Originally posted by sethman75 No dev in their right mind would make a game today that forces you to group and the reason is simple....there are not enough players that like that game style to make the game profitable.
The sooner people stop thinking it's 1997 when devs forced this on everybody because they were lazy and did not have the capacity create actual content are long gone.
Good riddance to that archaic and totally mind numbing style of game play.
Deal with the reality and enjoy what we have.
Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air. Where are you getting this? It's comical that you know exactly what happened in 1997 and 1999 when mmo's first started to emerge. Actually you don't know what your talking about. Nothing happened in 1997. In 1995 Meridian 59 released and in 1997 EQ released. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's completely fine if the old game design elements are not for you. Do you comprehend what niche means? You have no idea if this type of niche market is profitable. I don't know either. But I can tell you based off the 100 something votes more people want this style of gameplay than you do.
...
Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol
You open with "Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air"
and close with "Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol"
Somewhere amongst your assumptions and crazy misinformation you even include "you don't know what your talking about," forgetting that - if you really want to deal with facts and numbers - you are one of the few here that was still only 10 years old back then. Many of us are speaking from experience.
But on the highlighted part...
No one is arguing that. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person here that doesn't agree that there are about 100 people on the MMORPG.com boards that like the idea of a game similar to what you posted. That's neither indicative of MMO gamers as a whole nor a sign of any significant pool of interest worth developing a massively multiplayer online game for.
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
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
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
Originally posted by sethman75 No dev in their right mind would make a game today that forces you to group and the reason is simple....there are not enough players that like that game style to make the game profitable.
The sooner people stop thinking it's 1997 when devs forced this on everybody because they were lazy and did not have the capacity create actual content are long gone.
Good riddance to that archaic and totally mind numbing style of game play.
Deal with the reality and enjoy what we have.
Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air. Where are you getting this? It's comical that you know exactly what happened in 1997 and 1999 when mmo's first started to emerge. Actually you don't know what your talking about. Nothing happened in 1997. In 1995 Meridian 59 released and in 1997 EQ released. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's completely fine if the old game design elements are not for you. Do you comprehend what niche means? You have no idea if this type of niche market is profitable. I don't know either. But I can tell you based off the 100 something votes more people want this style of gameplay than you do.
...
Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol
You open with "Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air"
and close with "Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol"
Somewhere amongst your assumptions and crazy misinformation you even include "you don't know what your talking about," forgetting that - if you really want to deal with facts and numbers - you are one of the few here that was still only 10 years old back then. Many of us are speaking from experience.
But on the highlighted part...
No one is arguing that. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person here that doesn't agree that there are about 100 people on the MMORPG.com boards that like the idea of a game similar to what you posted. That's neither indicative of MMO gamers as a whole nor a sign of any significant pool of interest worth developing a massively multiplayer online game for.
Of course "wow being succesful" and "the only games released in the past 12 years are all themeparks minus one broken sandbox" are also not indicators that these sandbox/old school mmorpgs that the people of these forums want would fail.
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
Originally posted by sethman75 No dev in their right mind would make a game today that forces you to group and the reason is simple....there are not enough players that like that game style to make the game profitable.
The sooner people stop thinking it's 1997 when devs forced this on everybody because they were lazy and did not have the capacity create actual content are long gone.
Good riddance to that archaic and totally mind numbing style of game play.
Deal with the reality and enjoy what we have.
Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air. Where are you getting this? It's comical that you know exactly what happened in 1997 and 1999 when mmo's first started to emerge. Actually you don't know what your talking about. Nothing happened in 1997. In 1995 Meridian 59 released and in 1997 EQ released. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's completely fine if the old game design elements are not for you. Do you comprehend what niche means? You have no idea if this type of niche market is profitable. I don't know either. But I can tell you based off the 100 something votes more people want this style of gameplay than you do.
...
Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol
You open with "Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air"
and close with "Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol"
Somewhere amongst your assumptions and crazy misinformation you even include "you don't know what your talking about," forgetting that - if you really want to deal with facts and numbers - you are one of the few here that was still only 10 years old back then. Many of us are speaking from experience.
But on the highlighted part...
