay for OTHER purposes, it degrades the value of an MMORPG, and is specifically bad game design for those, because you have a strict definition of what is and is not beneficial towards reaching the goal of being a good MMORPG.
I'm... kind of guessing you're leaning towards the second one, but maybe it's the first! Or maybe it's some other thing I'm not thinking of.
To iterate, there is a right and wrong way to do anything.
Anything else?
Don't you mean 'to reiterate'? ...
I don't have any problem with the idea of there being a right and wrong way to do things...
I just think that you're picking an area where deciding this is right/wrong makes you narrowminded. It's probably because we have a fundamental disagreement on what an MMO is actually for.
I think if one repeats something they iterate it, if they repeat it again then it's reiterate. Though I was told once that iterate means to repeat so why wouldn't one just use "iterate".
In any case, I think your second point pinpoints the issue.
The OP says these things are "wrong". However, that's to his point of view. And to a certain extent mine. However, I would say "they are wrong for me". Because, for example, there are people who could very easily play without a death penalty and the game would be a blast. They don't require the "penalty" to make their actions more meaningful.
I have to say that to a certain degree that is true for me.
"failure" is it's own penalty. I feel that. I don't exactly need to have xp loss or pay monehy to heal or anything. But some people don't have that sense of failure as being a penalty so they probably do require some sort of hand slap.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
1. Inadequate penalties for dying. A 10% durability loss on equipped items (World of Warcraft)--or being able to die 10 times before your stats are reduced by 50% for only 4 mins (Rift. Although you can heal yourself for a minute amount of money before it gets to the point where you stats are reduced by 50%)--are not adequate penalties for dying in any game, let alone a MMORPG. Imagine if Nintendo had made it so dying in Super Mario Bros 3 meant respawning at an earlier checkpoint without the loss of anything; so, anyone, even your grandma, could beat the game because everyone would be given an infinite number of extra lives. Is that superior game design? Is that fun? Solid penalties for dying make games exciting, challenging, and encourage you to become better. Unfortunately as of late, the game developers for MMORPGs have been dropping the ball in this regard.
Most players don't agree with you, and with good reason. It's not that game developers just decided to stop doing heavy DP's. They have data on how players play their games, and from that, they know that the heavy DP's of olde detract from the game's experience.
Death Penalty does not in any way equal challenge; all it does is discourage risk. If I can't take a boss at 20th level, and I get smacked with XP/gear loss, I'm not going to try again, til' I'm 25th level, when I can B-smack it to Bermuda. Then I'm going to get bored with the game's lack of challenge and quit.
5. The way in which NPCs behave is lacking. I'm talking about being able to run away from attacking NPCs until they magically stop chasing you ("SORRY MAN, MY MOM'S CALLING ME FOR DINNER!"), becoming invulnerable, and then running back to their spawn point at 500% speed. First of all, they shouldn't be becoming invulnerable and running back to their spawn point at 500% speed. They should stop chasing after a certain period of time--depending on how much aggro you've generated (and the type of NPC they are)--and then walk or jog back to their original location, attacking whoever is in the way (if they're hostile to whoever is in the way, that is). This makes things much more immersive and interesting. Some argue that some players would use this to grief other players, but there are things that developers could do to lessen the chances of that happening (e.g. you will only be added to the NPCs aggro list if you stay around them for more than 10 seconds while they're attacking their original target). Moreover, there will always be players who grief; and the player willing to grief one way but can't for whatever reason will probably try to figure out another. That's their mentality. Consequently, I don't think it's a good idea to focus too much development time on finding every possible way a player could grief another, and then change the game accordingly. A lot of times this leads to dumbing-down the game mechanics, as we've seen with the way in which NPCs generate aggro in newer MMORPGs.
That would be flat out horrible, and would bring about an unprecedented amount of griefing. What "things" to prevent it do you propose?
I propose a 3rd way. Get rid of "wanderin' monstah's" altogether and make encounters MEANINGFUL. That way, you don't get dumb NPC behavior, and I don't have to worry about some jackass aggro'ing a boss, and leading it to me while I'm minding my own business. Also, I don't have to hack my way through monsters I don't care about fighting.
