Originally posted by Bladestrom Few thousand forgrim? You should calculate exactly how many players there are over the age of 25, it's a he'll of a lot more than a few million.
Why would I calculate all mmo players over the age of 25? Those numbers are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm calculating the small number of gamers, regardless of age, who would still want to play an old-school style of mmo. That's what a game developer would be looking at if they were considering making that type of game now.
And that's effectively nobody. The number of people who want to play an old-school game is considerably less than 1% of the total MMO marketplace. Most people who used to play old-school MMOs have either stopped playing entirely or have simply changed their minds and like the way modern MMOs play. Game developers know this, that's why you see no AAA old-school games.
Me leaving doesn't tell them what it is I left over.
You'd be surprised at how much the devs can identify from playing habits and related data.
Aside from basic metrics on which content you like and dislike, there's further information that is gained as you spend your time in a dev's virtual world. From how you play, the devs can see what kind of player you are, often identifying you as one of many different archetypes. No, you're not a unique snowflake. The type of content you engage in and the circles you socialize in definitely show a pattern, but changes in those often indicate a move to another stage in your gameplay. Some actions indicate someone is likely to start shifting toward a PVP phase. Some may indicate more of a move toward more socializing. Some actions are flags that indicate that you're on your way out.
Not only do the devs probably know why you left, they more than likely knew you were leaving three months before you did. This is true of a lot of behavioral data, including how you shop. There's a great article on Forbes about it what is identified from data on how you do things, and it's definitely worth reading.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Me leaving doesn't tell them what it is I left over.
You'd be surprised at how much the devs can identify from playing habits and related data.
Aside from basic metrics on which content you like and dislike, there's further information that is gained as you spend your time in a dev's virtual world. From how you play, the devs can see what kind of player you are, often identifying you as one of many different archetypes. No, you're not a unique snowflake. The type of content you engage in and the circles you socialize in definitely show a pattern, but changes in those often indicate a move to another stage in your gameplay. Some actions indicate someone is likely to start shifting toward a PVP phase. Some may indicate more of a move toward more socializing. Some actions are flags that indicate that you're on your way out.
Not only do the devs probably know why you left, they more than likely knew you were leaving three months before you did. This is true of a lot of behavioral data, including how you shop. There's a great article on Forbes about it what is identified from data on how you do things, and it's definitely worth reading.
I think you'd be surprised how much game companies aren't google.
Their metrics mainly keep track of time spent in game, time killing creatures, quest completed (and therefore section of a zone completed). They don't create complex profiles on gamer types and don't at all pinpoint why someone quit.
Sometimes people give far more credit then where it is due, and how accurate game companies are on a given player and why they quit is no where near where you suggest at this point in time.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Few thousand forgrim? You should calculate exactly how many players there are over the age of 25, it's a he'll of a lot more than a few million.
Why would I calculate all mmo players over the age of 25? Those numbers are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm calculating the small number of gamers, regardless of age, who would still want to play an old-school style of mmo. That's what a game developer would be looking at if they were considering making that type of game now.
And that's effectively nobody. The number of people who want to play an old-school game is considerably less than 1% of the total MMO marketplace. Most people who used to play old-school MMOs have either stopped playing entirely or have simply changed their minds and like the way modern MMOs play. Game developers know this, that's why you see no AAA old-school games.
Yeah, this same research proved that no one would make a AAA Sandbox ever again also. Didn't you get the memo?
We'll have to see how it goes in practice, won't we? Even if it falls flat on it's face, you'll have the sandbox advocates continuing to call for more sandboxes, even though sandboxes tend to fail.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Few thousand forgrim? You should calculate exactly how many players there are over the age of 25, it's a he'll of a lot more than a few million.
Why would I calculate all mmo players over the age of 25? Those numbers are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm calculating the small number of gamers, regardless of age, who would still want to play an old-school style of mmo. That's what a game developer would be looking at if they were considering making that type of game now.
