Originally posted by MikeB What do you guys think of The Division?
Is it really an MMO? Wheres the massive part? How many people will be on a map? How large is the map? The Devs said that you can play the game SOLO, as coop, or in pvp mode, with each being entirely separate instances.
Its sounds more like Battlefield than your average MMO.
Originally posted by MikeB What do you guys think of The Division?
IMVPO The Division will be a true breaktrhough in gaming! One of the hallmaks of next gen. I mean, I haven't played it, so what do I know, but the detail, the immersion, the level of realism and all looks just breathtaking. If Ubisoft can pull this right, it may redefine immersion in games.
The detail and graphics, the effects and environment is simply looking breathtaking.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
When you say you have no ideal how the big 3 will fare...I do! They will sell many and fade out fast. Big budget MMO's are soon to be dead and its high time they return to the niche they used to belong to. None of them will be as successful a year after their release because they try to do too much for too many gamers. I long for the days when the original Big 3; Ultima, Everquest and Asheron's Call were as diverse and varied as the gamers who played them. AC was my game and none of the others mattered. Now a days you got the new Big 3 trying to pull in everyone when they should be narrowing and focusing on their base constituents.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
fact is that 90% of the people love to be entertained, and to those people a themepark will allways prevail above a sandbox...
Quoted for truth. It just proves that we vocal forums posters who long return for more open-ended sandbox play are the extreme minority in MMO. One look at FFXIV was enough to prove to me that gamers want that the same tired stick.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I think 2014 will be another crap year for MMORPGs. It's the developers who are at fault, not the players. IMO there are plenty of players who want some good MMORPG gameplay, it's just not being delivered.
FFXIV was pure garbage, IMO, it's an MMORPG ultra light, as generic as a game can be, and very boring. It's the first good looking (up front) premium MMORPG I've ever been hyped about, bought, then didn't even last the first month because the game was just too damn easy and overall lacking.
The incoming titles look like more garbage to me, sadly (because I'm really wanting a good new MMORPG to play).
WildStar - looks great in a lot of ways but it's more of the same - heavy emphasis on soloing, generic progression structure, generic and typically lame PvP, WoW in space essentially. Not all bad since this is at least a decent MMORPG format. For me this game is ruined by CREDD since any built in system that lets players effectively buy game currency for cash (in a premium priced and sub-based game no less) isn't acceptable.
ESO - pure garbage, one of the worst ideas for an MMORPG to happen lately.
EQNext/Landmark - I don't trust SOE, nobody knows what "Next" will really be since it's mostly hot air, pipe dreams, and probably won't even be out IN 2014. Landmark went from "free for everyone by the end of '13" to alpha access for those who want to pay premium game prices in early 2014. I hate F2P and SOE does F2P as bad as anybody who does it bad. I'm not sure Landmark is even an MMORPG - dunno WHAT it is - massively multiplayer minecraft isn't an MMORPG. What it DOES look like is yet another piece of F2P garbage from a company that can't be trusted and a company that hasn't really ever created a truly excellent MMORPG (SOE bought EQ, the namesake they're now distorting into something that doesn't resemble EQ at all).
I'm tired of the single player experience in MMORPGs - that is NOT why I play MMORPGs, and is one of the reasons most MMORPGs suck anymore. There are amazing single player games all over the gaming landscape and no matter how slick they make soloing in MMORPGs, it is still weak gameplay compared to good single player games.
So, I wish that soloists would go away - and play single player games, and moreso that MMORPG devs would STOP catering to soloists and casuals and get back to MMORPG roots, which means an emphasis bordering on forced for grouping, and a return to more hardcore and/or complicated gameplay that may not appeal to everyone, but THAT IS OK because MMORPGs were never games for everybody to begin with and trying to make them be so is what's driven the genre into the dookie pile.
