I can't believe DAoC is not included in the list. Sure it's an old game, but I have my most fondest memories in that game. Fact is, I cancelled WoW and am going back to DAoC, you don't have to wait 14 hours to PvP.
Originally posted by Esorlleh I understand oldschool MMO players defending their first loves (UO, EQ, Asheron's Call or what not). And most likely they're right in saying that the older games had more depth and heart. I do think that high graphical standards limit the flexibility of game systems. When devs have to spend 3 hours as opposed to 10 minutes creating a model for an item, chances are they won't be making too many item options, as an example.That said, I'm not inquisitive enough to pay and play games like AC or EQ that, to me, look like polygons on a stick. I'd rather just accept my place in gaming history and take old-timer's words for it that 'back in the day, things were different'. I've played a huge number of MMOs but admittedly they're all second-gen MMOs. And that's the basis from which my judgement comes from. It doesn't make me a sheep, it just makes me a second-gen MMO player.(In conclusion, my vote still goes for Anarchy Online.)
I guess it comes down to, which is more important, since they're all actually 3d environments: gameplay or graphics. I'd dearly love to see something like AC1 or EQ1 in the hands of someone who would give them modern, WORTHY sequels -- or even just "remakes" or the originals, using modern graphics and interface technologies. And the reason is, there just more depth, flexilibility, and player involvement in those games. Even EQ1, which still epitomizes the "click-attack-go-get-dinner" part, because it was more than just the combat that made the game great. Neither game got a good sequel -- and, ironically, both games got the same premise for the sequel: since we're not that creative, we'll just say, the world was destroyed by a catastrophic event, and the "sequel" plays out in the decimated world.
That, or I'd like to see the Warcraft lore and setting put into the hands of someone who will create a game in that environment that actually incorporates some of the player-involving things that other games do: world events that change things instead of just being more static content; crafting that is customizable and doesn't lead to "4 million people making the same limited recipes", with depth, or even the capacity to build structures that are realised in the game world (aka Horizons); combat that is more involving and skill-based than just the usual "set up your specials buttons, hit attack, hit the buttons in the sequence you've learned to use". Roleplaying structures that support and create the environment -- as opposed to "honor" systems that forgot to look up the word "honor".
*sigh* Here's hoping Roma Victor or Dark and Light will actually come out and realise the potential of what they say they're trying to do.
(you know what's sad? EQ2 crafting. Phenomenally, almost mind-boggling huge and deep crafting with just millions of recipes -- but they're all the same, mindlessly built, no customization available, nothing that makes it "your weapon" or "your item", no way to alter the colorations, no way to add something unique to a recipe, no flexibility in it. A paradox, because it is so huge and so deep -- yet unsatisfying because it isn't flexible at all and leads to the same as WoW, tons of people mass-producing the same specc'd and looking items over and over again.)
I can understand that their is definitely a second and even third gen MMO community that is in it for pushing your systems to their max.
But I would also say that UO still has decent graphics and by far the best gameplay out of all the MMO's.
If these graphics aren't good enough for you then I recommend checking out UltimaIris which is a very neat little program that turns UO into a Second gen friendly gaming experience.
Why does this topic keep comming back over and over? I swear I've voted for something like this before already... The only two games that should EVER be called the best MMORPGS ever are UO and the first EQ. I've never played UO but head some good things about it. And I'd wish they'd stop putting both EQ1 and 2 together, even though I've played both, so far I still think the original eq is better than EQ2. But EQ2 is still a great game but I still wouldn't call it the best MMO ever.
Okay peple who say WoW isnt stomping the industry should open their eyes.
Its beaten out Lineage 1.. its slaughted EQ. its hit the 4million mark and climbing. In China its a brand. WoW is on the coke cans. They are hosting Blizzcon, which is projected to be Freaking gigantic.
WoW is still selling out in my home town. Its the first mmorpg for most people. Its is projected WoW will lower the sales of all other genres becuase people who pay a monthly fee are much less likely to buy other games.
WoW has tonnes of deaths becuase of it, a sure sign that its a monster. Good graphics and copy/paste gameplay doesnt sell 4 million copies. WoW is a solid game, whether you want to admit it or not is somthing else. It is the most sucessfull game ever made. As well it also has the largest Femal gamer pop of any blizzard game, comming in at an AMAZING 25% which is more than double the average for most games of 10%.
