Haha "hissy fits". I think it's just a matter of keeping within the interconnected realm of MMOs (which basically come from RPGs, after all, and are produced within a context much wider than just "Western MMOs" and "Asian grinders"). I still remember the heated debate about the Starcraft 2 coverage, and I pretty much agreed with the vocal 'hissy fitters' about keeping the site from turning into Gamespy with more MMO emphasis. I think it's a valid concern, and you should see it as such, as a concern, not as bitching. Sure enough, some are more aggressive than others, but it all comes down to the same question: is mmorpg.com a general gaming site or an mmo gaming one (without ignoring, of course, the fact that MMO gaming is in a sense a subcategory within general gaming)?
I believe that as long as the answer is the second then it's all good to most of us who frequent the site. In my opinion, covering Starcraft 2 started to tilt the answer towards the first one, but the choice is ultimately yours to make.
Is it me - or has the whole MMORPG ship turned. MMORPGs are far from dead, but it feels like we've maybe reached the peak - and passed it. Maybe its just me, I can't say I have taken pains to look at the numbers of accounts et al, so I might be way off.
All I can say is that after what seems a stampede by every developer to get into MMO space a good while ago, there now seems to be less and less that seems interesting, or even just plain announced.
I have also noticed that the MMORPG site seems to have its focus shifting - is it a coincidence, or is it because there *is* less to talk about MMORPG wise.
I am old enough to remember the boom in computer games in the early video arcade days, followed by their decline before the industry surged back into life. It makes me wonder if the whole MMORPG scene will follow a similar pattern, as ideas are done to death, everyone has become jaded of the mechanics and so numbers decline and then either some technology refreshes the scene, or some truly inspirational new design comes along to set things alight again. Maybe, maybe not, the games industry has a certain undeniable mass to it these days that it didn't in its infancy. But it could be that the 'first golden age' of MMORPGs is now on the back slope. Its downhill from hereon in, and it whilst it will never completely die out, perhaps it will occupy a less prominent place than it once did.
Should MMORPG cover different things other than MMORPGs ? I guess you have to follow your bottom line. The timing of the new musings - should things like Diablo III be counted etc - makes me wonder if content - the number of useful things to write about MMOs - has dropped, or whether its truly a move to expand for expansion sakes. The question being, if the MMORPG world contracts in terms of useful journalism opportunities, should a specialist site become a more general game focused site in order to keep its word count up and to make sure it still has relevance in the market.
Personally I think a shift to a more general game site would be a mistake - but if the bottom line doesn't support it, you have to adapt or die.
I look forward to the Second Age of MMOs. . . maybe by then there will be fully dynamic content and worlds, and the age of the fixed quest/location will be a quaint thing of the past. And I hope MMORPG will be around to report on them.
Oh we're going to be very cautious. Mainly, we're just gauging if we should do major previews/reviews and news of BIG upcoming RPGs.
Obviously, Mass Effect can be covered at FPSGuru, since we cover TPS games there as well, and they have plenty of that action. But for things like Skyrim, Amalur, and the like? Should we post major news announcements here? Would you like to see us review them? Especially in the case of Amalur or Torchlight 2 even, since these games directly influence their future MMO counter-parts.
Because mmorpg.com ( or rather Cyber Creations ) also owns the domain name rpgguru.com.
So get somebody to throw it up and move all the Diablos, MOBA's, strategy games and other non-mmos to there or to their appropriate already existing "guru" sites where they belong.
I feel like as long as it remains a few stories here and there vs. RPG stories dominating MMORPG info it works for me. If the site turned more of an eye to RPG's I think they could easily dominate the MMORPG news to some extent to sheer volume of titles as more SPRPGs come out than MMOs by far. So anyway I generally agree with the author. Some news about big RPG games you know cross interests with those that play MMOs are totally worthwhile.
Another good idea I've seen here is to make an RPGguru.com to add to your various sites. All of which I currently find useful. However, I still think games of MOBA and DotA nature probably fit more here at MMORPG.com than any of said sister sites.
First, I would love to see rpg coverage here, as I love rpgs and mmorpgs. And actually, you might have to do this in order to keep this site geared toward quality.
The browser games and asian f2p/cash shop games don't seem to garner much interest from people around here. I notice when there are articles regarding these games you get very few comments.
New triple A titles we have Rift and then we get SWTOR in December. That's it. Not a lot ot cover. The genre has stagnated and this site will too if it doesn't branch out a bit. I'd rather keep it just for mmorpg, but there is just not enough out there to keep the communities interest.
