Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Your 5 reasons why PC mmos have failed
ThomasN7
87.18.7.148Member CommonPosts: 6,690
Blizzard owns the mmo genre because there are probably the only ones who take the time to do it right. From marketing strategy to gameplay design and just purely making fun games Blizzard wether you like them or not does it right.
1. Complexity of the PC - From windows itself it is very hard to get a mmo wto work correctly with windows. You also have the complexity of the hardware where memory and video card issues are always a tough task at hand. Networking issues are probably one of the biggest reason why devs can't nail down the lag issue.
2. It is a copycat league - Since Everquest launch I thnk I played Everquest 10 times over and then some. There absolutely no creativity whatever right now.
3. MMO saturation - The mmo market is overloaded with mmos. How can one possibly max profit when the market has so many mmos competing at the same time not to mention WoW holds a ton of subscribers as it is. Stop mass producing mmos and maybe try to attempt to get 1 mmo done the right way.
4. Social Aspect is gone - Just about every mmo created these days is build around a single player mentality. Back in the day it was about community and working together to accomplish goals.
5. Stop catering to casuals - Oh yes the big one. How can you ever make something viable and fun when you have to make dumbed down content where even a caveman so to speak can figure it out. All mmos are on easy mode because a puchase is more cherished than a communities fun and a genres long term success.
I say it is time to make something creative, fun and for god sakes please stop using 2002 technolgy.
Comments
The early 2000's and 90's are long since over with. With the amount of money floating around with MMO's, developers don't care.
PC's are far from complex of the old days. If anything it's more streamlined and easy compared to back in the day when RAM and parts would cost 1000's+ of dollars where as now can buy a gaming computer set to go for a 500-1000 range. If anything it's more or less the good will or salvation army. Go through the bargin bin and take your pick. Sometimes you find what your looking for and other times it's just busted junk. But everyone has the right and choice of whether they want to even shop at that store. It's called become better informed and more intelligent and maybe developers will cater to the players needs above wants.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
Systems that encourage, not force, good social aspects:
Slower EXP rate
Group EXP bonuses
A few dangerously difficult monster camps in every zone (Patrols, adds, mini-bosses, the works)
Support classes that make grouping more fun, but can still cast weaker non-group buffs, too.
I think one of the main reasons must be the people who ultimately make the decisions on what happens in and with a game.
When 90% of gamers can look at a game direction change, or various aspects of an existing game and say, "I don't believe they thought that was a good idea, thats insane...", then there's something wrong with the decision making process within that company.
Its happening again with Fallen Earth it seems. The dumbing down of a complex game to try to 'appeal' to a wider audience so the game doesn't take a nose dive. Everyone knows thats a crap idea, and everyone knows what needs to be done to Fallen Earth so people actually want to play it. Do they make those changes? No, course not.
The MMO industry is currently split into various camps. The companies who's soul focus is money, where they make a shallow game that looks flashy so they can make enough inital money to turn a profit before winding the game down. The Asian market who just don't get the western one. Free MMO's that are absolute garbage and add a cash shop, which in essence means the game isn't actually free to play if you want to 'compete'. The Indy market, full of people who actually have great ideas and a passion for the genre, but just don't have the cash or the skills to put their ideas into place.
It's always the same. A game idea is released with a video, and everyone thinks 'Oh my god, this is IT!!!!'. Then the facts start to trickle out, with the usual game breakers that make everyone want to scream. Typical example is finding out a fantastic looking game is completely instanced with a 'hub', they just don't seem to get why thats shit. Warhammer 40K is going to be one such game I reckon. The ability to plough in the cash with millions of slavering games workshop fans waiting to devote their lives to a game and BE A SPACE MARINE OMG... yet you know, you just know... they will f**k it up.
For me, there are a list of things I would love to see in a game, and it seems to match other peoples views as well. I don't think I need to list them, I bet anyone on this site could produce the same ones. Things like player housing, freedom to go anywhere, a deep and meaningful crafting experience, a working economy, player driven content etc etc etc.