So really, I play wow, my neighbor plays wow. The hocket players in my town play wow. The pot heads play wow. two of my teachers play wow. gg
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Pizza Hut also sells 100 times as many pizzas as a really fine family owned Pizza joint in my home town as well. There is no doubt in about 95% of the people I've ever taken to the hometown pizza joint that the Pizza blows Pizza Huts pizza away and for an equal price.
But according to you, simply because "everybody" goes to Pizza Hut (even if they dont even know about the fine family owned place), well then OFCOURSE PIZZA HUT IS THE BEST PIZZA EVER!
Volume of sales doesnt relate at all to quality of what is sold. Again, I relate back to Britney Spears. Do you also think just because Britney Spears has sold more albums then Stevie Ray Vaughan that she "must" be a more talented and better musician?? Only on fool would say so, as only a fool would speak the gibberesh you spoke above about how if everbody does it, it "must" be great. That's total BS and I can give you 30,000 examples of how your thinking is not only foolish, but flat out wrong.
I don't take anything away from WoW. It is a good, solid game... for what it is. But not many old school mmo players who have spent considerable time playing either UO, AC1, or EQ1 will agree with you that WoW is a higher quality game with better content and depth.
Originally posted by zaxtor99 Munki...Don't be stupid.Pizza Hut also sells 100 times as many pizzas as a really fine family owned Pizza joint in my home town as well. There is no doubt in about 95% of the people I've ever taken to the hometown pizza joint that the Pizza blows Pizza Huts pizza away and for an equal price.But according to you, simply because "everybody" goes to Pizza Hut (even if they dont even know about the fine family owned place), well then OFCOURSE PIZZA HUT IS THE BEST PIZZA EVER!Volume of sales doesnt relate at all to quality of what is sold. Again, I relate back to Britney Spears. Do you also think just because Britney Spears has sold more albums then Stevie Ray Vaughan that she "must" be a more talented and better musician?? Only on fool would say so, as only a fool would speak the gibberesh you spoke above about how if everbody does it, it "must" be great. That's total BS and I can give you 30,000 examples of how your thinking is not only foolish, but flat out wrong.I don't take anything away from WoW. It is a good, solid game... for what it is. But not many old school mmo players who have spent considerable time playing either UO, AC1, or EQ1 will agree with you that WoW is a higher quality game with better content and depth. - Zaxx
Oh well, being one of those "elite" gamers who came from UO, I would have to dissagree. I am also sure many of the old EQ addicts from my guild would agree with me. WoW is the best mmorpg out to day imho.
The fact that it is the most popular just goes to show it was able to do somthing no MMORPG was able to do before it, and that is attract a mainstream audience. UO was a great game, but it never broke mainstream. Neither did EQ.. or any mmorpg for that fact.
and really, as a note, the reference to subscribers is how sucessful it is. Somthing that sucessful cant be garbage.
Pizza hut bad? nope, they are very sucessful, make lotsa money, employ lotsa poeple, make good food. Britney spears is a media whore, but shes sucessful. Just becuase you dont like her doesnt make her any less of a artist. Not that I like her either but you get my point.
Let lets skim past the parts where you try to tell me my opinoin doesnt matter and that im an idiot, and more onto the part where you are going to invalidate my thought processs. Now please list those 30k reasons or quit being a loud mouth.
WoW has more depth than UO ever had, much more indepth lore and story, as well as more content among other things. You are just trying to create this idea that people who like WoW are inferior to you and opinions matter less becuase you played those older games. Its like say the old "good" game was Pong. Move on bud, nobody thinks your special just because you romaticise about the classics.
So please Zaxtor next time you feel like trying to smack people with your epeen, stop and think about it first. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, and calling sombodies opinion stupid is never the best way to be taken seroiusly.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Originally posted by Munki WoW has more depth than UO ever had, much more indepth lore and story, as well as more content among other things.
You keep saying this, but you don't offer any reasons to your opinion other then saying simply that because over a million people play it, it has to be great. And that is your only reason. You offer nothing as to why or how it is a game with more depth then Ultima Online except saying over and over because it has more subscribers. And this is exactly why I say in response to you that you are foolish and that just because something sells more, certainly doesn't actually mean that it is better.
So I'll help make this easier for you. Let's ask you some questions about your beloved game of WoW in comparison to Ultima Online:
1) In WoW, is there something to do other then PvE, consensual PvP, and craft? ie, can you fish? Can you mine? Chop down trees for wood?
2) Can you build your own house or mansion or even castle exactly as you like? Can you design it as you like?
