"From the beginning it's never been about 'players have changed.' Nothing's really changed except developer's expectations.
The initial MMORPGs were always intended for a small player base. 100K, 200K, 500K? These were big numbers 15 years ago. That's the only thing that changed. Developers want 10 times the player bases now.
If someone were to developer a game styled after the original MMORPGs, Assuming it was designed, coded and monetized properly, I would expect the same number of players. And most likely, they would remain loyal to the game for several years if not longer."
But why did the developers' expectations change? Greed of their overseers and providers, of course. But, also, player expectations, the complexity of the tasks which go with it, and the costs which go with it have also increased. So, even in eliminating the greed factor, there will still be a creep of expectations in order to cover increasing costs. Otherwise, the MMORPG in question will develop more slowly proportionally.
But, I do agree that developer attitudes like "one size fits all" are unnecessary and are borne from suspect motives.
What we need to modify is player expectations. Fun--I mean proper fun--can be had without top-of-the-line graphics, complete voice acting, and all of those other superficial bells and whistles. Such things become front and center issues only when general priorities are out of whack.
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
"From the beginning it's never been about 'players have changed.' Nothing's really changed except developer's expectations.
The initial MMORPGs were always intended for a small player base. 100K, 200K, 500K? These were big numbers 15 years ago. That's the only thing that changed. Developers want 10 times the player bases now.
If someone were to developer a game styled after the original MMORPGs, Assuming it was designed, coded and monetized properly, I would expect the same number of players. And most likely, they would remain loyal to the game for several years if not longer."
But why did the developers' expectations change? Greed of their overseers and providers, of course. But, also, player expectations, the complexity of the tasks which go with it, and the costs which go with it have also increased. So, even in eliminating the greed factor, there will still be a creep of expectations in order to cover increasing costs. Otherwise, the MMORPG in question will develop more slowly proportionally.
But, I do agree that developer attitudes like "one size fits all" are unnecessary and are borne from suspect motives.
What we need to modify is player expectations. Fun--I mean proper fun--can be had without top-of-the-line graphics, complete voice acting, and all of those other superficial bells and whistles. Such things become front and center issues only when general priorities are out of whack.
MMOs were not that fun pre-WoW. By reading these forums you would think that MMOs back then were the holy grail and everyone is super happy and there were shooting rainbows everywhere and all problems turned to pixie dust.
My only explanation is a severe stage of nostalgia and also for a lot of people their first MMO was one of those MMOs (most commonly EQ) and this i why they still have that first MMO love relationship with it.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
My first MMO was Asheron's Call where I would spend 12-20 hours just chatting with friends and not accomplishing a damn thing. And YES that was FUN. Maybe it's not the button mashing fun the younger generation likes. You see, we older players come from a time when people actually spoke face to face with one another and cooperated to complete a common goal. Unlike todays so called smart phone users who want instant gratification and are so into texting and tweeting that I often think that the Zombie Apocalypse has already occurred.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
My first MMO was Asheron's Call where I would spend 12-20 hours just chatting with friends and not accomplishing a damn thing. And YES that was FUN. Maybe it's not the button mashing fun the younger generation likes. You see, we older players come from a time when people actually spoke face to face with one another and cooperated to complete a common goal. Unlike todays so called smart phone users who want instant gratification and are so into texting and tweeting that I often think that the Zombie Apocalypse has already occurred.
Every generation complains about the generation before. Are you still playing Asheron's Call? Probably not....
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
My first MMO was Asheron's Call where I would spend 12-20 hours just chatting with friends and not accomplishing a damn thing. And YES that was FUN. Maybe it's not the button mashing fun the younger generation likes. You see, we older players come from a time when people actually spoke face to face with one another and cooperated to complete a common goal. Unlike todays so called smart phone users who want instant gratification and are so into texting and tweeting that I often think that the Zombie Apocalypse has already occurred.
Every generation complains about the generation before. Are you still playing Asheron's Call? Probably not....