The MMO that get's rid of the "Marauding Army of Goblins" that just paces back and forth out in a field with their hands in their pockets will be the saviour of the modern MMO. It was necessary back in the days of mob grinding, but now it's mostly a legacy feature.
Comments
They'd just be in another themepark MMO or in EQ II or similar. World of warcraft is great because it showed the industry you really need to polish what you have while you have it.
1. theme parks
2. story driven quest arcs
3. end game
4. companions
5. lack of interactable content
wrong wrong and WRONG. All wow showed is that you can sell crap to lots of people if you advertise it enough and lie about how many people you have playing it. The BEST mmo I ever played came out BEFORE wow. IE (Pre Cu) SWG. It was better then wow in every way.
Top 3 MMO's PRE-CU SWG GW1 GW2
Worst 2 wow and Lotro Under standing stones it went woke
Agreed.... Asheron's Call is best mmorpg for me. And its my 1st mmorpg game and I'm very happy it was my first!
Kain_Dale
I think world of warcraft is the shining pinnacle of MMOs in general, and the champ of the themepark style, but star wars galaxies is a very good sandbox pre NGE. (and somewhat after as well). However, the types of people who will play these are two very different groups, these are two very different styles of play, and everyone of the 12 million plus subscribers for World of Warcraft cast their vote a long time ago, they won't be swayed by any glorious sandbox because it's not their style.
1. There is another factor to this: Difficulty.A really hard game with no death penalty or a eassy game with hard death penalty works fine in both cases. It is when a game gets both easy and have no or close to none death penalty it gets boring. So I agree with you that risk Vs reward could be better but the question is more complex than you say.
2. As a pen and paper RPG player I really agree with the point but your talk about EQ is far from enough for me, even EQ had this issue, it just have gotten worse now. When I play P&P I have loads of options and not even in D&D (which is the worst in this aspect) are characters of the same class so similar, There need however to be a auto select button for people who don't want to customize. I want to select my skills myself from a list. I want to create a close to unique character instead of mirroring the rest of my class, at least in PvE centered games.
3. Well, I do think that grouping should be encouraged but I don't like when games force me to do things no matter what it is, so this have to be encouraged carefully.
4. Agreed. Ibn fact it might be time to get rid of levels altogether and let people slowly advance as long as they play instead. Not too much so it get's totally unbalanced but a little at time.
5. Agreed. Mobs should react as close to humans as possible,
Programming is one way and if you think SWG ever had better coding than Wow you have very rose colored glasses on you.
The reason SWG started losing players in the first places which lead to the idiot decision were because it was coded by drunk monkeys, like all other SOE games.
If EQ2 would have been good coded, it would have been the big now, the IP already had the MMO fans and most people thought it were going to be the next big.
The solution for players who like this this kind of game: Remake Everquest with better graphics. How many do you think would play? Enough to make it worth making? It wouldn't be my kind of game, but I'm sure many would like it. In fact, I remember when Vanguard was being developed and all of these things were being planned. Vanguard is still around for you people. However, it didn't make the big splash they hoped.
Only in niche games (i.e. sandboxes the majority of the time) do you find that occurring. AAA mmos are developed to get as many subs as possible, hence they are made to appeal to the 'casual' crowd. Take a look through this forum, people care more about soloability and how rapidly they can get their shinies in the next game then they really care about any community driven interaction.
By aiming games at the item shop buying, instance running, solo casual crowd who shy away from any risk levels or need for community support ala crafting and decay systems then you pretty much ensure your games are going to have garbage communities in them.
That's fine for 'plug n play' games like rts and fps, but for persistent world games it really isn't.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
That's because the game was released in a terrible fashion and was never able to rebound from it. Not to mention, not many people were able to run the game well when Vanguard was released.
I see nothing wrong with modern day MMOs.
More gamers are playing MMOs than ever before.
We have more MMO titles than ever before.
Somehow that's 'wrong'? ?_?
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
i agree.
Basically the gist of your post is that EQ is the best mmo there ever was because all your negatives are points of divergence from EQ. Imo this is a very narrow-minded view and maybe you should open your mind a bit..