3) Can you hire npcs to sell your loot and crafted items and rare items for exactly what prices you like thus offering and competing in price wars with other players vendor based on supply and demand?
4) After you level up to max level on WoW, which happens very fast mind you.. is it still fun to play? in UO for example, you'll have some of your most fun after you max out 7 skills and become "uber". Do you really think tons of players will play WoW for years after maxxing out a couple of toons like happens all the time with Ultima Online??
5) Can you tame creatures with a taming type of skill, thus being able to ride and employ virtually any creature, even dragons as your pets?
I won't continue with the questions that I already know the answers to. I am simply giving you something other then your BS reason "it has more subscribers so it must be better!"
I won't even begine to compare WoW's depth to EQ1 or AC1 or it would look like a shallow pond compared to a deep ocean by comparison.
Now I say that you can't possibly say that WoW is an mmo of more depth... unless ofcourse you think that super stream-lined and fast leveling is "depth". I know that WoW is a good game man. It is a lot of fun too. But to say that is a game of more depth then the classic mmos like UO and AC1 just because it has more subscribers is plain silly.
And I am not saying that you are stupid. I am saying that your reasoning as to why WoW is the best just because it has more subscribers is a damn stupid statement. Which it is.
this seems to be turning into a 'faith in humanity' debate rather than something over MMO's.
--------------------------------------- All you friggin suburban white kid wannabe poobutts that are in love with G-Unit are sad and pathetic. Find your own identity -Anarchyart
Originally posted by zaxtor99 You keep saying this, but you don't offer any reasons to your opinion other then saying simply that because over a million people play it, it has to be great. And that is your only reason.
okay Im just gona drop this now because you must not even be reading my posts.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Originally posted by Munki Originally posted by zaxtor99 Munki...Don't be stupid.Pizza Hut also sells 100 times as many pizzas as a really fine family owned Pizza joint in my home town as well. There is no doubt in about 95% of the people I've ever taken to the hometown pizza joint that the Pizza blows Pizza Huts pizza away and for an equal price.But according to you, simply because "everybody" goes to Pizza Hut (even if they dont even know about the fine family owned place), well then OFCOURSE PIZZA HUT IS THE BEST PIZZA EVER!Volume of sales doesnt relate at all to quality of what is sold. Again, I relate back to Britney Spears. Do you also think just because Britney Spears has sold more albums then Stevie Ray Vaughan that she "must" be a more talented and better musician?? Only on fool would say so, as only a fool would speak the gibberesh you spoke above about how if everbody does it, it "must" be great. That's total BS and I can give you 30,000 examples of how your thinking is not only foolish, but flat out wrong.I don't take anything away from WoW. It is a good, solid game... for what it is. But not many old school mmo players who have spent considerable time playing either UO, AC1, or EQ1 will agree with you that WoW is a higher quality game with better content and depth. - Zaxx
Oh well, being one of those "elite" gamers who came from UO, I would have to dissagree. I am also sure many of the old EQ addicts from my guild would agree with me. WoW is the best mmorpg out to day imho.
The fact that it is the most popular just goes to show it was able to do somthing no MMORPG was able to do before it, and that is attract a mainstream audience. UO was a great game, but it never broke mainstream. Neither did EQ.. or any mmorpg for that fact.
and really, as a note, the reference to subscribers is how sucessful it is. Somthing that sucessful cant be garbage.
Pizza hut bad? nope, they are very sucessful, make lotsa money, employ lotsa poeple, make good food. Britney spears is a media whore, but shes sucessful. Just becuase you dont like her doesnt make her any less of a artist. Not that I like her either but you get my point.
Let lets skim past the parts where you try to tell me my opinoin doesnt matter and that im an idiot, and more onto the part where you are going to invalidate my thought processs. Now please list those 30k reasons or quit being a loud mouth.
WoW has more depth than UO ever had, much more indepth lore and story, as well as more content among other things. You are just trying to create this idea that people who like WoW are inferior to you and opinions matter less becuase you played those older games. Its like say the old "good" game was Pong. Move on bud, nobody thinks your special just because you romaticise about the classics.
So please Zaxtor next time you feel like trying to smack people with your epeen, stop and think about it first. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, and calling sombodies opinion stupid is never the best way to be taken seroiusly.
How fun hindsight is, and applying the standards of "groundbreaking" and "huge subscriptions" from today's standards as opposed to the games that set the standards in the past. It's so much fun forgetting that EQ WAS the subscription standard and leader for the bulk of the MMORPG lifetime to-date.