And that's effectively nobody. The number of people who want to play an old-school game is considerably less than 1% of the total MMO marketplace. Most people who used to play old-school MMOs have either stopped playing entirely or have simply changed their minds and like the way modern MMOs play. Game developers know this, that's why you see no AAA old-school games.
Making up statistics doesn't make your argument any more sound. Nobody really knows how many people would play a AAA hardcore MMO today. I bet it's a lot more than you think. Casual players might be the majority, but there is more than enough market for a good solid MMORPG that doesn't cater to that type of player.
WoW initially struck a pretty good balance because it took a lot of the more hardcore aspects from other games (like EQ) and increased the solo playability substantially. Vanilla WoW was pretty close to a perfect game, though still had some room for improvement.
I actually think that developers have listened FAR too much to their most vocal playerbase, the whiny casual.
Me leaving doesn't tell them what it is I left over.
You'd be surprised at how much the devs can identify from playing habits and related data.
Aside from basic metrics on which content you like and dislike, there's further information that is gained as you spend your time in a dev's virtual world. From how you play, the devs can see what kind of player you are, often identifying you as one of many different archetypes. No, you're not a unique snowflake. The type of content you engage in and the circles you socialize in definitely show a pattern, but changes in those often indicate a move to another stage in your gameplay. Some actions indicate someone is likely to start shifting toward a PVP phase. Some may indicate more of a move toward more socializing. Some actions are flags that indicate that you're on your way out.
Not only do the devs probably know why you left, they more than likely knew you were leaving three months before you did. This is true of a lot of behavioral data, including how you shop. There's a great article on Forbes about it what is identified from data on how you do things, and it's definitely worth reading.
I think you'd be surprised how much game companies aren't google.
Their metrics mainly keep track of time spent in game, time killing creatures, quest completed (and therefore section of a zone completed). They don't create complex profiles on gamer types and don't at all pinpoint why someone quit.
Sometimes people give far more credit then where it is due, and how accurate game companies are on a given player and why they quit is no where near where you suggest at this point in time.
Actually, I was explaining to you the type of data and research that we game developers really do.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
One big point its not just old school mmos missed by older gamers there would be a lot of young players that would like the depth of an old school mmo .the amount of times ive read on the forums played game for 3 months nothing to do or boring etc ,im sure a lot of younger gamers would play the likes of EQ and asherons call if the graphics were up to date
When the Walking Dead launched, the major networks saw it as nothing. Their research did suggest that type of show had an audience. Then the show grew and grew. They tried to say it was a passing fad and that it wouldn't last. It grew and grew and continues to grow. They actually had a couple execs from other major networks say they were confused as to why this show was working because their research said that a show had to 1) have a major star in it and 2) needed to be a procedural such as a cop drama/comedy. They put so much faith into their market research that even when something is doing well because it directly went for a side audience that producers weren't sure how big it was, that they can't wrap their head around it.
The market research isn't completely wrong. A detective show is the most desired show in the US currently. The problem is that there are at least 12 of them. If there was only 1 detective show it would by far and large be the most watched show on television. But with it spread out over so many (some competing on the same night or same time slots) they are all brought down. There are still successful ones for sure. But new ones will of course struggle because it is so flooded (like theme park MMOs).
For TV there are at least some people who realize this. AMC network came out of nowhere by targeting the audiences no one else was with shows like Mad Men, The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad. Netflix nailed some immediate home runs by making shows such as House of Cards and Orange is the New Black instead of going with a cop, lawyer, or other over done category. A few years ago Hollywood would have laughed off most of these ideas. But people realizing that when you have a global population of over 7 billion and a US population of over 330 million means that niche is actually quite large, has changed the game. HBO is of course another great example.
This is where the MMO industry (and kind of all gaming) hasn't caught up yet. Yes, if you took all of the MMO gamers and did a detailed poll on what they want, a quicker, easier, more casual, theme park MMO would be hands down the top of the charts. The problem is there there are a TON of those all trying to get a piece of that market which makes MOST of them do poorly. Breaking out of that mold and targeting some of the side groups where there is little to no competition currently is actually the far smarter solution. However, game companies are stuck in copy the leader mode and are hurting themselves.
this is possibly one of the more rational expositions of what is happening that i have read so far. i know others have hinted at it, but i think this offers a clear and usable analogy with explanatory power.