After years of waiting though, I honestly think this won't happen. Its all about the money, and thats what spoils the games. Lack of it, or too much of it to care. Oddly enough, if they forgot about 'business models' and how they were going to spin a profit, and focused on the game, they would actually make a fortune...
Just kiddin. Actually I tend to agree with you.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
LOL that was funny.
1. Easy, Easier, and even more easier. Constant tendancy for MMO Developers to dumb down their game to no end. They've thrown the social aspect of MMOs out the windows, allowing players to just join PUGs without ever having to talk with each others, let alone think. It's merely a multiplayer game that supports a wider range of players than the average, but the mechanics are so restricting that massively isn't really all that representative.
They've removed a lot of the tactics and strategies involved with the Content, often dumbing down so that even a toddler could play by smashing his hands on the keyboard or by pressing a single button that contains a well-developed macro or activate a tool available on the internet.
Basically, they've been pushing towards the mainstream so much that they've lost sight of it. Even Blizzard is losing subs since Cataclysm.
2. Companies pushing out unfinished product, badly unpolished, little to no content, filled with bugs and exploits, developers didn't think their decisions throughly, misjudged the usage of certain features, set false expectations, etc. Hell, saves for RIFT there hasn't been a single psudo-AAA MMO that did not have a rocky launch, AoC/STO/CO/DarkFall/Mortal Online/FFXIV and the list goes on.
3. Lack of Originality. It all just seems like a re-skin of one another. Developers are not even trying to make small changes to the formula, and instead have begun to rely on very popular IP to try and push their MMOs.I don't want to use the "Clone" thing too much, because we'd be here for hours if we're going to make a list of who cloned who and who was the first to come up with the idea. I understand inspiring yourself of various features and options, but flat-out copying them and slapping a new name on it will only give more reasons for players to just go back to the MMO they've inspired themselves on. Why play "x" if "x" is the same as WoW, but not as good?
4. Everything feels rushed. This one is more related to both the playerbase and the game developers who are somewhat caught in a vicious circle. MMORPGs are all about reaching the end-game, that's the playerbase main focus nowadays. Which in turn has made game developers focus only about end-game and forget about everything else, which has left the rest of the game suffering from a lack of either content or players to interact with, which in turns forces the mindset on all players that they must indeed rush to the end-game. While I do not want to turn this into a themepark vs. sandbox debate, it *IS* one of Themepark MMO's main issue. The other areas of the game are badly neglected.
5. Developers are not setting realistic expactions. They're all aiming for WoW and can't think objectively. It's as if, everything that's not WoW = Failure. It's a terrible mindset that has poisoned many studios. Although luckily lately developers are slowly starting to "get it" so perhaps this will become a non-issue soon ( A man can dream...).
I think that's about it. But regarding OP's point, I don't think appealing to Casuals is necessarily the issue, but rather that, as I mentionned in .4, the games are all about rushing to the end-game nowadays, which then affects the Casuals who want to be able to enjoy the game as much as other players, because the early and mid-game is just boring as hell (but they know that end-game is amazing!).
Why they failed? Because frankly, they are subpar games.
Really that's the reason. Gamers these days don't have to settle for archaic gameplay, or clunky controls, or unresponsive abilities.
You can pack as many features in them as you want, but simply just playing online with people... ISNT ENOUGH. You see all these games come out with interesting features and whatnot... and then you get the god awful combat.
That is why wow succeeded. And honestly, Even the recently released popular rift, is still about on par(if not WORSE!) then WoW in terms of actual "gameplay" It may have more interesting features and a better class mechanic, but that doesn't mean anything.
MMORPGS are still games first and foremost, and it feels like the game is the last thing made in them, which is simply unacceptable.
What does the platform has to do with success? You can have crap games on any platform.
The underlying problem is that the MMO genre is on the fast lane of the FAIL slope. I`m bored out of my mind every time I try any of the 'new', 'next-gen', 'hybrid', 'fresh' games churning out every month.
Better to be crazy, provided you know what sane is...