No, Munki, it's not that people aren't reading your posts -- it's that a lot of people are finding your posts to be nonsensical.
UO offered such a vast array of things that players can do that WoW doesn't, that saying the line "wow offers more depth than UO" is just ridiculous. WoW doesn't offer 1/10th the depth of so many other games -- AC1, UO, EQ1, or even in limited fashions to games like Horizons (vastly superior crafting) or DAoC or Shadowbane (vastly superior PvP system). Can you build items in WoW that are uniquely yours, that aren't just clones of the other 4 million people building the same recipe? Nope. Can you build structures that are realised in the game world? Like housing, bridges? Nope. Can you play out a quest that actually changes something in the gameworld (like AC1's world events? Or UO's many and varied quests that had an impact on the environment)? Nope. Does the game offer the flexibility to let players decide to run hospitals or malls, as they can in SWG? Nope. The list goes on and on and on.
This isn't to say that WoW is a bad game. Nor is it to say that others game are "superior". But all of these games mentioned above offered depth far beyond what WoW offers, and did so out of the original box. The reason a lot of us are horribly depressed about WoW is because it came after all these other games -- it should have offered the flexibilities the games that preceded it offered, it should have been something MORE, instead of just being something EASIER. It didn't challenge a single convention that already existed. It didn't get creative with any piece of the MMORPG "formula". Again, that's not to say it's bad, or that making the decision not to be innovative was wrong or bad -- it worked, it achieved their goal of bringing in new players (having Blizzard make the game and have the built-in audience of Diablo2 nuts didn't hurt, either).
As for population = quality, that sort of reasoning is so inherently flawed as to be... well, it should be obvious why it's flawed. EQ1 had the most people until recently -- did that make it the "best" game? Nope. It made it popular -- and hopefully most people already learned long ago that being popular doesn't equate to being "best" or even "good" (doesn't preclude it, either -- that's why rational people would use well-explained criteria for judging things instead of falling back on simplistic claptrap like volume of occupancy).
UO offered such a vast array of things that players can do that WoW doesn't, that saying the line "wow offers more depth than UO" is just ridiculous.
This goes both ways, there are many things you can do in WoW you couldnt do in UO, End game raids, raid bosses. Battlegrounds, instances, Magical Item system, set items, Quests... It goes both ways. So really, I think you give UO more credit than its due. It was a great game at the time. So was Pong, but time moves on and things improve.
WoW doesn't offer 1/10th the depth of so many other games -- AC1, UO, EQ1, or even in limited fashions to games like Horizons (vastly superior crafting) or DAoC or Shadowbane (vastly superior PvP system). Can you build items in WoW that are uniquely yours, that aren't just clones of the other 4 million people building the same recipe? Nope. Can you build structures that are realised in the game world? Like housing, bridges? Nope. Can you play out a quest that actually changes something in the gameworld (like AC1's world events? Or UO's many and varied quests that had an impact on the environment)? Nope. Does the game offer the flexibility to let players decide to run hospitals or malls, as they can in SWG? Nope. The list goes on and on and on.
1/10 of the depth? I dont think being able to dye your armor different colours is depth sorry. I think depth is lore that flows together, where every quests fits into the larger story. WoW is VERY lore rich world with more than I could even hope to understand. I dont want a game that you can build structures, build your own hospitals, or build strange unique items. I dont see how thats depth, thats just making the players create their own content as opposed to giving them content to enjoy. So in that regard, you could say that SWG for example was lazy. They made very little of the content temselves, all the fun stuff was made by players. and wait.. wows more popular, maybe the majority of players dont want a sandbox, they dont want to have to make their own fun, they want a game that gives them things to do. Sahdowbane was just a sandbox, and I think it just goes to show that a sandbox can only keep people busy for so long, now adays its just a botting fest with some PvP and the population is going down. They are just now adding a new server that adds rules and a point to the game.. why not just do that in the first place?
[quote]This isn't to say that WoW is a bad game. Nor is it to say that others game are "superior". But all of these games mentioned above offered depth far beyond what WoW offers, and did so out of the original box.[.quote] I would greatly dissagree, WoW had lots of options and it gripped you from the start. SWG did the same for me, but that died pretty quick. UO was good, but it was hard to get into, just like many mmorpgs, but it is getting better.