You know what's REALLY SCREWY? Most great single player games are considered weak unless they have a multiplayer or co op component. People WANT co op badly. They want multiplayer. So why...WHY do so many MMORPG devs skimp on what the genre is all about (grouping/mp) and heavily emphasize solo gameplay? It makes no sense at all.
I guess the idea was and continues to be that you can play your game and do your social media thing all at the time - play a solo game online (your modern MMORPG) that has lame and weak gameplay AND babble like a 12 year old in public chat at the same time. What a great idea. Or not. There is no lack of social media opportunities or app phones for people to get their incessant babbling on with - so how about focusing on making good MMORPGs and let people take care of yapping themselves?
When you make your MMORPG be a 90% solo game you get what you deserve - a bunch of players that don't care about your game, who play it like a single player game, and who bail once they've finished the single player content. This is not the way to build a lasting player base or the foundation for an MMORPG that's successful in MMORPG terms for years and years.
When the bulk of your dev time is spent on that 90% solo game, you aren't spending enough time on the content and systems for the people who WILL (and want to) play your game for months/years on end, and you end up not hooking them either, because there's so little for them to do that they obliterate the all too easy single player content, that also annoys/bores them to tears since that's not why they play MMORPGs to begin with, and then they too bail shortly after the pure soloists since there's nothing for them to do either after they exhaust the inevitable small amount of endgame.
Considering how much time and money it takes to make MMORPGs, and considering how long it takes to add to them post release, wouldn't it make sense to design and create MMORPGs that are actually MMORPGs and not just glorified and expensive to make and maintain single player games?
Isn't it sad that some of the best multiplayer and co op these days is found in single player games and not in MMORPGs?
Isn't it incredibly stupid that quality of soloing is even a factor in determining how good an MMORPG is?
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
I think 2014 will be another crap year for MMORPGs. It's the developers who are at fault, not the players. IMO there are plenty of players who want some good MMORPG gameplay, it's just not being delivered.
FFXIV was pure garbage, IMO, it's an MMORPG ultra light, as generic as a game can be, and very boring. It's the first good looking (up front) premium MMORPG I've ever been hyped about, bought, then didn't even last the first month because the game was just too damn easy and overall lacking.
The incoming titles look like more garbage to me, sadly (because I'm really wanting a good new MMORPG to play).
WildStar - looks great in a lot of ways but it's more of the same - heavy emphasis on soloing, generic progression structure, generic and typically lame PvP, WoW in space essentially. Not all bad since this is at least a decent MMORPG format. For me this game is ruined by CREDD since any built in system that lets players effectively buy game currency for cash (in a premium priced and sub-based game no less) isn't acceptable.
ESO - pure garbage, one of the worst ideas for an MMORPG to happen lately.
EQNext/Landmark - I don't trust SOE, nobody knows what "Next" will really be since it's mostly hot air, pipe dreams, and probably won't even be out IN 2014. Landmark went from "free for everyone by the end of '13" to alpha access for those who want to pay premium game prices in early 2014. I hate F2P and SOE does F2P as bad as anybody who does it bad. I'm not sure Landmark is even an MMORPG - dunno WHAT it is - massively multiplayer minecraft isn't an MMORPG. What it DOES look like is yet another piece of F2P garbage from a company that can't be trusted and a company that hasn't really ever created a truly excellent MMORPG (SOE bought EQ, the namesake they're now distorting into something that doesn't resemble EQ at all).
I'm tired of the single player experience in MMORPGs - that is NOT why I play MMORPGs, and is one of the reasons most MMORPGs suck anymore. There are amazing single player games all over the gaming landscape and no matter how slick they make soloing in MMORPGs, it is still weak gameplay compared to good single player games.
So, I wish that soloists would go away - and play single player games, and moreso that MMORPG devs would STOP catering to soloists and casuals and get back to MMORPG roots, which means an emphasis bordering on forced for grouping, and a return to more hardcore and/or complicated gameplay that may not appeal to everyone, but THAT IS OK because MMORPGs were never games for everybody to begin with and trying to make them be so is what's driven the genre into the dookie pile.