I believe that SPRPGs should be on mmorpg.com, since you've lately added fps games and rts games anyway...
Most mmorpg players I know came to these games from SPRPGs and most of us still like and enjoy them. Would love to hear news and reviews about them on our favorite game site
"Only in quiet waters do things mirror themselves undistorted. Only in a quiet mind is adequate perception of the world." Hans Margolius
The name of the site really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, it's the content within that determines the overall value of the medium. Adding content on more titles will only enrich the site as a whole.
In all seriousness, I don't think it really matters. This day has been coming for years. The "Massively" part to most games is already dumbed-down, shallow and de-emphasised, and many games hosted on this site with forums are not "Massively" Multiplayer ORPG's anyway; really.
But many a games are still more-so "Multiplayer" and/or "RPG"s. We could all list many, but for example Playboy Manager, APB, Torchlight, Black Aftermath, Global Agenda, Diablo, League of Legends, etc.
I come to this site because of MMO's or MMORPGS. It's simply in the name. There's millions of generic general gaming sites that cover up everything, and I really hope this site will not become one, it would mean that I have no reason to come here anymore because of the million other general gaming sites and google.
If you absolutely have to add more SPRPG's, "basic" MP games, and MOBAs etc, I'd really like to see separate news and forum activity tabs for them, it would be fair to those people who come to MMORPG.com for MMOG's dont you agree? And because of why not?
And please stop calling games like World of Tanks a MMOG or MMORPG. When a game does not have even a single MMO-like feature there is no reason at all to call it one right? Or does a cash shop these days qualify a game as a MMO-title?
List whatever brings in the hits to your site. I'll just ignore the stuff that doesn't interest me. Kind of like what I do right now. Might want to change the name of your site to something a bit more generic though, if you're not going to have a focus anymore.
MMORPG.COM has already alot of problems to decently cover the going ons in the mmorpg-scene. Both quality and quantity of articles are lacking and i don't even need a whole hand to count the good authors on this webside. The better stuff is usually to be found in these blogs written by other users.
Yet you think about taking more genres on board. Rather leave that to the heavyweight-websites out there and get back to quality, objective mmorpg journalism first. You can start with believeable reviews and not giving every title pleasant high ratings as long as there is an advertisement on the mainpage behind it.
As i wrote in an earlier post, nowadays this webpage is more out to serve the industry than the reader. So in the end it's all about selling the background of the page to as many publishers as possible and your decision will most likely be made according to it. So why asking about our opinion in first place?
I just hope for some consistency. With this change that would be difficult to maintain. Now its just about online only games, where having a online community is a big part of those games.
If you also start writing about singleplayer rpg's, then it becomes kind of arbitrary where you draw the line. Some FPS games have RPG elements, or some RPG games have RTS elements. Then there is the console market, will you review console only rpg's too then?
So, this might be a slippery slope and after a while you might become just another gamespot.
I think part of this website's success lies in the fact that you cater to MMORPG's. Adding other genres to it, just makes you one of many.
I think it takes away from the focus of your site and the reason I come here. Continue to branch out and you'll continue to become more generic. And I'll go get my news elsewhere.
To each their own with regards to what you publish. I just wish you guys would seperate out Virtual Worlds from Themeparks. They're completely different genera.
I think there should be some seperation between the RPG's and MMORPG's here on this site. I usually dont have an issue with games like TL, GW, or that kingdoms game being here because they are the leadins (or supporting capital) for the MMO's of the same IP. But games like D3, Mass Effect, and even Skyrim shouldnt be on here unless clearly seperated from the rest of the forums.
I would hate to come to this site called "MMORPG.com" and see 4 recent threads about RPGs and 1 recent thread about MMO's. I like what the staff has done with the other sites (the FPS and RTS site) and maybe something similar should be done for RPGs.
Otherwise give us two lists of recent topics, one for MMO's and one for RPG's. That way the people who dont care to read about RPG's arent encumbered by them.
I think there is a way to have your cake and eat it too. Continue the horizontal expansion into other genres, then add feature news, top game lists, and navigation into the sidebar here on MMORPG.com.
Another option is to create a "parent site" for the Cyber Creations game sites and take content vertical into that. It would serve as a gaming portal rather than a genre specific site.