I don't see how thinking EQ is a good or the best MMORPG is narrow-minded. I've played plenty of MMORPGs and I liked EQ the most. How is that narrow-minded?
However, calling somebody narrow-minded for having a different opinion than your own is narrow-minded.
Loke doesn't think WoW is the best MMO ever. He is just taking issue with your statement that SWG is better than WoW in every way.
I would think it would be nearly impossible for an MMO to be better in EVERY single way, simply because... well, sometimes there are ways to be better that are incompatible.
Explain to me why it CAN'T have 12 million subs. The video game industry itself is a $10 billion dollar industry, and there are 6-7 billion people on the planet. I think we have large enough numbers here to give them 12 million subs. Honestly, 12 million people just isn't that many anymore.
EDIT: Oh and never ignore people you think are delusional. They still can vote/run for office/do a lot of things that you might disagree with and will leave you whinging.
I don't think you understand what narrow-minded means. Or maybe you don't know what irony means.
In any case, expressing your opinion and giving reasons for why you think the way you do isn't being narrow-minded. If merely expressing an opinion is narrow-minded, then anyone who has ever held an opinion about anything--even if that opinion is that anyone who holds an opinion is narrow-minded--would be narrow-minded.
Anything else?
1) Death Penalties - I do think MMO's need them, but I realize we don't all agree on what is an appropriate death penalty. I prefer ones that make players pause before they take action (yes, even avoid taking action) if the risk doesn't justify the reward. Other players love to throw caution to the wind and try no matter what with little consequence. That's why we need all sorts of games with all sorts of death penalties in order to satisfy the variety of preferences.
2) Character Development or lack thereof - Totally agree, loved how DAOC or Lineage 1's stat choices when creating your character actually affected how they played, what weapons they fought with, what mob types they were strong and weak against and how they fared in PVP in many cases. Now everything is being simplified and it just makes things less interesting.
3) Lack of grouping incentives. - Absolutely, modern MMO's have become single player grinds (which I realize many players enjoy) but I do miss the fun of finding a good group like back in the early days of DAOC. (and no, you can't do that any more, DAOC is now a solo fest, following the modern trends)
4) Time to level cap - Another preference thing, if you are a casual player, you might not get to WOW's level cap for 3 months or more, whereas when I played Lineage 2 at launch I guestimated that it would take me 1.5 years to get to level cap, which was far to slow for me and I left for WOW. I don't it too easy, but then again, if the game is fun at lower levels, then I guess there's no reason for there to be a hurry. In the case of L2 there was the carrot of end game castle seiging for which you needed to be max level to survive and the grind was just plain annoying as it prevented me from getting to the fun stuff.
5) NPC behavior - Actually, in the past I played MMO's that did exactly what you said. If NPCs were follwing someone and finally peeled off they would attack anyone nearby or on the way back, but this lead to the tactic of "training"mobs on other players which players screamed about so now they just rush back to their starting point. As to why they don't follow forever, too easy for ranged to kite which is normally why they reset in the first place.
6) Faction - Definitely agree, faction shouldn't be a grind mechanic, but rather a side you chose which permanently influences the way the game world reacts to you. EVE's got a nice feature on this, kill too many of a certain NPC faction and they'll start shooting at your ships when you enter their space. Same goes for pirates, so player behavior is recognized and rewarded or punished for it.
"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
Okay, I stand corrected. You're just horrible at writing/expressing yourself. That's also a possibility.
You could try titling it like '6 things I don't like about modern-day MMORPGs' or '6 things I wish they would change about modern-day MMORPGs', but saying the things are WRONG suggests that there is a right way, and that is not the way they are doing it.
For example, if you went into a restaurant and saw people eating with chopsticks, and said 'You are eating the wrong way', I would say 'You are too narrowminded'. If you said 'You are eating in a way that I cannot, or do not wish to', I would just think you're a little weird for feeling the need to tell me that, but would otherwise accept your statement.
Because you phrased this whole thread in such a way that suggests that MMORPGs (In fact, a majority of them) are being done a wrong way, rather than the right way, that suggests you have a narrowminded view of what is an acceptable MMO style.