The reason a lot of us are horribly depressed about WoW is because it came after all these other games -- it should have offered the flexibilities the games that preceded it offered, it should have been something MORE, instead of just being something EASIER. It didn't challenge a single convention that already existed. It didn't get creative with any piece of the MMORPG "formula". Again, that's not to say it's bad, or that making the decision not to be innovative was wrong or bad -- it worked, it achieved their goal of bringing in new players (having Blizzard make the game and have the built-in audience of Diablo2 nuts didn't hurt, either).
This is where I sorta start to wonder. How do you know what it "should" have done. Do you think that you know better thant he designers of WoW? They set out to make a mmorpg that was fun to play and anybody could get into. They added touches, and made the game easier and funner to play. They didnt do anythign too extreeme becuase they wanted a solid game that anybody could play. They accomplished just that. Now I dont understand why you think that is bad. Maybe you want games that appeal to a niche, then WoW isnt the game for you.
As for population = quality, that sort of reasoning is so inherently flawed as to be... well, it should be obvious why it's flawed. EQ1 had the most people until recently -- did that make it the "best" game? Nope. It made it popular -- and hopefully most people already learned long ago that being popular doesn't equate to being "best" or even "good" (doesn't preclude it, either -- that's why rational people would use well-explained criteria for judging things instead of falling back on simplistic claptrap like volume of occupancy).
How else do you measure sucess or quality. If you like the game or not is just opinoin. It is a qualitative property. There is no numbers you can get from it. So instead I point to the fact that Millions of people play it an enjoy it. I dont understand how you can say your opinion is some how more vaild than theirs. This is fundamentally where we disagree. You seem to think that your opinion is the one, and I am saying that 4million people say its good, their has to be some truth to it. Where other people seem to be able to invalidate the opinions of 4million people and say "Ah well I like UO, its better than WoW"
But really, how can you say its "better" I use the popularity becuase it is a Quantative Value that you can measure. Its somthing that isnt influences by one persons preferances, or anything like that. Its a number, it has no bias. It cant be interpreted different, 4million is 4million. Good can be anything.
Thats why I say the number of players = quality. It is the only Quantitative Quality we can pull, the rest is just personal opinion.
edit: and as a note to Spy, I will aknowlege EQ was a great game, numbers dont lie. But as I said, so was Pong, we keep moving forward, WoW has stolen the spotlight.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Comments
Ppl aren't retarded for choosing what they like kthxbye
However making fun of ppl for having a preference is :b
And I voted wow
I can't believe DAoC is not included in the list. Sure it's an old game, but I have my most fondest memories in that game. Fact is, I cancelled WoW and am going back to DAoC, you don't have to wait 14 hours to PvP.
I guess it comes down to, which is more important, since they're all actually 3d environments: gameplay or graphics. I'd dearly love to see something like AC1 or EQ1 in the hands of someone who would give them modern, WORTHY sequels -- or even just "remakes" or the originals, using modern graphics and interface technologies. And the reason is, there just more depth, flexilibility, and player involvement in those games. Even EQ1, which still epitomizes the "click-attack-go-get-dinner" part, because it was more than just the combat that made the game great. Neither game got a good sequel -- and, ironically, both games got the same premise for the sequel: since we're not that creative, we'll just say, the world was destroyed by a catastrophic event, and the "sequel" plays out in the decimated world.
That, or I'd like to see the Warcraft lore and setting put into the hands of someone who will create a game in that environment that actually incorporates some of the player-involving things that other games do: world events that change things instead of just being more static content; crafting that is customizable and doesn't lead to "4 million people making the same limited recipes", with depth, or even the capacity to build structures that are realised in the game world (aka Horizons); combat that is more involving and skill-based than just the usual "set up your specials buttons, hit attack, hit the buttons in the sequence you've learned to use". Roleplaying structures that support and create the environment -- as opposed to "honor" systems that forgot to look up the word "honor".
*sigh* Here's hoping Roma Victor or Dark and Light will actually come out and realise the potential of what they say they're trying to do.
(you know what's sad? EQ2 crafting. Phenomenally, almost mind-boggling huge and deep crafting with just millions of recipes -- but they're all the same, mindlessly built, no customization available, nothing that makes it "your weapon" or "your item", no way to alter the colorations, no way to add something unique to a recipe, no flexibility in it. A paradox, because it is so huge and so deep -- yet unsatisfying because it isn't flexible at all and leads to the same as WoW, tons of people mass-producing the same specc'd and looking items over and over again.)