You know what's REALLY SCREWY? Most great single player games are considered weak unless they have a multiplayer or co op component. People WANT co op badly. They want multiplayer. So why...WHY do so many MMORPG devs skimp on what the genre is all about (grouping/mp) and heavily emphasize solo gameplay? It makes no sense at all.
I guess the idea was and continues to be that you can play your game and do your social media thing all at the time - play a solo game online (your modern MMORPG) that has lame and weak gameplay AND babble like a 12 year old in public chat at the same time. What a great idea. Or not. There is no lack of social media opportunities or app phones for people to get their incessant babbling on with - so how about focusing on making good MMORPGs and let people take care of yapping themselves?
When you make your MMORPG be a 90% solo game you get what you deserve - a bunch of players that don't care about your game, who play it like a single player game, and who bail once they've finished the single player content. This is not the way to build a lasting player base or the foundation for an MMORPG that's successful in MMORPG terms for years and years.
When the bulk of your dev time is spent on that 90% solo game, you aren't spending enough time on the content and systems for the people who WILL (and want to) play your game for months/years on end, and you end up not hooking them either, because there's so little for them to do that they obliterate the all too easy single player content, that also annoys/bores them to tears since that's not why they play MMORPGs to begin with, and then they too bail shortly after the pure soloists since there's nothing for them to do either after they exhaust the inevitable small amount of endgame.
Considering how much time and money it takes to make MMORPGs, and considering how long it takes to add to them post release, wouldn't it make sense to design and create MMORPGs that are actually MMORPGs and not just glorified and expensive to make and maintain single player games?
Isn't it sad that some of the best multiplayer and co op these days is found in single player games and not in MMORPGs?
Isn't it incredibly stupid that quality of soloing is even a factor in determining how good an MMORPG is?
Started in 1999 and I hate forced grouping MMO. EQ and to a degree DAoC had horrible PvE because it required inordinate amounts of group interactivity. It is why Asheron's Call was amazing, an MMO in 1999 that allowed you to solo to your hearts content but in order to finish the big quests or hunt the high drop rate loot monsters it was more beneficial to group.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by ThomasN7 We hear this every year "It's a big year for mmos" and yet the majority flop big time. I have no expectations for mmos
This.
I continue playing my sandbox MMO which has never failed on me after 10y and wait till 2015 to try any promising MMO that launched in 2014 after carefully reading the reviews 3-6 months after they have been launched.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
I have to say I don't understand the love of 'Sandbox" MMOs. To me a sandbox is when the developers didn't do anything.. They basically didn't finish their game.. Player created content is awful and lazy. That's the whole idea behind EQnext near as I can tell. Get the player base to design the content for you - LMAO.
Wildstar has the right idea - essentially improved themeparks. They are taking the best of all MMOs - GW2, WOW, etc and making one that is evolutionarily better. Action combat - with better graphics and WoW like progression = win. Its not going to change the world but its a step forward just like GW2 was compared to WoW or SWTOR.
The ESO will be proof that people are sick of the same old themeparks with a few added twists.
Yeah, people are so sick of themeparks! That's why WoW shut down years ago, and TOR's cash shop failed to make any money, causing them to shut down too!
Originally posted by GuyClinch
I have to say I don't understand the love of 'Sandbox" MMOs. To me a sandbox is when the developers didn't do anything.. They basically didn't finish their game.. Player created content is awful and lazy. That's the whole idea behind EQnext near as I can tell. Get the player base to design the content for you - LMAO.
Wildstar has the right idea - essentially improved themeparks. They are taking the best of all MMOs - GW2, WOW, etc and making one that is evolutionarily better. Action combat - with better graphics and WoW like progression = win. Its not going to change the world but its a step forward just like GW2 was compared to WoW or SWTOR.