+2 to Intelligence
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
Me leaving doesn't tell them what it is I left over.
You'd be surprised at how much the devs can identify from playing habits and related data.
Aside from basic metrics on which content you like and dislike, there's further information that is gained as you spend your time in a dev's virtual world. From how you play, the devs can see what kind of player you are, often identifying you as one of many different archetypes. No, you're not a unique snowflake. The type of content you engage in and the circles you socialize in definitely show a pattern, but changes in those often indicate a move to another stage in your gameplay. Some actions indicate someone is likely to start shifting toward a PVP phase. Some may indicate more of a move toward more socializing. Some actions are flags that indicate that you're on your way out.
Not only do the devs probably know why you left, they more than likely knew you were leaving three months before you did. This is true of a lot of behavioral data, including how you shop. There's a great article on Forbes about it what is identified from data on how you do things, and it's definitely worth reading.
I think you'd be surprised how much game companies aren't google.
Their metrics mainly keep track of time spent in game, time killing creatures, quest completed (and therefore section of a zone completed). They don't create complex profiles on gamer types and don't at all pinpoint why someone quit.
Sometimes people give far more credit then where it is due, and how accurate game companies are on a given player and why they quit is no where near where you suggest at this point in time.
Actually, I was explaining to you the type of data and research that we game developers really do.
and if those who aren't should be.
it's too bad such data would never be released to the public. i think a more self aware consumer is a benefit to both consumer and producer.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
Originally posted by Bladestrom The point he was making is that many adults are too busy for such things, so of you are not careful the statistics are skewed by those that do have more time on their hands. Fact is people have been gaming since the 80's and humans seek progressively more sophisticated and deep experiences as they go- but that is not what is getting delivered. There is something skewing away....
But that's not reality. As people get older, they tend to become more and more casual in their gaming because they don't have the time to spend on deep, sophisticated gaming. Kids who have time to spend 12-16 hours a day gaming get jobs, get married and find that they don't have remotely that much time. They might have time for 2 hours a day gaming. Lots of us, myself included, maybe get 2 hours a week gaming. Gaming is not that important and if you think it is, then you're neither mature nor sophisticated.
So much irony, not just in the name-calling but in the fact that you're dedicating time posting about a hobby that you turn around and dismiss as a waste of time.
I couldn't disagree more. My hobbies are important, ALL OF THEM, and they are what keep me healthy physically and mentally. One of the most amusing things to me is how many gamers devote so much time to their hobby and then turn around and tell everyone about how much their hobby isn't worth their time, or how bad it is....
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
Originally posted by SnarlingWolfHere is probably a better example:When the Walking Dead launched, the major networks saw it as nothing. Their research did suggest that type of show had an audience. Then the show grew and grew. They tried to say it was a passing fad and that it wouldn't last. It grew and grew and continues to grow. They actually had a couple execs from other major networks say they were confused as to why this show was working because their research said that a show had to 1) have a major star in it and 2) needed to be a procedural such as a cop drama/comedy. They put so much faith into their market research that even when something is doing well because it directly went for a side audience that producers weren't sure how big it was, that they can't wrap their head around it.The market research isn't completely wrong. A detective show is the most desired show in the US currently. The problem is that there are at least 12 of them. If there was only 1 detective show it would by far and large be the most watched show on television. But with it spread out over so many (some competing on the same night or same time slots) they are all brought down. There are still successful ones for sure. But new ones will of course struggle because it is so flooded (like theme park MMOs).For TV there are at least some people who realize this. AMC network came out of nowhere by targeting the audiences no one else was with shows like Mad Men, The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad. Netflix nailed some immediate home runs by making shows such as House of Cards and Orange is the New Black instead of going with a cop, lawyer, or other over done category. A few years ago Hollywood would have laughed off most of these ideas. But people realizing that when you have a global population of over 7 billion and a US population of over 330 million means that niche is actually quite large, has changed the game. HBO is of course another great example.This is where the MMO industry (and kind of all gaming) hasn't caught up yet. Yes, if you took all of the MMO gamers and did a detailed poll on what they want, a quicker, easier, more casual, theme park MMO would be hands down the top of the charts. The problem is there there are a TON of those all trying to get a piece of that market which makes MOST of them do poorly. Breaking out of that mold and targeting some of the side groups where there is little to no competition currently is actually the far smarter solution. However, game companies are stuck in copy the leader mode and are hurting themselves.