I can understand that their is definitely a second and even third gen MMO community that is in it for pushing your systems to their max.
But I would also say that UO still has decent graphics and by far the best gameplay out of all the MMO's.
If these graphics aren't good enough for you then I recommend checking out UltimaIris which is a very neat little program that turns UO into a Second gen friendly gaming experience.
Have fun
Why does this topic keep comming back over and over? I swear I've voted for something like this before already... The only two games that should EVER be called the best MMORPGS ever are UO and the first EQ. I've never played UO but head some good things about it. And I'd wish they'd stop putting both EQ1 and 2 together, even though I've played both, so far I still think the original eq is better than EQ2. But EQ2 is still a great game but I still wouldn't call it the best MMO ever.
ultima online of course
Ultima Online and Shadowbane.
Okay peple who say WoW isnt stomping the industry should open their eyes.
Its beaten out Lineage 1.. its slaughted EQ.
its hit the 4million mark and climbing.
In China its a brand. WoW is on the coke cans.
They are hosting Blizzcon, which is projected to be Freaking gigantic.
WoW is still selling out in my home town. Its the first mmorpg for most people.
Its is projected WoW will lower the sales of all other genres becuase people who pay a monthly fee are much less likely to buy other games.
WoW has tonnes of deaths becuase of it, a sure sign that its a monster.
Good graphics and copy/paste gameplay doesnt sell 4 million copies.
WoW is a solid game, whether you want to admit it or not is somthing else.
It is the most sucessfull game ever made. As well it also has the largest Femal gamer pop of any blizzard game, comming in at an AMAZING 25% which is more than double the average for most games of 10%.
So really, I play wow, my neighbor plays wow. The hocket players in my town play wow. The pot heads play wow. two of my teachers play wow.
gg
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Munki...
Don't be stupid.
Pizza Hut also sells 100 times as many pizzas as a really fine family owned Pizza joint in my home town as well. There is no doubt in about 95% of the people I've ever taken to the hometown pizza joint that the Pizza blows Pizza Huts pizza away and for an equal price.
But according to you, simply because "everybody" goes to Pizza Hut (even if they dont even know about the fine family owned place), well then OFCOURSE PIZZA HUT IS THE BEST PIZZA EVER!
Volume of sales doesnt relate at all to quality of what is sold. Again, I relate back to Britney Spears. Do you also think just because Britney Spears has sold more albums then Stevie Ray Vaughan that she "must" be a more talented and better musician?? Only on fool would say so, as only a fool would speak the gibberesh you spoke above about how if everbody does it, it "must" be great. That's total BS and I can give you 30,000 examples of how your thinking is not only foolish, but flat out wrong.
I don't take anything away from WoW. It is a good, solid game... for what it is. But not many old school mmo players who have spent considerable time playing either UO, AC1, or EQ1 will agree with you that WoW is a higher quality game with better content and depth.
- Zaxx
Oh well, being one of those "elite" gamers who came from UO, I would have to dissagree. I am also sure many of the old EQ addicts from my guild would agree with me. WoW is the best mmorpg out to day imho.
The fact that it is the most popular just goes to show it was able to do somthing no MMORPG was able to do before it, and that is attract a mainstream audience.
UO was a great game, but it never broke mainstream. Neither did EQ.. or any mmorpg for that fact.
and really, as a note, the reference to subscribers is how sucessful it is. Somthing that sucessful cant be garbage.
Pizza hut bad? nope, they are very sucessful, make lotsa money, employ lotsa poeple, make good food.
Britney spears is a media whore, but shes sucessful. Just becuase you dont like her doesnt make her any less of a artist. Not that I like her either but you get my point.
Let lets skim past the parts where you try to tell me my opinoin doesnt matter and that im an idiot, and more onto the part where you are going to invalidate my thought processs. Now please list those 30k reasons or quit being a loud mouth.
WoW has more depth than UO ever had, much more indepth lore and story, as well as more content among other things. You are just trying to create this idea that people who like WoW are inferior to you and opinions matter less becuase you played those older games. Its like say the old "good" game was Pong. Move on bud, nobody thinks your special just because you romaticise about the classics.
So please Zaxtor next time you feel like trying to smack people with your epeen, stop and think about it first. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, and calling sombodies opinion stupid is never the best way to be taken seroiusly.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Who's gonna listen to you when you tell us that Pizza Hut and Britney ain't bad? We know the truth!