A company I was joint-venture with did both of these in a business related topic. It served well with clean navigation and link popularity, and exceptionally well performing SEO.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I dont understand why this cannot be a single site that covers all game types on the front page. Front page can cover news for every type of game on every platform. Of course a new domain would need to be purchased since it would be more than mmos on the surface.
The front page can have links to specific game types- fps, 3ps, mmo, rpg, etc. Each of these divisions can have their own community managers to modify how they see fit.
While we are at this transition phase, can we please delete some of the mmorpgs off the list that are dead. I'll be flamed to hell, but there are really only what.. 40-50 mmos at MOST that are still alive and functioning. The current list is outdated and hard to navigate for people who are casually searching for games.
Edited to add- While im totally for expanding and adding a new site for mmorpg.com's front page, I still would enjoy the current amount of attention as far as news and blogs go. I wouldn't want it to suffer because a lot of attention was redirected to the 'mother site'.
I dont understand why this cannot be a single site that covers all game types on the front page. Front page can cover news for every type of game on every platform. Of course a new domain would need to be purchased since it would be more than mmos on the surface.
The front page can have links to specific game types- fps, 3ps, mmo, rpg, etc. Each of these divisions can have their own community managers to modify how they see fit.
While we are at this transition phase, can we please delete some of the mmorpgs off the list that are dead. I'll be flamed to hell, but there are really only what.. 40-50 mmos at MOST that are still alive and functioning. The current list is outdated and hard to navigate for people who are casually searching for games.
If the game has been shutdown then it should be removed, but should have something indicating that its shutdown. So if I feel nostaligic I can still go and find what the game was, but for people who are looking for games to play they can just filter them out (just like I have a list made for F2P and one for P2P)
Just a note to the author: we played single player RPGs on computers back in the 80's too. Sure there were plenty of party style games but there were a few single character CRPGs (remember that acronym? I doubt many do.)
Another point, MMOs were not an overnight success. Plenty of people stuck with CRPG and MUD's until well after EQ was out. I would also say that while they may have dipped on the PC, that kind of game still had plenty of space on console systems until companies began bringing consoles into the MMO phenmoena.
I personally have no issue with RPG reviews and reports as a once a week column or as a once a week news feature linked to another or several other sites.
I would love to see RPG's on here. Yeah can't place them with the MMO's but maybe either make a seperate list or an offsite like you guys have done with FPS and RTS.
Comments
Haha "hissy fits". I think it's just a matter of keeping within the interconnected realm of MMOs (which basically come from RPGs, after all, and are produced within a context much wider than just "Western MMOs" and "Asian grinders"). I still remember the heated debate about the Starcraft 2 coverage, and I pretty much agreed with the vocal 'hissy fitters' about keeping the site from turning into Gamespy with more MMO emphasis. I think it's a valid concern, and you should see it as such, as a concern, not as bitching. Sure enough, some are more aggressive than others, but it all comes down to the same question: is mmorpg.com a general gaming site or an mmo gaming one (without ignoring, of course, the fact that MMO gaming is in a sense a subcategory within general gaming)?
I believe that as long as the answer is the second then it's all good to most of us who frequent the site. In my opinion, covering Starcraft 2 started to tilt the answer towards the first one, but the choice is ultimately yours to make.
Is it me - or has the whole MMORPG ship turned. MMORPGs are far from dead, but it feels like we've maybe reached the peak - and passed it. Maybe its just me, I can't say I have taken pains to look at the numbers of accounts et al, so I might be way off.
All I can say is that after what seems a stampede by every developer to get into MMO space a good while ago, there now seems to be less and less that seems interesting, or even just plain announced.
I have also noticed that the MMORPG site seems to have its focus shifting - is it a coincidence, or is it because there *is* less to talk about MMORPG wise.
I am old enough to remember the boom in computer games in the early video arcade days, followed by their decline before the industry surged back into life. It makes me wonder if the whole MMORPG scene will follow a similar pattern, as ideas are done to death, everyone has become jaded of the mechanics and so numbers decline and then either some technology refreshes the scene, or some truly inspirational new design comes along to set things alight again. Maybe, maybe not, the games industry has a certain undeniable mass to it these days that it didn't in its infancy. But it could be that the 'first golden age' of MMORPGs is now on the back slope. Its downhill from hereon in, and it whilst it will never completely die out, perhaps it will occupy a less prominent place than it once did.