this is possibly one of the more rational expositions of what is happening that i have read so far. i know others have hinted at it, but i think this offers a clear and usable analogy with explanatory power.
TWD wasn't thought of as 'nothing'. The content could not be aired on channels like NBC, CBS or ABC. AMC ordered the first season before they even filmed the pilot, something they wouldn't have done if they didn't think the show would rock. They also showed bits of the pilot episode at ComiCons - pandering to their comic fans.
**
Even if they weren't that confident in a new show there are focus groups, pilot episodes and video shorts to see if something will work.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I am 55 years old, And a Disabled Desert Storm Vet. I made time to play thoses good classics games since C64. Now since im disabled I have alot of time on my hands and fail to find good MMOs thats not catered to screaming 12 year olds who have gutter mouths. I play and buy games I like, not what others think about it or Forums. Yes we are a dying breed and yes it suxs.
I'm 36 with wife, kid and career. What I want in a MMO:
action combat like GW2,
all the sandbox elements from SWG. Bounty hunting, flagged pvp, crafting, player economy, non-combat classes and pets. Huge open world.
craters to casual and hardcore players.
Epic quests like EQ and EQ2.
ditches the WoW quest hub design.
wizards/mages have non-combat spells they use like Eye of Zomm and levitate.
What I don't want is sitting around for 2 hours in game to figure out what to do or to put a group together. Thats about as long as my play sessions can be is 2 hrs. If all that time is spent doing nothing everytime I log on then I might as well not play. In fact this is exactly why I left EQ1.
Lol sandbox, casual, old school, silly childish insults (xthos, I'm a very t well balanced individual with great kids etc, ask yourself why you need to be rude perhaps?). All are labels that mean nothing. What gamers want( all gamers). Are games that are better than the game they played before. Mature players have the same needs that the children today will have in 10 years. Today's cutting edge is tomorrows old school- developers give us bigger and more sophisticated and it's job done.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I think he uses the word 'mature' because most mature or older players agree with his game design preferences. Myself included.
Nobody appreciates what they don't have to earn. That being said, I think that we choose our own pace and our own community. We can have that in any game we choose to. Blows my mind that game developers spend half a decade or more creating these worlds and players with the time just grind through all the content and hit max level in a matter of weeks.
Justin Bieber and all current trash pop. They must thank their stars everyday for the brainless 14-17 year olds with no responsibility who spend their money on whatever is trendy to fit in with the crowd.
I agree, I have money ready to spend in gaming, but at our age we expect a product worth what we pay for it.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Few thousand forgrim? You should calculate exactly how many players there are over the age of 25, it's a he'll of a lot more than a few million.
Why would I calculate all mmo players over the age of 25? Those numbers are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm calculating the small number of gamers, regardless of age, who would still want to play an old-school style of mmo. That's what a game developer would be looking at if they were considering making that type of game now.
And that's effectively nobody. The number of people who want to play an old-school game is considerably less than 1% of the total MMO marketplace. Most people who used to play old-school MMOs have either stopped playing entirely or have simply changed their minds and like the way modern MMOs play. Game developers know this, that's why you see no AAA old-school games.
Yeah, this same research proved that no one would make a AAA Sandbox ever again also. Didn't you get the memo?