And M.C. Hammer, Vanilla Ice and Hardee's were all successful at one time too.
You keep saying this, but you don't offer any reasons to your opinion other then saying simply that because over a million people play it, it has to be great. And that is your only reason. You offer nothing as to why or how it is a game with more depth then Ultima Online except saying over and over because it has more subscribers. And this is exactly why I say in response to you that you are foolish and that just because something sells more, certainly doesn't actually mean that it is better.
So I'll help make this easier for you. Let's ask you some questions about your beloved game of WoW in comparison to Ultima Online:
1) In WoW, is there something to do other then PvE, consensual PvP, and craft? ie, can you fish? Can you mine? Chop down trees for wood?
2) Can you build your own house or mansion or even castle exactly as you like? Can you design it as you like?
3) Can you hire npcs to sell your loot and crafted items and rare items for exactly what prices you like thus offering and competing in price wars with other players vendor based on supply and demand?
4) After you level up to max level on WoW, which happens very fast mind you.. is it still fun to play? in UO for example, you'll have some of your most fun after you max out 7 skills and become "uber". Do you really think tons of players will play WoW for years after maxxing out a couple of toons like happens all the time with Ultima Online??
5) Can you tame creatures with a taming type of skill, thus being able to ride and employ virtually any creature, even dragons as your pets?
I won't continue with the questions that I already know the answers to. I am simply giving you something other then your BS reason "it has more subscribers so it must be better!"
I won't even begine to compare WoW's depth to EQ1 or AC1 or it would look like a shallow pond compared to a deep ocean by comparison.
Now I say that you can't possibly say that WoW is an mmo of more depth... unless ofcourse you think that super stream-lined and fast leveling is "depth". I know that WoW is a good game man. It is a lot of fun too. But to say that is a game of more depth then the classic mmos like UO and AC1 just because it has more subscribers is plain silly.
And I am not saying that you are stupid. I am saying that your reasoning as to why WoW is the best just because it has more subscribers is a damn stupid statement. Which it is.
- Zaxx
this seems to be turning into a 'faith in humanity' debate rather than something over MMO's.
---------------------------------------
-Anarchyart
All you friggin suburban white kid wannabe poobutts that are in love with G-Unit are sad and pathetic. Find your own identity
lol, it always does
Watch....by the 11th page a debate on firearms will ensue
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Oh well, being one of those "elite" gamers who came from UO, I would have to dissagree. I am also sure many of the old EQ addicts from my guild would agree with me. WoW is the best mmorpg out to day imho.
The fact that it is the most popular just goes to show it was able to do somthing no MMORPG was able to do before it, and that is attract a mainstream audience.
UO was a great game, but it never broke mainstream. Neither did EQ.. or any mmorpg for that fact.
and really, as a note, the reference to subscribers is how sucessful it is. Somthing that sucessful cant be garbage.
Pizza hut bad? nope, they are very sucessful, make lotsa money, employ lotsa poeple, make good food.
Britney spears is a media whore, but shes sucessful. Just becuase you dont like her doesnt make her any less of a artist. Not that I like her either but you get my point.
Let lets skim past the parts where you try to tell me my opinoin doesnt matter and that im an idiot, and more onto the part where you are going to invalidate my thought processs. Now please list those 30k reasons or quit being a loud mouth.
WoW has more depth than UO ever had, much more indepth lore and story, as well as more content among other things. You are just trying to create this idea that people who like WoW are inferior to you and opinions matter less becuase you played those older games. Its like say the old "good" game was Pong. Move on bud, nobody thinks your special just because you romaticise about the classics.
So please Zaxtor next time you feel like trying to smack people with your epeen, stop and think about it first. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, and calling sombodies opinion stupid is never the best way to be taken seroiusly.
How fun hindsight is, and applying the standards of "groundbreaking" and "huge subscriptions" from today's standards as opposed to the games that set the standards in the past. It's so much fun forgetting that EQ WAS the subscription standard and leader for the bulk of the MMORPG lifetime to-date.
g
No, Munki, it's not that people aren't reading your posts -- it's that a lot of people are finding your posts to be nonsensical.