Well imo most of the reasons for failure stem from one source - the inability of the devs to switch from single player "content delivery" to multiplayer "social fun space" thinking.
1) Linearity and "disposability" of PvE content. If you set up the game in the same way as a single-player game to be "run through" then don't expect to retain subs once this content has been used up and don't act surprised if players complain of other users "getting in the way". Of course they will complain if there are strangers running all over their basically single-player experience.
2) Perception of a mmorpg as a "game" rather than a "world". This ties in with above. If you're designing the said "social fun space" then first you design the world framework which is capable of containing many "games". Example: crafting. While many find crafting uninteresting, some do. Crafting is basically a game within the larger mmo world framework. And so is raiding and PvP etc etc. A good mmo design offers many different strokes for different folks but never absolutely requires the players to participate in any of them because that would alienate potential customer segments that absolutely loathe that part of the game experience.
3) Linear progression. I don't mean anything prosaic like levels vs skills debate. What I mean is that the classical RPG paradigm where the more you play the more powerful you are is a long-term death for a mmo world since it effectively cuts of new arrivals from participating meaningfully once the original population ages sufficiently. A model with purely cosmetical achievements and modest real power gap between arrivals and old fogies (GW1 is sterling example) is much much more appropriate for the mentioned "social fun space".
4) Lack of emergent gameplay experiences. If a game wishes to retain freshness of experience ant thus subscriptions it absolutely NEEDS mechanisms that would generate emergent gameplay experiences. Sadly, in todays mainstream mmos the only source of this emergent experience comes from either guild drama or maybe PvP if the area is large/complex enough so that elements you can't actually see or directly influence do have an impact on your situation (aka world PvP).
5) Faulty pricing models. So far all are crap. Subs drive away people. Item shops are tacky. One-off purchase is not enough to finance the mmo overheads, especially customer service. This needs to be rethought. Imo the only fair/viable model is box purchase with additional downloadable content. Actually this is the D&D pen-and-paper model with its basic sets and adventure modules and it worked quite well all these years.
Layers, and difficulty levels. I can't believe why it hasn't been done before, except for dungeons. In singleplayer games you can opt for difficulty levels, which solves the problem of catering to several groups of gamers with 1 game, so that a game can still be mainstream and still be enjoyed by hardcore gamers and the more casual players, by simply adjusting the difficulty settings.
You could make it so that people who opt for a more challenging difficulty setting have tougher encounters with harsher rule settings, like for example a XP death penalty but also offset with benefits, like faster XP gain or better loot chances for example.
At the moment there isn't a mechanic in place like you see in singleplayer games where various groups of gamers are catered efficiently depending on their gameplay experience wish.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
OP: If you define "failed" I think it will be easier for us to make qualified (or rather un-qualified) guesses of why.
ie. Failing as in not meeting a the commercial expectations of revenue and profit?
Or maybe failing because the hardcore MMO playerbase deemed the game "un-worthy"?
Or perhaps that the title did not revolutionize the genre? There are plenty of ways I could think of but I still have no idea what you were getting at?
Thanks
Uhm, harcore players in general are not intrigued by the difficulty itself by rather the accomplishement of standing on top of the community despite those difficulties. If some were able to reach the "end game" by simpler means than the Hardcore settings dude and reap the same benefits the sense of accomplishment just wouldnt be there any way.
How has it 'failed'?
We have more MMO players than ever before, we have more titles coming out than ever before.
More innovation with various mechanics and generally more profits are being made. Not seeing any of this 'failure' on a purely objective level.
On a personal 'there is no game that suits me' level than maybe but than again, I can't see that as a legitamate complaint.
What happens if you are one of those million in one person who prefers pc-speaker sound over normal Soundblaster type person?
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
The biggest reason? MMOs are released to early.
oh and:
lolwut? http://i.imgur.com/64KZG.png
"World of Warcraft is the perfect implementation of this genre." - Hilmar Petursson. CEO of CCP.
Well that first requires a definition of "failure".
When has a MMORPG failed ?