No one is arguing that. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person here that doesn't agree that there are about 100 people on the MMORPG.com boards that like the idea of a game similar to what you posted. That's neither indicative of MMO gamers as a whole nor a sign of any significant pool of interest worth developing a massively multiplayer online game for.
First off I started playing EQ in 2002 when I was 16. I do have experience. So stop with the personal attacks. Can you comment on the original content of the thread? I don't think you can. You haven't yet. Seems like you're only interested in personal attacks. The whole point was to just see if people on this forum ALONE would like this type of game over than what is currently out. That's it. I said based on this poll people would rather play it. I am sick of being a broken record about saying that. I never once said this poll alone would constitute to develop a game. I mentioned that I don't know what the numbers would be to develop this niche game. I am no longer going to waste my time on your petty personal attacks.
Originally posted by Eronakis Out of 150 votes the majority of voters would rather have the niche game I have described rather than the same saturated gameplay we have today. The purpose of this was to only sample this mmorpg forum as a whole. The poll does mean something on here because you come to this forum because you've played or are playing an mmo right now. However, it can't be taken an account of the whole mmo genre as a whole. Perhaps Pantheon wasn't enough for the this niche to sustain to back it. Maybe one day a good quality game will appear and this niche market of gamers can go to it and be a loyal fan base to sustain it.
Then you need more polls. The one you posted will not attract a random sampling of MMORPG.com forum members, but a specific sampling of active forum posters. It would also only attract those people who found the topic interesting enough to click the link. You cannot say with authority that your poll represents even the wants of the MMORPG.com membership or even the active membership.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by sethman75 No dev in their right mind would make a game today that forces you to group and the reason is simple....there are not enough players that like that game style to make the game profitable.
The sooner people stop thinking it's 1997 when devs forced this on everybody because they were lazy and did not have the capacity create actual content are long gone.
Good riddance to that archaic and totally mind numbing style of game play.
Deal with the reality and enjoy what we have.
Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air. Where are you getting this? It's comical that you know exactly what happened in 1997 and 1999 when mmo's first started to emerge. Actually you don't know what your talking about. Nothing happened in 1997. In 1995 Meridian 59 released and in 1997 EQ released. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's completely fine if the old game design elements are not for you. Do you comprehend what niche means? You have no idea if this type of niche market is profitable. I don't know either. But I can tell you based off the 100 something votes more people want this style of gameplay than you do.
...
Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol
You open with "Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air"
and close with "Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol"
Somewhere amongst your assumptions and crazy misinformation you even include "you don't know what your talking about," forgetting that - if you really want to deal with facts and numbers - you are one of the few here that was still only 10 years old back then. Many of us are speaking from experience.
But on the highlighted part...
No one is arguing that. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person here that doesn't agree that there are about 100 people on the MMORPG.com boards that like the idea of a game similar to what you posted. That's neither indicative of MMO gamers as a whole nor a sign of any significant pool of interest worth developing a massively multiplayer online game for.
First off I started playing EQ in 2002 when I was 16. I do have experience. So stop with the personal attacks. Can you comment on the original content of the thread? I don't think you can. You haven't yet. Seems like you're only interested in personal attacks. The whole point was to just see if people on this forum ALONE would like this type of game over than what is currently out. That's it. I said based on this poll people would rather play it. I am sick of being a broken record about saying that. I never once said this poll alone would constitute to develop a game. I mentioned that I don't know what the numbers would be to develop this niche game. I am no longer going to waste my time on your petty personal attacks.
The people on this forum are A) not enough and not a unbiased sample of what the regular MMO gamer may want (if such a concept can even be adequately defined).
And to reply to the original post of this thread. A massive yes to everything other than "endgame". The guild-wars 2 system was kind of a failure but I think that leveling should be more of a relative indication of where your player is at with a large amount of leeway and the game should be mostly open to a larger portion of the population creating more of a horizontal system.
For example, A level 5 cant complete this content, but around level 30 you can begin to complete it if you've allocated your points correctly, by level 40 you should be able to complete it, but until around level 50 or so the rewards from this content are still viable and worth completing.