Actually, the EQN/EQNL combo is pure genius, from a business standpoint. People who just want a true sandbox get Landmark, and people who prefer an experience with quality control get Next, which will end up with way more content than a traditional themepark, because the devs will be cherry picking the stuff that is actually good that players create in Landmark to add to the game. (Without needing to pay a dime to develop it.)
And, assuming SOE manages to deliver on even half the promise of these two games, it should deliver a definitive verdict on how much of a market there is for sandbox gaming. You don't get any sandier than the way Landmark has been described. We'll find out if a substantial number really want sandbox, or if they just want something they call a sandbox that is actually just an empty themepark.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Comments
Only reason I bought a PS4. Only game I will buy and play on it. Can't wait.
Is it really an MMO? Wheres the massive part? How many people will be on a map? How large is the map? The Devs said that you can play the game SOLO, as coop, or in pvp mode, with each being entirely separate instances.
Its sounds more like Battlefield than your average MMO.
___________________________
Have flask; will travel.
Division will be on PC, too. :P
"It's like a finger pointing away to the moon... Don't concentrate on the finger or you'll miss all the heavenly glory" (Bruce Lee)
(Insert your favourite mmo here): ......And behold, a pale horse.... And a million hellishly bad mmos followed with it.
Are you joking there ?
Sorry, but it will probably last a month at max, then will "survive".
IMVPO The Division will be a true breaktrhough in gaming! One of the hallmaks of next gen. I mean, I haven't played it, so what do I know, but the detail, the immersion, the level of realism and all looks just breathtaking. If Ubisoft can pull this right, it may redefine immersion in games.
The detail and graphics, the effects and environment is simply looking breathtaking.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Quoted for truth. It just proves that we vocal forums posters who long return for more open-ended sandbox play are the extreme minority in MMO. One look at FFXIV was enough to prove to me that gamers want that the same tired stick.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I think 2014 will be another crap year for MMORPGs. It's the developers who are at fault, not the players. IMO there are plenty of players who want some good MMORPG gameplay, it's just not being delivered.
FFXIV was pure garbage, IMO, it's an MMORPG ultra light, as generic as a game can be, and very boring. It's the first good looking (up front) premium MMORPG I've ever been hyped about, bought, then didn't even last the first month because the game was just too damn easy and overall lacking.
The incoming titles look like more garbage to me, sadly (because I'm really wanting a good new MMORPG to play).
WildStar - looks great in a lot of ways but it's more of the same - heavy emphasis on soloing, generic progression structure, generic and typically lame PvP, WoW in space essentially. Not all bad since this is at least a decent MMORPG format. For me this game is ruined by CREDD since any built in system that lets players effectively buy game currency for cash (in a premium priced and sub-based game no less) isn't acceptable.
ESO - pure garbage, one of the worst ideas for an MMORPG to happen lately.
EQNext/Landmark - I don't trust SOE, nobody knows what "Next" will really be since it's mostly hot air, pipe dreams, and probably won't even be out IN 2014. Landmark went from "free for everyone by the end of '13" to alpha access for those who want to pay premium game prices in early 2014. I hate F2P and SOE does F2P as bad as anybody who does it bad. I'm not sure Landmark is even an MMORPG - dunno WHAT it is - massively multiplayer minecraft isn't an MMORPG. What it DOES look like is yet another piece of F2P garbage from a company that can't be trusted and a company that hasn't really ever created a truly excellent MMORPG (SOE bought EQ, the namesake they're now distorting into something that doesn't resemble EQ at all).
I'm tired of the single player experience in MMORPGs - that is NOT why I play MMORPGs, and is one of the reasons most MMORPGs suck anymore. There are amazing single player games all over the gaming landscape and no matter how slick they make soloing in MMORPGs, it is still weak gameplay compared to good single player games.