Should MMORPG cover different things other than MMORPGs ? I guess you have to follow your bottom line. The timing of the new musings - should things like Diablo III be counted etc - makes me wonder if content - the number of useful things to write about MMOs - has dropped, or whether its truly a move to expand for expansion sakes. The question being, if the MMORPG world contracts in terms of useful journalism opportunities, should a specialist site become a more general game focused site in order to keep its word count up and to make sure it still has relevance in the market.
Personally I think a shift to a more general game site would be a mistake - but if the bottom line doesn't support it, you have to adapt or die.
I look forward to the Second Age of MMOs. . . maybe by then there will be fully dynamic content and worlds, and the age of the fixed quest/location will be a quaint thing of the past. And I hope MMORPG will be around to report on them.
In my opinion no since this site is for MMOs but you added diablo 3 so might aswell start adding rpgs with online modes I guess.
Why Not RPGs on MMORPG.com?
Easy.
Because mmorpg.com ( or rather Cyber Creations ) also owns the domain name rpgguru.com.
So get somebody to throw it up and move all the Diablos, MOBA's, strategy games and other non-mmos to there or to their appropriate already existing "guru" sites where they belong.
I feel like as long as it remains a few stories here and there vs. RPG stories dominating MMORPG info it works for me. If the site turned more of an eye to RPG's I think they could easily dominate the MMORPG news to some extent to sheer volume of titles as more SPRPGs come out than MMOs by far. So anyway I generally agree with the author. Some news about big RPG games you know cross interests with those that play MMOs are totally worthwhile.
Another good idea I've seen here is to make an RPGguru.com to add to your various sites. All of which I currently find useful. However, I still think games of MOBA and DotA nature probably fit more here at MMORPG.com than any of said sister sites.
Steam: Neph
There's a single login across all three sites.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
First, I would love to see rpg coverage here, as I love rpgs and mmorpgs. And actually, you might have to do this in order to keep this site geared toward quality.
The browser games and asian f2p/cash shop games don't seem to garner much interest from people around here. I notice when there are articles regarding these games you get very few comments.
New triple A titles we have Rift and then we get SWTOR in December. That's it. Not a lot ot cover. The genre has stagnated and this site will too if it doesn't branch out a bit. I'd rather keep it just for mmorpg, but there is just not enough out there to keep the communities interest.
I believe that SPRPGs should be on mmorpg.com, since you've lately added fps games and rts games anyway...
Most mmorpg players I know came to these games from SPRPGs and most of us still like and enjoy them. Would love to hear news and reviews about them on our favorite game site
"Only in quiet waters do things mirror themselves undistorted.
Only in a quiet mind is adequate perception of the world."
Hans Margolius
I can't think of a good reason not to list RPGs.
The name of the site really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, it's the content within that determines the overall value of the medium. Adding content on more titles will only enrich the site as a whole.
In all seriousness, I don't think it really matters. This day has been coming for years. The "Massively" part to most games is already dumbed-down, shallow and de-emphasised, and many games hosted on this site with forums are not "Massively" Multiplayer ORPG's anyway; really.
But many a games are still more-so "Multiplayer" and/or "RPG"s. We could all list many, but for example Playboy Manager, APB, Torchlight, Black Aftermath, Global Agenda, Diablo, League of Legends, etc.
You guys already own http://www.morpg.com/
Just change your logo to MO&RPG (Multiplayer Online -and- RPG), have a coming out of the closet party, and call it a day.
I come to this site because of MMO's or MMORPGS. It's simply in the name. There's millions of generic general gaming sites that cover up everything, and I really hope this site will not become one, it would mean that I have no reason to come here anymore because of the million other general gaming sites and google.
If you absolutely have to add more SPRPG's, "basic" MP games, and MOBAs etc, I'd really like to see separate news and forum activity tabs for them, it would be fair to those people who come to MMORPG.com for MMOG's dont you agree? And because of why not?
And please stop calling games like World of Tanks a MMOG or MMORPG. When a game does not have even a single MMO-like feature there is no reason at all to call it one right? Or does a cash shop these days qualify a game as a MMO-title?
My thoughts.
List whatever brings in the hits to your site. I'll just ignore the stuff that doesn't interest me. Kind of like what I do right now. Might want to change the name of your site to something a bit more generic though, if you're not going to have a focus anymore.
MMORPG.COM has already alot of problems to decently cover the going ons in the mmorpg-scene. Both quality and quantity of articles are lacking and i don't even need a whole hand to count the good authors on this webside. The better stuff is usually to be found in these blogs written by other users.