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
My first MMO was Asheron's Call where I would spend 12-20 hours just chatting with friends and not accomplishing a damn thing. And YES that was FUN. Maybe it's not the button mashing fun the younger generation likes. You see, we older players come from a time when people actually spoke face to face with one another and cooperated to complete a common goal. Unlike todays so called smart phone users who want instant gratification and are so into texting and tweeting that I often think that the Zombie Apocalypse has already occurred.
Every generation complains about the generation before. Are you still playing Asheron's Call? Probably not....
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
I'm currently playing The Repopulation. Whether it is as good as you think the other games are is irrelevant. What I am saying is that many of these old games that people keep going on about can still be played, but very few people actually play them anymore.
"MMOs were not that fun pre-WoW. By reading these forums you would think that MMOs back then were the holy grail and everyone is super happy and there were shooting rainbows everywhere and all problems turned to pixie dust.
My only explanation is a severe stage of nostalgia and also for a lot of people their first MMO was one of those MMOs (most commonly EQ) and this i why they still have that first MMO love relationship with it.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?"
I think that you are missing the point. This issue--what they are getting at (I believe)--is primarily about more abstract experiences like experiencing consequences for your actions in terms of personal responsibility and personal reliance, earning things, getting a feeling of accomplishment when you do something, building community in the face of adversity, and so on. Exactly how they experienced these things through these "old school" games is purely a secondary issue which obfuscates the primary issue.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
In this sense, "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers are talking past each other on these forums.
The only way to make "new school" gamers understand these things is to somehow show them and have them experience what "old school" gamers have experienced. But, I would agree that this requires a different approach than simply reviving "old school" games and saying, "Here ... play them!" Clearly, "new school" gamers don't want to.
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
"MMOs were not that fun pre-WoW. By reading these forums you would think that MMOs back then were the holy grail and everyone is super happy and there were shooting rainbows everywhere and all problems turned to pixie dust.
My only explanation is a severe stage of nostalgia and also for a lot of people their first MMO was one of those MMOs (most commonly EQ) and this i why they still have that first MMO love relationship with it.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?"
I think that you are missing the point. This issue--what they are getting at (I believe)--is primarily about more abstract experiences like experiencing consequences for your actions in terms of personal responsibility and personal reliance, earning things, getting a feeling of accomplishment when you do something, building community in the face of adversity, and so on. Exactly how they experienced these things through these "old school" games is purely a secondary issue which obfuscates the primary issue.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
In this sense, "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers are talking past each other on these forums.
The only way to make "new school" gamers understand these things is to somehow show them and have them experience what "old school" gamers have experienced. But, I would agree that this requires a different approach than simply reviving "old school" games and saying, "Here ... play them!" Clearly, "new school" gamers don't want to.
Exactly, MMOs give way too much now. You do not earn anything or create, you are simply an NPC with a wider skill set that jumps around in circles for no apparent reason.
"MMOs were not that fun pre-WoW. By reading these forums you would think that MMOs back then were the holy grail and everyone is super happy and there were shooting rainbows everywhere and all problems turned to pixie dust.
My only explanation is a severe stage of nostalgia and also for a lot of people their first MMO was one of those MMOs (most commonly EQ) and this i why they still have that first MMO love relationship with it.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?"
I think that you are missing the point. This issue--what they are getting at (I believe)--is primarily about more abstract experiences like experiencing consequences for your actions in terms of personal responsibility and personal reliance, earning things, getting a feeling of accomplishment when you do something, building community in the face of adversity, and so on. Exactly how they experienced these things through these "old school" games is purely a secondary issue which obfuscates the primary issue.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
In this sense, "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers are talking past each other on these forums.
The only way to make "new school" gamers understand these things is to somehow show them and have them experience what "old school" gamers have experienced. But, I would agree that this requires a different approach than simply reviving "old school" games and saying, "Here ... play them!" Clearly, "new school" gamers don't want to.
There is also another factor in the differences.
I agree, assuming I understood your previous post, in that I didn't play MMORPGs for fun. I played them to achieve something.
But there was another factor. The "Old School" games had a depth to them. They were layered games. There were games within the game that people played and they could chose paths they wanted to follow along them. Generally they involved crafting, gathering, social positioning, and as in the case of SWG, a political system. What I refer to as "Meta-Game" This kind of layered gaming is gone. And Developers have replaced it with their attempts to "revolutionize" MMORPG Combat systems. I've always thought the 2 were not mutually exclusive and yet, in the new games, if you are killing something, you aren't progressing.