Another example, A level 100 is capable of completing all content in the game as a mage when all of the growth was dedicated to mage progression, however, a level 150 will be able to complete the content easier, will benefit more from the completion, or will be able to complete it as a mage/warrior hybrid, or with less use of consumable resources (potions, healing items, buff items, etc.).
I dont think anything should be "level based", I think level should only be an indicator of your progress, I.E. every so much XP you get a skill point which you can use to upgrade a skill. A level 50 could have spent all of his points evenly between all skills and kinda suck at everything or maybe spent evenly between magic and melee, or maybe all in melee, it is only a relative indicator of skill. I also think that there should be more levels to game to allow greater amounts of growth, or maybe just remove levels entirely as it's pretty pointless once you remove the level restrictions.
In my opinion no other game close to the level of character-build detail that asheron's call was able to create.
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
You're right. I misunderstood the point you were making.
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
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
If you count WoW as mainstream it is pretty much the only western MMORPG that is mainstream. Hell there are only a handful of games that have more non release spike subs or free games with more active accounts than EQ's 500k. This is one of the fallacies of the argument that modern games are suddenly vastly more popular and older games were vastly more obscure.
Majority of all "AAA" games have been of the same branch of WoW. 13 million subs have skewed the industry. Why risk making a game like UO or SWG that had 300-250k when you can make a game like WoW that had 13 million subs? This happened even though majority of "AAA" themeparks managed around the 250k anyways. Not only that many of these games aren't even charging at the door.
I don't see how its proven that old school formula doesn't work when we've had almost none made and majority of MMORPG's players have never tried it.
I wish some AAA devs would make this game for the social butterflies so they will quit being pissed at me for preferring to play solo.
Please, someone, give these people a home. Or a server. Something! They're driving me insane.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Thats what mmo's used to be about. But Wow changed all that and the money it was making. Now they try to cater to everyone and it fails badly. I would kill for Anarchy Online 2. That game was all about solo and team play and exploring the world and after a hards day of that heading to a club in the cities. PVP was not even a big deal you could only do it one on one in a arena. And no one really cared about it. I miss playing a game like that. I would love for a dev to come out and say we are doing a game this way and if you don't like it don't play it. But they can't because of the suits bean counters running the show these days. Thats why i think the days of great mmo's is gone and never will come back.
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
If you count WoW as mainstream it is pretty much the only western MMORPG that is mainstream. Hell there are only a handful of games that have more non release spike subs or free games with more active accounts than EQ's 500k. This is one of the fallacies of the argument that modern games are suddenly vastly more popular and older games were vastly more obscure.
Majority of all "AAA" games have been of the same branch of WoW. 13 million subs have skewed the industry. Why risk making a game like UO or SWG that had 300-250k when you can make a game like WoW that had 13 million subs? This happened even though majority of "AAA" themeparks managed around the 250k anyways. Not only that many of these games aren't even charging at the door.
I don't see how its proven that old school formula doesn't work when we've had almost none made and majority of MMORPG's players have never tried it.
Question is not why make...how can you justify hundred of millions of dollars for only 250k -300k subs?
So what I can't understand, for the life of me, is why some people seem to think that just because the general population wants wow-clones that they also seem to think that the niche-market-gamers aren't allowed to want what we want. Or, for that matter, why game companies won't make these games. I get that companies are always trying to make money, but money can be made without always shooting for the top 1% of earning potential. In fact, most people that know anything about making money know that shooting to be the top 1% of earners is one of the worst ways to make money.
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
If you count WoW as mainstream it is pretty much the only western MMORPG that is mainstream. Hell there are only a handful of games that have more non release spike subs or free games with more active accounts than EQ's 500k. This is one of the fallacies of the argument that modern games are suddenly vastly more popular and older games were vastly more obscure.
Majority of all "AAA" games have been of the same branch of WoW. 13 million subs have skewed the industry. Why risk making a game like UO or SWG that had 300-250k when you can make a game like WoW that had 13 million subs? This happened even though majority of "AAA" themeparks managed around the 250k anyways. Not only that many of these games aren't even charging at the door.
I don't see how its proven that old school formula doesn't work when we've had almost none made and majority of MMORPG's players have never tried it.
Question is not why make...how can you justify hundred of millions of dollars for only 250k -300k subs?
I don't think most of those MMORPG's spent that much outside of ESO and SWTOR. If you take a handful of games out of the equation themeparks only really hit the 250k-300k numbers and they're not even charging at the gate these days. It what should be expected as the norm. The only difference between old school numbers and WoW clone numbers are the unrealized potential of WoW as a carrot.
yea i wish it was like old time mmo now they are way too casual friendly don't get me wrong it's cool that anyone can enjoy the game but if you want to get the best stuff and be part of the best you should work for it the hard way it's do able for anyone willing to do it Casual or not people need to start working there ass to get what they want as long it's in a fun way .
If you count WoW as mainstream it is pretty much the only western MMORPG that is mainstream. Hell there are only a handful of games that have more non release spike subs or free games with more active accounts than EQ's 500k. This is one of the fallacies of the argument that modern games are suddenly vastly more popular and older games were vastly more obscure.
Majority of all "AAA" games have been of the same branch of WoW. 13 million subs have skewed the industry. Why risk making a game like UO or SWG that had 300-250k when you can make a game like WoW that had 13 million subs? This happened even though majority of "AAA" themeparks managed around the 250k anyways. Not only that many of these games aren't even charging at the door.
I don't see how its proven that old school formula doesn't work when we've had almost none made and majority of MMORPG's players have never tried it.
I think there's real truth to this statement. While we don't have the numbers on ESO, I would be highly surprised if they settled into anything higher than the 250k-300k subscriber range.
The old school formula should be updated with the convenience of modern life (as far as thing such as UI are concerned), but the essence of the formula seems to be just as viable as any soloable themepark other than WoW.
For all the hubbub about soloable MMOs and themeparks being all the rage, the landscape seems to show that, other than the radical outlier that is WoW, themeparks don't seem to be doing any better than average anyways, even when the barrier to entry for said soloable themepark is low to non-existent.
Comments
You open with "Man seems like you guys are pulling this out of thin air"
and close with "Just think out side of the box before you come on here and blow your gasket and post lol"
Somewhere amongst your assumptions and crazy misinformation you even include "you don't know what your talking about," forgetting that - if you really want to deal with facts and numbers - you are one of the few here that was still only 10 years old back then. Many of us are speaking from experience.
But on the highlighted part...
No one is arguing that. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person here that doesn't agree that there are about 100 people on the MMORPG.com boards that like the idea of a game similar to what you posted. That's neither indicative of MMO gamers as a whole nor a sign of any significant pool of interest worth developing a massively multiplayer online game for.
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
It's probably very hard for you to understand because you're spending too much time creating strawmen. Or are you really having trouble understanding the difference between
"niche-market-gamers aren't allow to want what we want"
and the very clearly expressed contention that there is no data to indicate that this particular niche of these particular features is worth building a multimillion dollar game for.
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
Of course "wow being succesful" and "the only games released in the past 12 years are all themeparks minus one broken sandbox" are also not indicators that these sandbox/old school mmorpgs that the people of these forums want would fail.
"""At this point we aren't even sure if a AAA niche-market game can be successful because there hasn't been one released in 14 years (short of vanguard which was so buggy that I don't think it should be called AAA). BUT with this we also aren't sure that they are guaranteed to fail. All we do know is that they aren't being made.""""
1) The above statement is a direct quote from my post, the same post you quoted, which agrees completely with your statement. You also don't seem to be aware of what my argument was, which is that because there hasn't been one of these niche-market games released in forever that there is no proof that one can't be successful, however, that niche-anything shouldn't be ignored because niche-anything has been succesful several times throughout history.
2) """""I think that what you're talking about is kinda like dating a stripper. It sounds so awesome!!! In reality, though, it's not really what you're looking for.
Sorry, I think it's been proven more than it's been disproven that the "old school" formula doesn't work anymore. """""
This is a direct quote from another post in this thread.
First off I started playing EQ in 2002 when I was 16. I do have experience. So stop with the personal attacks. Can you comment on the original content of the thread? I don't think you can. You haven't yet. Seems like you're only interested in personal attacks. The whole point was to just see if people on this forum ALONE would like this type of game over than what is currently out. That's it. I said based on this poll people would rather play it. I am sick of being a broken record about saying that. I never once said this poll alone would constitute to develop a game. I mentioned that I don't know what the numbers would be to develop this niche game. I am no longer going to waste my time on your petty personal attacks.
Then you need more polls. The one you posted will not attract a random sampling of MMORPG.com forum members, but a specific sampling of active forum posters. It would also only attract those people who found the topic interesting enough to click the link. You cannot say with authority that your poll represents even the wants of the MMORPG.com membership or even the active membership.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The people on this forum are A) not enough and
not a unbiased sample of what the regular MMO gamer may want (if such a concept can even be adequately defined).
And to reply to the original post of this thread. A massive yes to everything other than "endgame". The guild-wars 2 system was kind of a failure but I think that leveling should be more of a relative indication of where your player is at with a large amount of leeway and the game should be mostly open to a larger portion of the population creating more of a horizontal system.
For example, A level 5 cant complete this content, but around level 30 you can begin to complete it if you've allocated your points correctly, by level 40 you should be able to complete it, but until around level 50 or so the rewards from this content are still viable and worth completing.
Another example, A level 100 is capable of completing all content in the game as a mage when all of the growth was dedicated to mage progression, however, a level 150 will be able to complete the content easier, will benefit more from the completion, or will be able to complete it as a mage/warrior hybrid, or with less use of consumable resources (potions, healing items, buff items, etc.).
I dont think anything should be "level based", I think level should only be an indicator of your progress, I.E. every so much XP you get a skill point which you can use to upgrade a skill. A level 50 could have spent all of his points evenly between all skills and kinda suck at everything or maybe spent evenly between magic and melee, or maybe all in melee, it is only a relative indicator of skill. I also think that there should be more levels to game to allow greater amounts of growth, or maybe just remove levels entirely as it's pretty pointless once you remove the level restrictions.
In my opinion no other game close to the level of character-build detail that asheron's call was able to create.
You're right. I misunderstood the point you were making.
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
If you count WoW as mainstream it is pretty much the only western MMORPG that is mainstream. Hell there are only a handful of games that have more non release spike subs or free games with more active accounts than EQ's 500k. This is one of the fallacies of the argument that modern games are suddenly vastly more popular and older games were vastly more obscure.
Majority of all "AAA" games have been of the same branch of WoW. 13 million subs have skewed the industry. Why risk making a game like UO or SWG that had 300-250k when you can make a game like WoW that had 13 million subs? This happened even though majority of "AAA" themeparks managed around the 250k anyways. Not only that many of these games aren't even charging at the door.
I don't see how its proven that old school formula doesn't work when we've had almost none made and majority of MMORPG's players have never tried it.
I wish some AAA devs would make this game for the social butterflies so they will quit being pissed at me for preferring to play solo.
Please, someone, give these people a home. Or a server. Something! They're driving me insane.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Question is not why make...how can you justify hundred of millions of dollars for only 250k -300k subs?
I don't think most of those MMORPG's spent that much outside of ESO and SWTOR. If you take a handful of games out of the equation themeparks only really hit the 250k-300k numbers and they're not even charging at the gate these days. It what should be expected as the norm. The only difference between old school numbers and WoW clone numbers are the unrealized potential of WoW as a carrot.
Looking at your signature you seem to be a rare specimen of a butterfly yourself.
I think there's real truth to this statement. While we don't have the numbers on ESO, I would be highly surprised if they settled into anything higher than the 250k-300k subscriber range.
The old school formula should be updated with the convenience of modern life (as far as thing such as UI are concerned), but the essence of the formula seems to be just as viable as any soloable themepark other than WoW.
For all the hubbub about soloable MMOs and themeparks being all the rage, the landscape seems to show that, other than the radical outlier that is WoW, themeparks don't seem to be doing any better than average anyways, even when the barrier to entry for said soloable themepark is low to non-existent.