Yet you think about taking more genres on board. Rather leave that to the heavyweight-websites out there and get back to quality, objective mmorpg journalism first. You can start with believeable reviews and not giving every title pleasant high ratings as long as there is an advertisement on the mainpage behind it.
As i wrote in an earlier post, nowadays this webpage is more out to serve the industry than the reader. So in the end it's all about selling the background of the page to as many publishers as possible and your decision will most likely be made according to it. So why asking about our opinion in first place?
I just hope for some consistency. With this change that would be difficult to maintain. Now its just about online only games, where having a online community is a big part of those games.
If you also start writing about singleplayer rpg's, then it becomes kind of arbitrary where you draw the line. Some FPS games have RPG elements, or some RPG games have RTS elements. Then there is the console market, will you review console only rpg's too then?
So, this might be a slippery slope and after a while you might become just another gamespot.
I think part of this website's success lies in the fact that you cater to MMORPG's. Adding other genres to it, just makes you one of many.
I think you should guys, but just for the best games, you can keep all the bad mmos though
No but i'm serious you should really do it.
I think it takes away from the focus of your site and the reason I come here. Continue to branch out and you'll continue to become more generic. And I'll go get my news elsewhere.
Not going to read through the replies.. long story short...
It's MMO - RPG (dot) COM not RPG (dot) COM. I have IGN and Gamespot for useless game info. I come here for the MMO's.
To each their own with regards to what you publish. I just wish you guys would seperate out Virtual Worlds from Themeparks. They're completely different genera.
I think there should be some seperation between the RPG's and MMORPG's here on this site. I usually dont have an issue with games like TL, GW, or that kingdoms game being here because they are the leadins (or supporting capital) for the MMO's of the same IP. But games like D3, Mass Effect, and even Skyrim shouldnt be on here unless clearly seperated from the rest of the forums.
I would hate to come to this site called "MMORPG.com" and see 4 recent threads about RPGs and 1 recent thread about MMO's. I like what the staff has done with the other sites (the FPS and RTS site) and maybe something similar should be done for RPGs.
Otherwise give us two lists of recent topics, one for MMO's and one for RPG's. That way the people who dont care to read about RPG's arent encumbered by them.
I think there is a way to have your cake and eat it too. Continue the horizontal expansion into other genres, then add feature news, top game lists, and navigation into the sidebar here on MMORPG.com.
Another option is to create a "parent site" for the Cyber Creations game sites and take content vertical into that. It would serve as a gaming portal rather than a genre specific site.
A company I was joint-venture with did both of these in a business related topic. It served well with clean navigation and link popularity, and exceptionally well performing SEO.
I dont understand why this cannot be a single site that covers all game types on the front page. Front page can cover news for every type of game on every platform. Of course a new domain would need to be purchased since it would be more than mmos on the surface.
The front page can have links to specific game types- fps, 3ps, mmo, rpg, etc. Each of these divisions can have their own community managers to modify how they see fit.
While we are at this transition phase, can we please delete some of the mmorpgs off the list that are dead. I'll be flamed to hell, but there are really only what.. 40-50 mmos at MOST that are still alive and functioning. The current list is outdated and hard to navigate for people who are casually searching for games.
Edited to add- While im totally for expanding and adding a new site for mmorpg.com's front page, I still would enjoy the current amount of attention as far as news and blogs go. I wouldn't want it to suffer because a lot of attention was redirected to the 'mother site'.
If the game has been shutdown then it should be removed, but should have something indicating that its shutdown. So if I feel nostaligic I can still go and find what the game was, but for people who are looking for games to play they can just filter them out (just like I have a list made for F2P and one for P2P)
Just a note to the author: we played single player RPGs on computers back in the 80's too. Sure there were plenty of party style games but there were a few single character CRPGs (remember that acronym? I doubt many do.)
Another point, MMOs were not an overnight success. Plenty of people stuck with CRPG and MUD's until well after EQ was out. I would also say that while they may have dipped on the PC, that kind of game still had plenty of space on console systems until companies began bringing consoles into the MMO phenmoena.
I personally have no issue with RPG reviews and reports as a once a week column or as a once a week news feature linked to another or several other sites.
Just My 2 Lunars
Looks like a majority is strongly against the idea, with the minority in favour not especially enthusiastic.
Interesting times.
I would love to see RPG's on here. Yeah can't place them with the MMO's but maybe either make a seperate list or an offsite like you guys have done with FPS and RTS.