In my eyes, WoW has failed. It has failed to be fun.
While Vanguard was a huge success. It was massively fun.
I know commercial success is the other way around. But why should that bother me ? That should only bother the investors, not myself.
Because for me, a "failed" MMO that has only 10,000 active players and is extremely fun is much more interesting to me than a "successful" MMO with 10,000,000 players and no fun.
I agree with the Vanguard comment. I hated WoW with a passion but I loved Vanguard.
For me MMORPG's have failed because of what I look for in them.
When I first started playing them, I would invest years. Now I am lucky to get out of the free trial with the newer generation.
I need clarification, are we talking about financial failure or a personal failing to the individual.
Obviously I was talking about on a personal level.
You're not the op though, that's who i need clarification from
I don't see this as a "Top 5 Reasons" issue....but more of a hierarchal / cause & event type of situation.
Blizzard has HUGE success lowering the barriers to entry (learning curve) for "average" gamers (casual gamers)
Linear UBER Polished MMORPGs (ala WOW) become the industry gold standard (meaning a precident has been set that in order to get MASSIVE success in the MMO industry, you must spend tens-hundreds of millions dollars on publishing & polish)
AAA Publishers cannot justify innovating outside the linear themepark model because anything else appeals to niche markets that cannot financially recoup the HUGE expense involved in MMO development
Indie developers are relegated to innovating, or revisiting traditional means of MMORPGs, because they have less money on the line and can justify creating a game that appeals to a smaller audience...but typically fail due to poor press & bad launches (as a result of lack of funds)
The crux of it all is the audience (and prospective revenue stream). If companies like Electronic Arts, Bioware, NCSoft, and Blizzard think that the formula for success requires them to spend upwards of 400 million dollars, they will NEVER be in a financial position to create a game that does not appeal to the largest chunk of the MMORPG playerbase (Casuals)
SO...if the MMO doesn't appeal to casual gamers (easy, short play cycle, shallow, linear), then the powers that be won't touch it with a 10 foot straw.
That is....unless......XL Games has massive success with ArcheAge (a AAA published Sandbox / Linear Hybrid) OR SW:TOR falls flat on its face.
The biggest reason is that in the past 10 years or so Consoles have gotten to a point where they really compete with PCs because people are getting lazy and tired of trying to keep upgrading a PC, so they just resort to the cheaper and easier console. With this shift MMO companys are having to simplify UIs to convince consolers just to play them, and even worse Devs are now trying to cross platform MMOs to get that revenue, which means the game isnt has to be simplified so as to work on a console and so PC gamers suffer.
You'll notice also that Devs are relying on the cartoony graphics more and more because it can be run on much older PCs which is them trying to convince people if they play their game, they wont have to deal with constant computer upgrading.
Any way you look at it, its the PC gamers slow death and decline.
Mess with the best, Die like the rest
Despite quite a few of our complaints and doom and glooms this genre seems to be growing, or at least held stagnant.
I can only say why its failed me, as I believe the genre is successful. Just ask Turbine, Blizzard and Trion. Not to mention all the f2p companies.
1. LFG times have not been reduced. I remember back in my EQ days I quit due to the long wait for finding a group. Despite now having cross-server queues, and instant pairings there is still too large of a wait. Admittedly, I have not played WoW, since their cross-server queue. I play Rift, and they don't have one. Going LFG/D is a waste of time on my server.
2. No economy. I used to love buying stuff and selling stuff. Now, there is really no economy to speak of. You raid to get your gear. End of story.
3. Performance based off gear not knowledge or skills. Set up a macro, get good gear, and your set. I loved DAoC, because we all had the same crappy gear. The skilled players were truly skilled. They weren't just geared. And macroes are lol ez-mode.
4. Server population. Seems to me servers have the same amount of people on them as they did 12 years ago, but the worlds are much larger. This makes for most zones being empty. Why can servers still only hold a few thousand people after all these years?
5. Tank and cleric. C'mon. Are you serious? This has to be the number one reason why being LFG takes forever. Few people like being a cleric or tank.