We'll have to see how it goes in practice, won't we? Even if it falls flat on it's face, you'll have the sandbox advocates continuing to call for more sandboxes, even though sandboxes tend to fail.
Just as themeparks fail...Sandboxes were not being made AAA, so a AAA themepark verse a indie sandbox was never a good comparison in the first place. Themepark does not shield you from failure, just gives you more people to try to get your small percentage from.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Lol sandbox, casual, old school, silly childish insults (xthos, I'm a very t well balanced individual with great kids etc, ask yourself why you need to be rude perhaps?). All are labels that mean nothing. What gamers want( all gamers). Are games that are better than the game they played before. Mature players have the same needs that the children today will have in 10 years. Today's cutting edge is tomorrows old school- developers give us bigger and more sophisticated and it's job done.
Uhm, I don't recall insulting you, and argued the same side you are...Think you have misunderstood sarcasm, I try to leave no doubt that it is sarcasm, when I stated AAA sandbox, and I think SoE and EQN/L probably qualify as AAA. If it was something else, you will need to point it out.
You also may of not followed the quote boxes and think the mature jab was mine, but it wasn't?
Originally posted by Bladestrom Few thousand forgrim? You should calculate exactly how many players there are over the age of 25, it's a he'll of a lot more than a few million.
Why would I calculate all mmo players over the age of 25? Those numbers are irrelevant to the discussion. I'm calculating the small number of gamers, regardless of age, who would still want to play an old-school style of mmo. That's what a game developer would be looking at if they were considering making that type of game now.
And that's effectively nobody. The number of people who want to play an old-school game is considerably less than 1% of the total MMO marketplace. Most people who used to play old-school MMOs have either stopped playing entirely or have simply changed their minds and like the way modern MMOs play. Game developers know this, that's why you see no AAA old-school games.
Yeah, this same research proved that no one would make a AAA Sandbox ever again also. Didn't you get the memo?
We'll have to see how it goes in practice, won't we? Even if it falls flat on it's face, you'll have the sandbox advocates continuing to call for more sandboxes, even though sandboxes tend to fail.
Just as themeparks fail...Sandboxes were not being made AAA, so a AAA themepark verse a indie sandbox was never a good comparison in the first place. Themepark does not shield you from failure, just gives you more people to try to get your small percentage from.
No and there was a reason there weren't AAA sandboxes being made, they just are not as popular as themeparks. We know themeparks make money, that's why there are so many of them made. 90% of every new business, regardless of the industry, fails in the first year. We have many examples of themeparks that survive considerably beyond that threshold. We have very few examples of sandboxes that do so.
Comments
That's exactly what I was saying.
You'd be surprised at how much the devs can identify from playing habits and related data.
Aside from basic metrics on which content you like and dislike, there's further information that is gained as you spend your time in a dev's virtual world. From how you play, the devs can see what kind of player you are, often identifying you as one of many different archetypes. No, you're not a unique snowflake.
The type of content you engage in and the circles you socialize in definitely show a pattern, but changes in those often indicate a move to another stage in your gameplay. Some actions indicate someone is likely to start shifting toward a PVP phase. Some may indicate more of a move toward more socializing. Some actions are flags that indicate that you're on your way out.
Not only do the devs probably know why you left, they more than likely knew you were leaving three months before you did. This is true of a lot of behavioral data, including how you shop. There's a great article on Forbes about it what is identified from data on how you do things, and it's definitely worth reading.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think you'd be surprised how much game companies aren't google.
Their metrics mainly keep track of time spent in game, time killing creatures, quest completed (and therefore section of a zone completed). They don't create complex profiles on gamer types and don't at all pinpoint why someone quit.
Sometimes people give far more credit then where it is due, and how accurate game companies are on a given player and why they quit is no where near where you suggest at this point in time.
We'll have to see how it goes in practice, won't we? Even if it falls flat on it's face, you'll have the sandbox advocates continuing to call for more sandboxes, even though sandboxes tend to fail.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Kickstarter seems to be the place to prove your niche exists and is hungry enough for something that doesn't exist to throw money at the screen.