UO offered such a vast array of things that players can do that WoW doesn't, that saying the line "wow offers more depth than UO" is just ridiculous. WoW doesn't offer 1/10th the depth of so many other games -- AC1, UO, EQ1, or even in limited fashions to games like Horizons (vastly superior crafting) or DAoC or Shadowbane (vastly superior PvP system). Can you build items in WoW that are uniquely yours, that aren't just clones of the other 4 million people building the same recipe? Nope. Can you build structures that are realised in the game world? Like housing, bridges? Nope. Can you play out a quest that actually changes something in the gameworld (like AC1's world events? Or UO's many and varied quests that had an impact on the environment)? Nope. Does the game offer the flexibility to let players decide to run hospitals or malls, as they can in SWG? Nope. The list goes on and on and on.
This isn't to say that WoW is a bad game. Nor is it to say that others game are "superior". But all of these games mentioned above offered depth far beyond what WoW offers, and did so out of the original box. The reason a lot of us are horribly depressed about WoW is because it came after all these other games -- it should have offered the flexibilities the games that preceded it offered, it should have been something MORE, instead of just being something EASIER. It didn't challenge a single convention that already existed. It didn't get creative with any piece of the MMORPG "formula". Again, that's not to say it's bad, or that making the decision not to be innovative was wrong or bad -- it worked, it achieved their goal of bringing in new players (having Blizzard make the game and have the built-in audience of Diablo2 nuts didn't hurt, either).
As for population = quality, that sort of reasoning is so inherently flawed as to be... well, it should be obvious why it's flawed. EQ1 had the most people until recently -- did that make it the "best" game? Nope. It made it popular -- and hopefully most people already learned long ago that being popular doesn't equate to being "best" or even "good" (doesn't preclude it, either -- that's why rational people would use well-explained criteria for judging things instead of falling back on simplistic claptrap like volume of occupancy).
So really, I think you give UO more credit than its due. It was a great game at the time. So was Pong, but time moves on and things improve. 1/10 of the depth? I dont think being able to dye your armor different colours is depth sorry.
I think depth is lore that flows together, where every quests fits into the larger story. WoW is VERY lore rich world with more than I could even hope to understand. I dont want a game that you can build structures, build your own hospitals, or build strange unique items. I dont see how thats depth, thats just making the players create their own content as opposed to giving them content to enjoy. So in that regard, you could say that SWG for example was lazy. They made very little of the content temselves, all the fun stuff was made by players. and wait.. wows more popular, maybe the majority of players dont want a sandbox, they dont want to have to make their own fun, they want a game that gives them things to do. Sahdowbane was just a sandbox, and I think it just goes to show that a sandbox can only keep people busy for so long, now adays its just a botting fest with some PvP and the population is going down. They are just now adding a new server that adds rules and a point to the game.. why not just do that in the first place?
This is where I sorta start to wonder. How do you know what it "should" have done. Do you think that you know better thant he designers of WoW? They set out to make a mmorpg that was fun to play and anybody could get into. They added touches, and made the game easier and funner to play. They didnt do anythign too extreeme becuase they wanted a solid game that anybody could play. They accomplished just that. Now I dont understand why you think that is bad. Maybe you want games that appeal to a niche, then WoW isnt the game for you.[quote]This isn't to say that WoW is a bad game. Nor is it to say that others game are "superior". But all of these games mentioned above offered depth far beyond what WoW offers, and did so out of the original box.[.quote]
I would greatly dissagree, WoW had lots of options and it gripped you from the start. SWG did the same for me, but that died pretty quick. UO was good, but it was hard to get into, just like many mmorpgs, but it is getting better.
How else do you measure sucess or quality. If you like the game or not is just opinoin. It is a qualitative property. There is no numbers you can get from it. So instead I point to the fact that Millions of people play it an enjoy it. I dont understand how you can say your opinion is some how more vaild than theirs.
This is fundamentally where we disagree. You seem to think that your opinion is the one, and I am saying that 4million people say its good, their has to be some truth to it. Where other people seem to be able to invalidate the opinions of 4million people and say "Ah well I like UO, its better than WoW"
But really, how can you say its "better"
I use the popularity becuase it is a Quantative Value that you can measure. Its somthing that isnt influences by one persons preferances, or anything like that. Its a number, it has no bias. It cant be interpreted different, 4million is 4million. Good can be anything.
Thats why I say the number of players = quality. It is the only Quantitative Quality we can pull, the rest is just personal opinion.
edit: and as a note to Spy, I will aknowlege EQ was a great game, numbers dont lie. But as I said, so was Pong, we keep moving forward, WoW has stolen the spotlight.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
anarchy online was my favorite and played it the longest. EVE and then UO would be #2 and #3.