So, I wish that soloists would go away - and play single player games, and moreso that MMORPG devs would STOP catering to soloists and casuals and get back to MMORPG roots, which means an emphasis bordering on forced for grouping, and a return to more hardcore and/or complicated gameplay that may not appeal to everyone, but THAT IS OK because MMORPGs were never games for everybody to begin with and trying to make them be so is what's driven the genre into the dookie pile.
You know what's REALLY SCREWY? Most great single player games are considered weak unless they have a multiplayer or co op component. People WANT co op badly. They want multiplayer. So why...WHY do so many MMORPG devs skimp on what the genre is all about (grouping/mp) and heavily emphasize solo gameplay? It makes no sense at all.
I guess the idea was and continues to be that you can play your game and do your social media thing all at the time - play a solo game online (your modern MMORPG) that has lame and weak gameplay AND babble like a 12 year old in public chat at the same time. What a great idea. Or not. There is no lack of social media opportunities or app phones for people to get their incessant babbling on with - so how about focusing on making good MMORPGs and let people take care of yapping themselves?
When you make your MMORPG be a 90% solo game you get what you deserve - a bunch of players that don't care about your game, who play it like a single player game, and who bail once they've finished the single player content. This is not the way to build a lasting player base or the foundation for an MMORPG that's successful in MMORPG terms for years and years.
When the bulk of your dev time is spent on that 90% solo game, you aren't spending enough time on the content and systems for the people who WILL (and want to) play your game for months/years on end, and you end up not hooking them either, because there's so little for them to do that they obliterate the all too easy single player content, that also annoys/bores them to tears since that's not why they play MMORPGs to begin with, and then they too bail shortly after the pure soloists since there's nothing for them to do either after they exhaust the inevitable small amount of endgame.
Considering how much time and money it takes to make MMORPGs, and considering how long it takes to add to them post release, wouldn't it make sense to design and create MMORPGs that are actually MMORPGs and not just glorified and expensive to make and maintain single player games?
Isn't it sad that some of the best multiplayer and co op these days is found in single player games and not in MMORPGs?
Isn't it incredibly stupid that quality of soloing is even a factor in determining how good an MMORPG is?
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
Started in 1999 and I hate forced grouping MMO. EQ and to a degree DAoC had horrible PvE because it required inordinate amounts of group interactivity. It is why Asheron's Call was amazing, an MMO in 1999 that allowed you to solo to your hearts content but in order to finish the big quests or hunt the high drop rate loot monsters it was more beneficial to group.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
This.
I continue playing my sandbox MMO which has never failed on me after 10y and wait till 2015 to try any promising MMO that launched in 2014 after carefully reading the reviews 3-6 months after they have been launched.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
I have to say I don't understand the love of 'Sandbox" MMOs. To me a sandbox is when the developers didn't do anything.. They basically didn't finish their game.. Player created content is awful and lazy. That's the whole idea behind EQnext near as I can tell. Get the player base to design the content for you - LMAO.
Wildstar has the right idea - essentially improved themeparks. They are taking the best of all MMOs - GW2, WOW, etc and making one that is evolutionarily better. Action combat - with better graphics and WoW like progression = win. Its not going to change the world but its a step forward just like GW2 was compared to WoW or SWTOR.
Yeah, people are so sick of themeparks! That's why WoW shut down years ago, and TOR's cash shop failed to make any money, causing them to shut down too!
Actually, the EQN/EQNL combo is pure genius, from a business standpoint. People who just want a true sandbox get Landmark, and people who prefer an experience with quality control get Next, which will end up with way more content than a traditional themepark, because the devs will be cherry picking the stuff that is actually good that players create in Landmark to add to the game. (Without needing to pay a dime to develop it.)
And, assuming SOE manages to deliver on even half the promise of these two games, it should deliver a definitive verdict on how much of a market there is for sandbox gaming. You don't get any sandier than the way Landmark has been described. We'll find out if a substantial number really want sandbox, or if they just want something they call a sandbox that is actually just an empty themepark.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.