OP, it seems that every focus group conducted by every mmo dev company in the last 10 years disagrees with you.
I really do wonder where they find the people for those focus groups.
Making up statistics doesn't make your argument any more sound. Nobody really knows how many people would play a AAA hardcore MMO today. I bet it's a lot more than you think. Casual players might be the majority, but there is more than enough market for a good solid MMORPG that doesn't cater to that type of player.
WoW initially struck a pretty good balance because it took a lot of the more hardcore aspects from other games (like EQ) and increased the solo playability substantially. Vanilla WoW was pretty close to a perfect game, though still had some room for improvement.
I actually think that developers have listened FAR too much to their most vocal playerbase, the whiny casual.
Actually, I was explaining to you the type of data and research that we game developers really do.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
this is possibly one of the more rational expositions of what is happening that i have read so far. i know others have hinted at it, but i think this offers a clear and usable analogy with explanatory power.
+2 to Intelligence
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
and if those who aren't should be.
it's too bad such data would never be released to the public. i think a more self aware consumer is a benefit to both consumer and producer.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
So much irony, not just in the name-calling but in the fact that you're dedicating time posting about a hobby that you turn around and dismiss as a waste of time.
I couldn't disagree more. My hobbies are important, ALL OF THEM, and they are what keep me healthy physically and mentally. One of the most amusing things to me is how many gamers devote so much time to their hobby and then turn around and tell everyone about how much their hobby isn't worth their time, or how bad it is....
Just because every car has similar features doesn't mean that Ferraris are copies of Model Ts. Progress requires failure and refining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_%28TV_series%29
TWD wasn't thought of as 'nothing'. The content could not be aired on channels like NBC, CBS or ABC. AMC ordered the first season before they even filmed the pilot, something they wouldn't have done if they didn't think the show would rock. They also showed bits of the pilot episode at ComiCons - pandering to their comic fans.
**
Even if they weren't that confident in a new show there are focus groups, pilot episodes and video shorts to see if something will work.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I am 55 years old, And a Disabled Desert Storm Vet. I made time to play thoses good classics games since C64. Now since im disabled I have alot of time on my hands and fail to find good MMOs thats not catered to screaming 12 year olds who have gutter mouths. I play and buy games I like, not what others think about it or Forums. Yes we are a dying breed and yes it suxs.
However I am not Alone
I'm 36 with wife, kid and career. What I want in a MMO:
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I think he uses the word 'mature' because most mature or older players agree with his game design preferences. Myself included.
Nobody appreciates what they don't have to earn. That being said, I think that we choose our own pace and our own community. We can have that in any game we choose to. Blows my mind that game developers spend half a decade or more creating these worlds and players with the time just grind through all the content and hit max level in a matter of weeks.
No bitchers.
No bitchers.
Justin Bieber and all current trash pop. They must thank their stars everyday for the brainless 14-17 year olds with no responsibility who spend their money on whatever is trendy to fit in with the crowd.
I agree, I have money ready to spend in gaming, but at our age we expect a product worth what we pay for it.
Just as themeparks fail...Sandboxes were not being made AAA, so a AAA themepark verse a indie sandbox was never a good comparison in the first place. Themepark does not shield you from failure, just gives you more people to try to get your small percentage from.
Uhm, I don't recall insulting you, and argued the same side you are...Think you have misunderstood sarcasm, I try to leave no doubt that it is sarcasm, when I stated AAA sandbox, and I think SoE and EQN/L probably qualify as AAA. If it was something else, you will need to point it out.
You also may of not followed the quote boxes and think the mature jab was mine, but it wasn't?
No and there was a reason there weren't AAA sandboxes being made, they just are not as popular as themeparks. We know themeparks make money, that's why there are so many of them made. 90% of every new business, regardless of the industry, fails in the first year. We have many examples of themeparks that survive considerably beyond that threshold. We have very few examples of sandboxes that do so.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None