Not all opinions are narrow minded, but there certainly are narrow minded opinions.
If I say "the only acceptable death penalty is permadeath in an MMORPG" I'm probably voicing a narrow minded opinion vs "games should have some sort of penalty for dying however player expectations will likely vary in this regard" is a much broader minded stance.
"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
This makes me laugh. SWG did not just have bugs. The game had fundamental flaws in its core engine design.
eg. The Rifleman profession was supposed to be long range marksman but the game would not start generating mobs until you were within pistol range. That was not a bug but a resource management system so the game had fewere NPCs to deal with.
The SWG crafting UI was completely incompatible with the long skill-up grind necessary to level the crafting professions.
The reason they had so many problems fixing bugs was beacuse fixing one bug would usually create one or more new ones.
The game was imploding months before the NGE or CU. One of the reasons for the NGE was that the devs decided that it would be easier jsut to rewrite a large chunk of the game raher than having to fix the old code.
"Not all opinions are narrow minded, but there are certainly are narrow minded opinions" is an opinion in itself, which may or may not be narrow minded. You're going to have to provide good reasons for why we should believe it is a true statement.
No, they're just two different opinions. You're arbitrarily saying one is narrow-minded, which could be considered narrow-minded in itself. Perhaps one game design would be more popular than the other, but that doesn't mean the less popular one is narrow-minded.
Don't you mean 'to reiterate'? ... but I digress. Look, the whole basis of our disagreement is a simple thing.
I don't have any problem with the idea of there being a right and wrong way to do things...
I just think that you're picking an area where deciding this is right/wrong makes you narrowminded. It's probably because we have a fundamental disagreement on what an MMO is actually for.
To refer back to your version of my example with the chopsticks, I personally think that the 6 points you brought up are a case of chopsticks vs. other eating utensils. That there are multiple ways to do an MMO, and you are picking only certain ways as being acceptable. (Which would be narrowminded)
YOU appear to think that it's a case of using chopsticks. Up your nose. That these things are wrong in an MMO because they're just... well, wrong. That things like lack of a death penalty are actually anathema to the state of being an MMO. Which wouldn't really make you narrowminded, if that's the way it is.
I think an MMORPG is a specific game genre combined with a technology... basically something massively multiplayer and online (A technology), that is a role playing game (A genre), and its purpose is delivering fun.
You appear to have a more strict definition of what it takes to be an MMORPG, and therefore it is possible to do things wrong (Like in the examples you listed).
If you're suggesting that those things are bad game design, you're actually ignoring all the games that don't do things the way you want, and are perfectly wonderful games. For example, a game with no death penalty that is quite difficult (More so than many of the same genre with a harsher penalty) would be Super Meat Boy. They have made the lack of a death penalty part of the game itself, and it is definitely improved with the way they utilize it, rather than say having a very limited amount of lives and having to restart from 1-1 if you fail.
I can think of lots of ways to still have a good game experience for some people (Not all, obviously), while violating most of your core precepts. So either you're saying 1. It's still bad game design because you personally don't like it, or 2. It is non-MMORPG behavior, and while it may be okay for OTHER purposes, it degrades the value of an MMORPG, and is specifically bad game design for those, because you have a strict definition of what is and is not beneficial towards reaching the goal of being a good MMORPG.
I'm... kind of guessing you're leaning towards the second one, but maybe it's the first! Or maybe it's some other thing I'm not thinking of.
I think if one repeats something they iterate it, if they repeat it again then it's reiterate. Though I was told once that iterate means to repeat so why wouldn't one just use "iterate".
In any case, I think your second point pinpoints the issue.
The OP says these things are "wrong". However, that's to his point of view. And to a certain extent mine. However, I would say "they are wrong for me". Because, for example, there are people who could very easily play without a death penalty and the game would be a blast. They don't require the "penalty" to make their actions more meaningful.
I have to say that to a certain degree that is true for me.
"failure" is it's own penalty. I feel that. I don't exactly need to have xp loss or pay monehy to heal or anything. But some people don't have that sense of failure as being a penalty so they probably do require some sort of hand slap.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo