Originally posted by Bladestrom The masses tend to get the generalised mass market products, it's the small products that drive evolution. It should be the same in MMO, aim for more niche markets - a MMO with no levelling and lots of raids,or the lore rich questing and rich virtual world with pve/pvp mix at end with no rush to get there, or maybe the open world pvp etcetc. The fail comes when a dev aims for x million subs and multiple mmorpg styles - you either fail to please anyone or you end up with a very expensive to dev bucket of features pretending to be 1 game.
But neither of those two extremes exist in real life. There are no indies that have nothing but good innovations - there's some crap in there too -- just like there are no MMOs that are 100% full of safe proven features without at least some attempt to throw in a new wrinkle or two. AAA studios are not all money-grubbing hacks and indy devs are not all genius saints .
We'd all love to have a developer Leonardo Da Vinci out there that creates something totally new and totally fun and it's still somehow recognizable as an MMO that knocks all of our socks off, But how likely is that?
The genre is constantly evolving and there is innovation. A lot of people just dismiss the innovations if they don't like the whole package. Warhammer Online is a good example of this. They were the first to add achievements which was then copied by WOW and has become a standard feature of every MMO. And they were also the first to add dynamic events which a lot of MMOs including Rift, GW2 and ESO also have in some shape. The whole WAR package didn't work well and the game took a nosedive pretty quickly and eventually closed. It still doesn't negate that they innovated and added to the genre despite being a mediocre AAA MMO.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I remember the uproar over the sistine chapel ceiling when they restored the frescoes of Michelangelo. Everyone was shocked because for centuries they appeared a certain way and now they were totally different... what everyone thought was reality, turned out to be wrong.
MMOs of the past are like the frescoes of old... if they ever did restore them, I doubt they would appear as you imagine they would.
Although I agree with the OP for the most part, there are some neat games right now to support for those looking for the old school experience.
Try Project: Gorgon, Project 1999 and/or Neverwinter Nights 2 persistent worlds. All are quite good. In my experience it takes some effort to get into these games, kind of like it did in the early days but the tech was new so we didn't really mind it, but it pays off.
I remember that I used to play D&D pencil and paper type games, but then I discovered MMOs, and found all the time involved in getting a RPG group together and hoping everyone showed up and such made it untenable.
So I played MMOs for years and dropped the p&p completely. Now I'm like the OP. The MMO just doesn't do it for me. I still come here almost everyday (and hardly ever post) hoping for the next great game, but I haven't seen it yet.
And in a nerdy update, I finally gave in and played a D&D game last Friday night for the first time in about 10 years. And guess what--it was awesome. Each type of game has its advantages and disadvantages, but right now, I think I'll being doing some pencil and paper for a while.
Since WoW came out these have been introduced or tried in the genre:
Removal of holy trinity - Ultima Online
Action Combat - Its existed in the oldies. I remember a few but can't remember their names.
Cutscenes on quests - Is this really an "innovation"?
Bot wrangling with Chronoscrolls/PLEX/CREDD
Flex Raids
Normalized PvP gear - This isn't innovated. It's just gear you get from PvPing.
Mega servers
Non-linear questing - This is silly. Every quest in an old sandbox can be approached differently.
Dynamic world events - A fancy word for a quest that appears and disappears.
World vs World vs World pvp - DAoC
Player housing - Ultima Online
Guild housing - Ultima Online
Sieges - DAoC
Probably a lot more I'm not thinking of - There's actually not
What innovation are you looking for that has not been tried. Or do you require only the ones you like to be packaged into one game?
Take a look at the list of truly new "innovations" (if you can even call them that) that have been released since the MMO oldies.
The sad truth is that most MMO gamers started around when WoW was released and have no clue what existed before it. The MMOs from back then had almost all of the features todays MMO's mostly DON'T have or just included. They simply don't understand why MANY (not all) old MMO gamers aren't satisfied with today's MMO's, and it's seriously because they're far more watered-down and don't even feel like an MMO "world" anymore. They feel like single player games with a little social interaction.
Every single time I tell all of my post-WoW MMO gaming friends about Ultima Online, its features, my stories from then, what it was all like, they ALWAYS respond the same. "That sounds awesome! That can't even happen in WoW. Why don't MMO's have that stuff today?" And I always respond, "I ask myself the same thing".
I am not a lover of doom and gloom but I do see that good numbers do not mean the industry is doing fabulously. And if you look over these forums you will find many, often the majority of posts reflect that. You do realise that before every fall the numbers were good? There were great numbers just before the credit crunch for example.
I am sorry bro but that is what it is. Everything you said in long post is nothing but doom and gloom.
And the fact that you think only because i am more positive about MMO's future it means i am some new guy who just started playing the MMOS show that any further discussion with you will be pointless.
I started playing MMOS when Anarchy Online launched so i have been playing MMOs for quite a while now. If you want to paint a picture that all old gamers are negative and pessimistic you are free to do so but i won't be any part of it.
I have learned to adapt and change with time. And despite of few bad games i still have so many game to play i just wish i had more free time.
Wow is a hard game to get into anymore....Theres just so much out there for free....How can anyone drop 46 bucks for an expansion, then another 15 a month on this?.....THe genre has made strides, but what I think has changed more is the players.....In 2000 most of us had alot more time than we have in 2014.....They had to change the genre to accomodate that and it has affected the games also.
I remember that I used to play D&D pencil and paper type games, but then I discovered MMOs, and found all the time involved in getting a RPG group together and hoping everyone showed up and such made it untenable.
So I played MMOs for years and dropped the p&p completely. Now I'm like the OP. The MMO just doesn't do it for me. I still come here almost everyday (and hardly ever post) hoping for the next great game, but I haven't seen it yet.
And in a nerdy update, I finally gave in and played a D&D game last Friday night for the first time in about 10 years. And guess what--it was awesome. Each type of game has its advantages and disadvantages, but right now, I think I'll being doing some pencil and paper for a while.
J.
It's interesting how RPers like you have gone full circle. And, indeed, I think the writing was on the wall for this genre the moment when we decided, almost collectively, that these games weren't about playingcharacters but about pushing toons.
All of the elements in an MMORPG can be delivered faster, better or cheaper in other genres: you'll never get fast-action here like you will in an FPS or TPS. You'll never get the crafting or customizability here like you will in Minecraft. You'll never get the decorative ability here like you would in The Sims. And you'll never get a story here like you would in an action/adventure title.
Other genres are just...better. They just are. They do cutscenes better, they do mechanics better, they do variety better. About the only thing that an MMORPG does better is roleplay: true, character-driven, immersive, interactive roleplay. But it seems your typical MMORPG player has no use for portraying a character, so these platforms got progressively worse for RP.
But once you take the RP out of MMORPG...there really isn't much left that other genres can't do better. And they have.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Doom and gloom again. Suck it up, choose a game and make it happen. If you can't then probably you are right and you need to move on. You wanted to logout within the first minute, but how can you check out everything that is new the game has to offer without a thorough chance?
The problem with the genre isn't the games so much as it is flooded with choices, to many imho. No one puts the effort into anything before they move on and complain about what they just left.
The paradox of too much choice - instead of being freeing its often paralyzing.
Unfortunately I had to learn this the hard way with Steam. 200+ games in my library, and many nights I wil just stare at the list thinking how I'd like to play about 25 games on my list that night. Not including any MMOs. So I end up just quitting and doing something else, not worth the wasted time. My point? You don't NEED 200 or 300 games on Steam. If you have a good batch of 25 or so that should be a'plenty. My opinion. :-)
I am not a lover of doom and gloom but I do see that good numbers do not mean the industry is doing fabulously. And if you look over these forums you will find many, often the majority of posts reflect that. You do realise that before every fall the numbers were good? There were great numbers just before the credit crunch for example.
I am sorry bro but that is what it is. Everything you said in long post is nothing but doom and gloom.
And the fact that you think only because i am more positive about MMO's future it means i am some new guy who just started playing the MMOS show that any further discussion with you will be pointless.
I started playing MMOS when Anarchy Online launched so i have been playing MMOs for quite a while now. If you want to paint a picture that all old gamers are negative and pessimistic you are free to do so but i won't be any part of it.
I have learned to adapt and change with time. And despite of few bad games i still have so many game to play i just wish i had more free time.
Fair enough, AO is a decent time frame for anyone. I too play new MMOs, I just don't find them to be as enjoyable as you do.
MMOs have a very limited future. The younger generations of gamers who grow up with iPads and cellphones in thier hands from age 4 or 5 are not going to sit at a computer and play MMOs. The whole concept of slow steady progression and long term, in-depth gameplay over years is completely foreign to most younger players.
Even Blizzard sees the handwriting on the wall. They took their 'next-gen MMO', code-named Titan, stripped out the MMO elements and rebuilt it as a Team Fortress style shooter. They will milk WoW for the next decade or so but it's obvious that they have reduced the amount of focus they put on it. Instead they seem move excited about their upcoming MOBA and FPS products.
Kind of a flawed logic there as the younger generations are the one's making games like Flappy and Candy Crush million dollar babies.
Even a simple game can get you to play it for hours... the problem here is, some games aren't giving you reason to WANT TO play them for hours. That is what changed.
Also, too many games leads to fickle players. If you know a new game is coming out every week, you're less likely to play the ones that are out for very long. Doesn't matter what genre you play, all of them are competing for your attention and they all generally get it.
I think sirchive has made some very salient points. Will gamers sit at a desk in the future? If not its bye bye mouse and keyboard, hello dumbed down controller. We complain about the short termism of gaming today, those brought up on such games will only want more of the same. SMO - Small Multiplayer Online is where we are already at today.
It is the older generation as well that have made Candy Crush millions. But they will leave as I mentioned early, the last playbase is now being mined. Once they go I am not sure those teenagers will sustain the next Candy Crush. On balance I think they will but will they support the next Perfect World, TERA or AA? I doubt it.
As you say Peyeq, the huge blob of games we now have is detrimental to gaming. But you will see posters on this very thread citing that as a reason to believe the industry is doing fabulously. Too much product in any market will lead to slash and burn in that market. It's not good for the industry or the players.
MMOs have a very limited future. The younger generations of gamers who grow up with iPads and cellphones in thier hands from age 4 or 5 are not going to sit at a computer and play MMOs. The whole concept of slow steady progression and long term, in-depth gameplay over years is completely foreign to most younger players.
Even Blizzard sees the handwriting on the wall. They took their 'next-gen MMO', code-named Titan, stripped out the MMO elements and rebuilt it as a Team Fortress style shooter. They will milk WoW for the next decade or so but it's obvious that they have reduced the amount of focus they put on it. Instead they seem move excited about their upcoming MOBA and FPS products.
Kind of a flawed logic there as the younger generations are the one's making games like Flappy and Candy Crush million dollar babies.
Even a simple game can get you to play it for hours... the problem here is, some games aren't giving you reason to WANT TO play them for hours. That is what changed.
Also, too many games leads to fickle players. If you know a new game is coming out every week, you're less likely to play the ones that are out for very long. Doesn't matter what genre you play, all of them are competing for your attention and they all generally get it.
I think sirchive has made some very salient points. Will gamers sit at a desk in the future? If not its bye bye mouse and keyboard, hello dumbed down controller. We complain about the short termism of gaming today, those brought up on such games will only want more of the same. SMO - Small Multiplayer Online is where we are already at today.
It is the older generation as well that have made Candy Crush millions. But they will leave as I mentioned early, the last playbase is now being mined. Once they go I am not sure those teenagers will sustain the next Candy Crush. On balance I think they will but will they support the next Perfect World, TERA or AA? I doubt it.
As you say Peyeq, the huge blob of games we now have is detrimental to gaming. But you will see posters on this very thread citing that as a reason to believe the industry is doing fabulously. Too much product in any market will lead to slash and burn in that market. It's not good for the industry or the players.
What is with the people who feel the need to take shots at consoles or pcs? There all video games who cares if you use a mouse/keyboard or controller? You claim controllers are dumb downed but what about games that allow macros? A person using a razer naga has 6 or even 12 macros setup has it a lot easier then a "dumb down controller". Its amazing having these pc elitist attempt to think they are better then a console gamer when in fact we are all gamers and If they actually cared about games they would stop stroking themselves over which platform they use.
I think the future for mmorpgs is bright. Especially with games like "The Repopulation" and Camelot Unleashed on the horizon. Could not be better!
Maybe the Wowish type games are on the landslide. But is that really a bad thing? Especially when you have titles that bring back the glory to mmos. I am looking forward to the future titles coming out.
I think the future for mmorpgs is bright. Especially with games like "The Repopulation" and Camelot Unleashed on the horizon. Could not be better!
Maybe the Wowish type games are on the landslide. But is that really a bad thing? Especially when you have titles that bring back the glory to mmos. I am looking forward to the future titles coming out.
Yeah I dont see how "wowish games are on a landslide".
Wow coming out with a new expansion
Swtor coming out with a new expansion
FFXIV still doing good
ES has turned it around
Sandbox?
AA has created fighting among the sandboxers.
Granted the games you mentioned will be some much needed variety to the market. But again just because you enjoy one aspect doesn't mean it's better or the competition is failing. Because there are a lot of other games I didn't mention that are doing just fine.
I'm sensing there's a lot of people here who think PC gaming is above all others and MMOs are the cream of videogames. Both notions are false.
Social network and mobile games are not targeted towards "gamers". They are directed toward "casuals" meaning they don't identify themselves as gamers. They are "non-gamers". Someone who sees the effort of getting gaming PC and installs World of Warcraft on it, is likely not a casual anymore. That is already a gamer in my book.
And while many games thrive on being casual friendly, it doesn't make them part of the casual gaming genre (see social network and mobile games). Also, while playing on a console only might make you a casual gamer and even if the biggest group playing console games are casual gamers, it doesn't make the games on console necessarily "casual games". More importantly, even if you play only console games, you can still be a "hardcore gamer".
I really hate reading comments with generalizations about console games being dumbed down or how sandboxes require a refined taste and how they go over the heads of "the masses". Its really all just bullshit. And you are ignorant if this is your view and if it is willful ignorance your an moron to boot.
It is ludicrous to think that...
"We are the PC gaming master race. Look at those console peasants squirm and struggle in our games. They can't possibly comprehend the pleasure we can have in our games. Our games produce real enjoyment, those other games are just glorified skinner boxes."
No, if you think you are somehow better because you like game X (and because you know what skinner box is), the likely diagnosis is that you're being stupid.
"But PvP in this game is 'meaningful'. Grouping is much more 'organic'."
Re-branding bullshit. Believe me I've seen comments like these hundreds of times. You're not fooling anyone. You've only managed to make yourself look like a douché.
"I liked MMOs before they were cool. Now the masses have ruined the genre."
Nobody likes hipsters for a reason. They think they are cool and above all others... -They are not.
I've seen too many casual gamers in the so-called hardcore games and hardcore gamers enjoying the so-called casual games to believe any of the stereotypes and generalizations thrown about on these forums. I don't care if you're addicted to candy crunch. I don't care if you played UO in the days of old. As far as I'm concerned, everyone is equal. Candy crunch might be an excellent casual game and UO might have been an excellent MMORPG for its time. I don't need to bash you for that - but I can offer criticism.
I myself liked the average-to-poor Need For Speed: Most Wanted. I think Morrowind is the best game in the Elder Scrolls series even if it got only average ratings. I enjoyed my time in Pirates of the Burning Sea despite it being severely flawed. They all scratched the right itch at the right time. I can say "this game is shit, but somehow I like it". I played Eve Online for 3 years and I still think it is mediocre at best. Which drives some of the fans of said game up the wall when I say something less than flattering about it.
I don't feel the need to attach myself to a game and defend it in the forums to the last man. And I don't need to like a game in order to appreciate what it does. World of Warcraft is a monster of a game. Hugely successful. Undoubtedly a very good game. Yet I can't be bothered to play it. That doesn't mean I have to look down upon those that do. Good for them. I'm glad someone is having fun even if I am not.
This is where I take my high ground. Are you mature enough to do the same? Can you detach yourself from your preferences? Can you look at games objectively? Can you take in all the facts and not just the ones that you like? Do you need to spin them to fit your opinion or does your opinion change with the facts?
And if there's no MMORPGs for you to enjoy, isn't it self-centered to think that the "genre is fading/dying" because of it? Even if you don't like "what the genre has become", you don't need to bash anything or anyone and please don't create hundred threads about it on these forums.
But what am I saying, you probably will anyway. ...
There I got it out.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
What is with the people who feel the need to take shots at consoles or pcs? There all video games who cares if you use a mouse/keyboard or controller? You claim controllers are dumb downed but what about games that allow macros? A person using a razer naga has 6 or even 12 macros setup has it a lot easier then a "dumb down controller". Its amazing having these pc elitist attempt to think they are better then a console gamer when in fact we are all gamers and If they actually cared about games they would stop stroking themselves over which platform they use.
And every PC owner has a Naga? I take your point on the Macros though, but then PC's don't have that built in targeter (forgot its name) that consoles have. I think Mouse and keyboard make for a better control system and millions of FPS fans agree. Even if you don't think controllers are dumbed down, having to use one is restrictive. Restricting the types of interface used. You can use anything sat at a desk, you can't sat on a sofa.
I just paid $15 and logged into WoW to revisit, give it a chance after the latest big patch and within the first minute I wanted to log back out.
Looks super outdated and in fact worse than it used to because they did something to the lighting and now everything has the same amount of light. Super bright and ugly, no darkness. The sky in Stormwind looks like Minecraft 1.0 and it's never night time. Everything looks the same, but somehow worse.
Super easy, everything dies almost instantly.
It looks like they spend $46 on this expansion and are hoping to rake in hundreds of millions from all of the suckers.
All of the games out now and even the ones coming are either lobby console casual crap or Asian anime throw-up.
I just want EQ1 with a brand new graphics engine and AAA production quality.
It seems like there is no more talent and passion anymore, just people who want to be trillionaires.
I think the problem might be on your end.
People see their beliefs reflected in the real world, so if you see nothing worthwhile in sight - that is all you.
The best is yet to come.
I don't think so.. I think the OP has a point and I share his feelings as well.. I want more from a PvE MMO.. I want a robust open world where the sky is the limit.. I want exciting vibrant and challenging classes to play.. However, in my heart I do not see that happening because of two main reasons..
PvP balance.. It is impossible to have a robust PvE world if you have to worry about skills and spells being too over powering in a PvP world.. I"ll just use one example.. "Mez" or "Charm".. I don't care if my target is a mob or another player, and if I put you to sleep for 2 minutes.. TOUGH SHIT! The problem isn't that the npc will go crying to the computer AI that my sleep spell was OP.. The problem is that the player will run to the forums or QUIT the game because of OP classes and skills.. Anyone miss the evil eyes from EQ1 yet? I do..
Lobby Instancing.. Again because of the nature of how these zones are played and with whom, we lose the robust open world feeling and excitement.. When devs use this instancing as a main focus for group play, the game play changes.. Where are the zones such as Lower Guk or KC where multiple groups co-exist, along with solo players.. Again, classes, spells and skills are homogenized into a small pool to accommodate the instanced zone..
In conclusion, IMO, if you want a vibrant exciting MMORPG PvE world, forget about PvP balance and get rid of instancing..
What is with the people who feel the need to take shots at consoles or pcs? There all video games who cares if you use a mouse/keyboard or controller? You claim controllers are dumb downed but what about games that allow macros? A person using a razer naga has 6 or even 12 macros setup has it a lot easier then a "dumb down controller". Its amazing having these pc elitist attempt to think they are better then a console gamer when in fact we are all gamers and If they actually cared about games they would stop stroking themselves over which platform they use.
And every PC owner has a Naga? I take your point on the Macros though, but then PC's don't have that built in targeter (forgot its name) that consoles have. I think Mouse and keyboard make for a better control system and millions of FPS fans agree. Even if you don't think controllers are dumbed down, having to use one is restrictive. Restricting the types of interface used. You can use anything sat at a desk, you can't sat on a sofa.
Oh I'm not debating which is better I'm just saying lumping controllers as "dumb downed" when macros take that a step further isnt really fair.
What is with the people who feel the need to take shots at consoles or pcs? There all video games who cares if you use a mouse/keyboard or controller? You claim controllers are dumb downed but what about games that allow macros? A person using a razer naga has 6 or even 12 macros setup has it a lot easier then a "dumb down controller". Its amazing having these pc elitist attempt to think they are better then a console gamer when in fact we are all gamers and If they actually cared about games they would stop stroking themselves over which platform they use.
And every PC owner has a Naga? I take your point on the Macros though, but then PC's don't have that built in targeter (forgot its name) that consoles have. I think Mouse and keyboard make for a better control system and millions of FPS fans agree. Even if you don't think controllers are dumbed down, having to use one is restrictive. Restricting the types of interface used. You can use anything sat at a desk, you can't sat on a sofa.
Oh I'm not debating which is better I'm just saying lumping controllers as "dumb downed" when macros take that a step further isnt really fair.
I am 100% with you on this Tassle, it should be about the games, but everything in games seems to be about stroking the ego these days, sadly.
The mine is better than yours attitude. Who gives a shit. Play the game.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
I don't think so.. I think the OP has a point and I share his feelings as well.. I want more from a PvE MMO.. I want a robust open world where the sky is the limit.. I want exciting vibrant and challenging classes to play.. However, in my heart I do not see that happening because of two main reasons..
PvP balance.. It is impossible to have a robust PvE world if you have to worry about skills and spells being too over powering in a PvP world.. I"ll just use one example.. "Mez" or "Charm".. I don't care if my target is a mob or another player, and if I put you to sleep for 2 minutes.. TOUGH SHIT! The problem isn't that the npc will go crying to the computer AI that my sleep spell was OP.. The problem is that the player will run to the forums or QUIT the game because of OP classes and skills.. Anyone miss the evil eyes from EQ1 yet? I do..
Lobby Instancing.. Again because of the nature of how these zones are played and with whom, we lose the robust open world feeling and excitement.. When devs use this instancing as a main focus for group play, the game play changes.. Where are the zones such as Lower Guk or KC where multiple groups co-exist, along with solo players.. Again, classes, spells and skills are homogenized into a small pool to accommodate the instanced zone..
In conclusion, IMO, if you want a vibrant exciting MMORPG PvE world, forget about PvP balance and get rid of instancing..
What do you mean by "robust open world"?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I don't think so.. I think the OP has a point and I share his feelings as well.. I want more from a PvE MMO.. I want a robust open world where the sky is the limit.. I want exciting vibrant and challenging classes to play.. However, in my heart I do not see that happening because of two main reasons..
PvP balance.. It is impossible to have a robust PvE world if you have to worry about skills and spells being too over powering in a PvP world.. I"ll just use one example.. "Mez" or "Charm".. I don't care if my target is a mob or another player, and if I put you to sleep for 2 minutes.. TOUGH SHIT! The problem isn't that the npc will go crying to the computer AI that my sleep spell was OP.. The problem is that the player will run to the forums or QUIT the game because of OP classes and skills.. Anyone miss the evil eyes from EQ1 yet? I do..
Lobby Instancing.. Again because of the nature of how these zones are played and with whom, we lose the robust open world feeling and excitement.. When devs use this instancing as a main focus for group play, the game play changes.. Where are the zones such as Lower Guk or KC where multiple groups co-exist, along with solo players.. Again, classes, spells and skills are homogenized into a small pool to accommodate the instanced zone..
In conclusion, IMO, if you want a vibrant exciting MMORPG PvE world, forget about PvP balance and get rid of instancing..
What do you mean by "robust open world"?
Simple, he meant seamless ... As in no instances or zones..
Don't worry about the graphics for playability come with skills.
My expectations of PC gaming in general have shifted.
Nowadays it's just accepting that games are only popular for 3 months before they release (and if you're in beta, cool), and then 1-3 months after they release.
And that's it.
It's literally like bar-hopping. "Where's the crowd going next?!"
That's PC gaming now. People stopped calling games "fail" a while ago, because they've grown to expect it to be this way. Yeah, most games aren't really worth playing long-term because there really isn't enough innovation. This is just simple principles of anything that "sticks", you need to be first or you need to be unique...
I can only laugh at all of the people butthurt and acting surprised that ArcheAge is already going down the toilet. I didn't even bother with that game. And I got out of wildstar as soon as I saw that was going down the toilet (which was even shorter than most games); and I didn't spend an ounce of time whining on forums or saying "fix this fix that".
Drop your expectations and just go where the crowd goes. These games are only worth playing when they're "on top" and have a bunch of people playing them. Then they turn into miserable ghost towns with constant "when's this pos going F2P" threads daily.
"Drop your expectations and just go where the crowd goes. These games are only worth playing when they're "on top" and have a bunch of people playing them. Then they turn into miserable ghost towns with constant "when's this pos going F2P" threads daily."
This is what most old timers decided to do, but I think many of those who have not drifted away yet are now on their way out. My guess is that MMOs are starting to shed their top end demographic, increasingly relying on the younger end. Long term that is going to cause real problems.
I just want EQ1 with a brand new graphics engine and AAA production quality.
You mean Wildstar or FFXIV? They got trinity, new graphics, huge raids, a giant world, massive PvE content and AAA production quality. They are pretty much an evolution from EQ1.
Comments
But neither of those two extremes exist in real life. There are no indies that have nothing but good innovations - there's some crap in there too -- just like there are no MMOs that are 100% full of safe proven features without at least some attempt to throw in a new wrinkle or two. AAA studios are not all money-grubbing hacks and indy devs are not all genius saints .
We'd all love to have a developer Leonardo Da Vinci out there that creates something totally new and totally fun and it's still somehow recognizable as an MMO that knocks all of our socks off, But how likely is that?
The genre is constantly evolving and there is innovation. A lot of people just dismiss the innovations if they don't like the whole package. Warhammer Online is a good example of this. They were the first to add achievements which was then copied by WOW and has become a standard feature of every MMO. And they were also the first to add dynamic events which a lot of MMOs including Rift, GW2 and ESO also have in some shape. The whole WAR package didn't work well and the game took a nosedive pretty quickly and eventually closed. It still doesn't negate that they innovated and added to the genre despite being a mediocre AAA MMO.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I remember the uproar over the sistine chapel ceiling when they restored the frescoes of Michelangelo. Everyone was shocked because for centuries they appeared a certain way and now they were totally different... what everyone thought was reality, turned out to be wrong.
MMOs of the past are like the frescoes of old... if they ever did restore them, I doubt they would appear as you imagine they would.
Although I agree with the OP for the most part, there are some neat games right now to support for those looking for the old school experience.
Try Project: Gorgon, Project 1999 and/or Neverwinter Nights 2 persistent worlds. All are quite good. In my experience it takes some effort to get into these games, kind of like it did in the early days but the tech was new so we didn't really mind it, but it pays off.
Cheer up, enjoy!
I remember that I used to play D&D pencil and paper type games, but then I discovered MMOs, and found all the time involved in getting a RPG group together and hoping everyone showed up and such made it untenable.
So I played MMOs for years and dropped the p&p completely. Now I'm like the OP. The MMO just doesn't do it for me. I still come here almost everyday (and hardly ever post) hoping for the next great game, but I haven't seen it yet.
And in a nerdy update, I finally gave in and played a D&D game last Friday night for the first time in about 10 years. And guess what--it was awesome. Each type of game has its advantages and disadvantages, but right now, I think I'll being doing some pencil and paper for a while.
J.
Take a look at the list of truly new "innovations" (if you can even call them that) that have been released since the MMO oldies.
The sad truth is that most MMO gamers started around when WoW was released and have no clue what existed before it. The MMOs from back then had almost all of the features todays MMO's mostly DON'T have or just included. They simply don't understand why MANY (not all) old MMO gamers aren't satisfied with today's MMO's, and it's seriously because they're far more watered-down and don't even feel like an MMO "world" anymore. They feel like single player games with a little social interaction.
Every single time I tell all of my post-WoW MMO gaming friends about Ultima Online, its features, my stories from then, what it was all like, they ALWAYS respond the same. "That sounds awesome! That can't even happen in WoW. Why don't MMO's have that stuff today?" And I always respond, "I ask myself the same thing".
I am sorry bro but that is what it is. Everything you said in long post is nothing but doom and gloom.
And the fact that you think only because i am more positive about MMO's future it means i am some new guy who just started playing the MMOS show that any further discussion with you will be pointless.
I started playing MMOS when Anarchy Online launched so i have been playing MMOs for quite a while now. If you want to paint a picture that all old gamers are negative and pessimistic you are free to do so but i won't be any part of it.
I have learned to adapt and change with time. And despite of few bad games i still have so many game to play i just wish i had more free time.
It's interesting how RPers like you have gone full circle. And, indeed, I think the writing was on the wall for this genre the moment when we decided, almost collectively, that these games weren't about playing characters but about pushing toons.
All of the elements in an MMORPG can be delivered faster, better or cheaper in other genres: you'll never get fast-action here like you will in an FPS or TPS. You'll never get the crafting or customizability here like you will in Minecraft. You'll never get the decorative ability here like you would in The Sims. And you'll never get a story here like you would in an action/adventure title.
Other genres are just...better. They just are. They do cutscenes better, they do mechanics better, they do variety better. About the only thing that an MMORPG does better is roleplay: true, character-driven, immersive, interactive roleplay. But it seems your typical MMORPG player has no use for portraying a character, so these platforms got progressively worse for RP.
But once you take the RP out of MMORPG...there really isn't much left that other genres can't do better. And they have.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Unfortunately I had to learn this the hard way with Steam. 200+ games in my library, and many nights I wil just stare at the list thinking how I'd like to play about 25 games on my list that night. Not including any MMOs. So I end up just quitting and doing something else, not worth the wasted time. My point? You don't NEED 200 or 300 games on Steam. If you have a good batch of 25 or so that should be a'plenty. My opinion. :-)
Fair enough, AO is a decent time frame for anyone. I too play new MMOs, I just don't find them to be as enjoyable as you do.
2 things :
- People will always use credit cards as a source of a loan and pay the monthly minimum.
- People will always pay big money for Free-To-Play mmos.
Credit card, and mmo developers will always win because of it !
I think sirchive has made some very salient points. Will gamers sit at a desk in the future? If not its bye bye mouse and keyboard, hello dumbed down controller. We complain about the short termism of gaming today, those brought up on such games will only want more of the same. SMO - Small Multiplayer Online is where we are already at today.
It is the older generation as well that have made Candy Crush millions. But they will leave as I mentioned early, the last playbase is now being mined. Once they go I am not sure those teenagers will sustain the next Candy Crush. On balance I think they will but will they support the next Perfect World, TERA or AA? I doubt it.
As you say Peyeq, the huge blob of games we now have is detrimental to gaming. But you will see posters on this very thread citing that as a reason to believe the industry is doing fabulously. Too much product in any market will lead to slash and burn in that market. It's not good for the industry or the players.
What is with the people who feel the need to take shots at consoles or pcs? There all video games who cares if you use a mouse/keyboard or controller? You claim controllers are dumb downed but what about games that allow macros? A person using a razer naga has 6 or even 12 macros setup has it a lot easier then a "dumb down controller". Its amazing having these pc elitist attempt to think they are better then a console gamer when in fact we are all gamers and If they actually cared about games they would stop stroking themselves over which platform they use.I think the future for mmorpgs is bright. Especially with games like "The Repopulation" and Camelot Unleashed on the horizon. Could not be better!
Maybe the Wowish type games are on the landslide. But is that really a bad thing? Especially when you have titles that bring back the glory to mmos. I am looking forward to the future titles coming out.
Yeah I dont see how "wowish games are on a landslide".
Wow coming out with a new expansion
Swtor coming out with a new expansion
FFXIV still doing good
ES has turned it around
Sandbox?
AA has created fighting among the sandboxers.
Granted the games you mentioned will be some much needed variety to the market. But again just because you enjoy one aspect doesn't mean it's better or the competition is failing. Because there are a lot of other games I didn't mention that are doing just fine.
I'm sensing there's a lot of people here who think PC gaming is above all others and MMOs are the cream of videogames. Both notions are false.
Social network and mobile games are not targeted towards "gamers". They are directed toward "casuals" meaning they don't identify themselves as gamers. They are "non-gamers". Someone who sees the effort of getting gaming PC and installs World of Warcraft on it, is likely not a casual anymore. That is already a gamer in my book.
And while many games thrive on being casual friendly, it doesn't make them part of the casual gaming genre (see social network and mobile games). Also, while playing on a console only might make you a casual gamer and even if the biggest group playing console games are casual gamers, it doesn't make the games on console necessarily "casual games". More importantly, even if you play only console games, you can still be a "hardcore gamer".
I really hate reading comments with generalizations about console games being dumbed down or how sandboxes require a refined taste and how they go over the heads of "the masses". Its really all just bullshit. And you are ignorant if this is your view and if it is willful ignorance your an moron to boot.
It is ludicrous to think that...
"We are the PC gaming master race. Look at those console peasants squirm and struggle in our games. They can't possibly comprehend the pleasure we can have in our games. Our games produce real enjoyment, those other games are just glorified skinner boxes."
No, if you think you are somehow better because you like game X (and because you know what skinner box is), the likely diagnosis is that you're being stupid.
"But PvP in this game is 'meaningful'. Grouping is much more 'organic'."
Re-branding bullshit. Believe me I've seen comments like these hundreds of times. You're not fooling anyone. You've only managed to make yourself look like a douché.
"I liked MMOs before they were cool. Now the masses have ruined the genre."
Nobody likes hipsters for a reason. They think they are cool and above all others... -They are not.
I've seen too many casual gamers in the so-called hardcore games and hardcore gamers enjoying the so-called casual games to believe any of the stereotypes and generalizations thrown about on these forums. I don't care if you're addicted to candy crunch. I don't care if you played UO in the days of old. As far as I'm concerned, everyone is equal. Candy crunch might be an excellent casual game and UO might have been an excellent MMORPG for its time. I don't need to bash you for that - but I can offer criticism.
I myself liked the average-to-poor Need For Speed: Most Wanted. I think Morrowind is the best game in the Elder Scrolls series even if it got only average ratings. I enjoyed my time in Pirates of the Burning Sea despite it being severely flawed. They all scratched the right itch at the right time. I can say "this game is shit, but somehow I like it". I played Eve Online for 3 years and I still think it is mediocre at best. Which drives some of the fans of said game up the wall when I say something less than flattering about it.
I don't feel the need to attach myself to a game and defend it in the forums to the last man. And I don't need to like a game in order to appreciate what it does. World of Warcraft is a monster of a game. Hugely successful. Undoubtedly a very good game. Yet I can't be bothered to play it. That doesn't mean I have to look down upon those that do. Good for them. I'm glad someone is having fun even if I am not.
This is where I take my high ground. Are you mature enough to do the same? Can you detach yourself from your preferences? Can you look at games objectively? Can you take in all the facts and not just the ones that you like? Do you need to spin them to fit your opinion or does your opinion change with the facts?
And if there's no MMORPGs for you to enjoy, isn't it self-centered to think that the "genre is fading/dying" because of it? Even if you don't like "what the genre has become", you don't need to bash anything or anyone and please don't create hundred threads about it on these forums.
But what am I saying, you probably will anyway. ...
There I got it out.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
And every PC owner has a Naga? I take your point on the Macros though, but then PC's don't have that built in targeter (forgot its name) that consoles have. I think Mouse and keyboard make for a better control system and millions of FPS fans agree. Even if you don't think controllers are dumbed down, having to use one is restrictive. Restricting the types of interface used. You can use anything sat at a desk, you can't sat on a sofa.
I don't think so.. I think the OP has a point and I share his feelings as well.. I want more from a PvE MMO.. I want a robust open world where the sky is the limit.. I want exciting vibrant and challenging classes to play.. However, in my heart I do not see that happening because of two main reasons..
Oh I'm not debating which is better I'm just saying lumping controllers as "dumb downed" when macros take that a step further isnt really fair.
I am 100% with you on this Tassle, it should be about the games, but everything in games seems to be about stroking the ego these days, sadly.
The mine is better than yours attitude. Who gives a shit. Play the game.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
What do you mean by "robust open world"?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Simple, he meant seamless ... As in no instances or zones..
Don't worry about the graphics for playability come with skills.
That where Sony isn't good at.
My expectations of PC gaming in general have shifted.
Nowadays it's just accepting that games are only popular for 3 months before they release (and if you're in beta, cool), and then 1-3 months after they release.
And that's it.
It's literally like bar-hopping. "Where's the crowd going next?!"
That's PC gaming now. People stopped calling games "fail" a while ago, because they've grown to expect it to be this way. Yeah, most games aren't really worth playing long-term because there really isn't enough innovation. This is just simple principles of anything that "sticks", you need to be first or you need to be unique...
I can only laugh at all of the people butthurt and acting surprised that ArcheAge is already going down the toilet. I didn't even bother with that game. And I got out of wildstar as soon as I saw that was going down the toilet (which was even shorter than most games); and I didn't spend an ounce of time whining on forums or saying "fix this fix that".
Drop your expectations and just go where the crowd goes. These games are only worth playing when they're "on top" and have a bunch of people playing them. Then they turn into miserable ghost towns with constant "when's this pos going F2P" threads daily.
"Drop your expectations and just go where the crowd goes. These games are only worth playing when they're "on top" and have a bunch of people playing them. Then they turn into miserable ghost towns with constant "when's this pos going F2P" threads daily."
This is what most old timers decided to do, but I think many of those who have not drifted away yet are now on their way out. My guess is that MMOs are starting to shed their top end demographic, increasingly relying on the younger end. Long term that is going to cause real problems.
You mean Wildstar or FFXIV? They got trinity, new graphics, huge raids, a giant world, massive PvE content and AAA production quality. They are pretty much an evolution from EQ1.