I think these experiences are gone for another reason. One I've never seen discussed here. This issue is that most if not all of that layerd meta gaming comes as a result of the players interacting through an in-game economy. But the truth is, the way that "new School" games have been monetized has destroyed any kind of hope for any kind of player influenced economy.
Trion has shown you cannot have a player driven economy and a cash shop at the same time. Well, at least one where you have cash shop items that can be traded in game anyway. Developers know this so unless we see a different kind of business model where the real money and the game are kept separate, there will never be anything more than single player focused experiences with group combat.
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
Marvel Heroes ... much better game (for me, of course, since "great" is subjective) than SWG, CoH or TR.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
"Bad" is subjective. MMORPG is certainly driven in a different direction (more games, less world), but whether it is bad is a matter of perspective.
And don't confuse about "not understanding" with "not agreeing". I certainly have seen people treat MMOs as a job, and stuff in there as "real life achievement". I just don't agree that illusion of achievements in video games (i am talking mostly about pve "achievement"s, not e-sports) are important.
I don't feel a sense of achievement in watching a movie, and certainly i do not play games for that. Sense of achievement, to me, is reserved for real world activities (such as publishing a paper, for example). Now, others can have any values they want, and if they want to find achievement in video games, it is their prerogative. But video games, to me, are just entertainment products.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
"Bad" is subjective. MMORPG is certainly driven in a different direction (more games, less world), but whether it is bad is a matter of perspective.
And don't confuse about "not understanding" with "not agreeing". I certainly have seen people treat MMOs as a job, and stuff in there as "real life achievement". I just don't agree that illusion of achievements in video games (i am talking mostly about pve "achievement"s, not e-sports) are important.
I don't feel a sense of achievement in watching a movie, and certainly i do not play games for that. Sense of achievement, to me, is reserved for real world activities (such as publishing a paper, for example). Now, others can have any values they want, and if they want to find achievement in video games, it is their prerogative. But video games, to me, are just entertainment products.
I can't argue any of these points. As you said, they are all subjective. I personally don't look for achievements in video games (specifically, PvE), either. The only difference is in understanding where we each derive our fun.
Personally, I have a lot more fun experiencing things with others than I do in experiencing them by myself. Even if my allies aren't actively communicating the entire time, whenever we collectively do something amazing, you tend to see people pipe up to at least say, "Holy shit, that was awesome!" Sometimes this leads to further communication, sometimes just agreement and then silence. Either way, it's a much cooler experience to me if there are multiple folks working together. Usually, this kind of thing happens in PvP situations, but I've seen it happen in PvE ones, too.
For folks like me, the old school MMO more accurately targets what we consider most fun. MOBAs do too, if only for PvP. I cannot say I'd play any of the OP mentioned games if they were still around (maybe Tabula Rasa, I really liked that game), but I would play a game where, upon login, the majority of players were looking to get together to do things instead of rush through content solo. It needn't be overtly user-averse. The UI doesn't need to be cumbersome and complicated. The process doesn't have to be a huge grind (though grinding becomes much more palatable when done in good company). It doesn't need to force folks to play a type of content they don't want to (such as open world PvP). It just needs to, by its nature, encourage folks not to completely ignore the multiplayer portion of a massively multiplayer game.
I would be playing each game, in rotation for the entire year.
It makes me so sad that there's no game on the modern market that fits my MMO needs and three of my favorites are all dead.
RIP mediocre but different MMOs
Well i get that you are coming from. Those games where fun, especially for their own time. TR i never got that in to as i caught in on the tail end but to some degree i think Defiance does a good job of capturing the feeling i remember from TR
But i can not say i share your love for SWG... Sure it was a very special animal but if you set out to do something make sure you do it right or adjust your vision to fit your abilities. SWG was broken... Really broken...Fun... but in the end broken... Then they kind of broke it again while trying to fix it. But i guess you are right that there is no game like it... Probably for the best.
As for CoH... .. . Well... As much as i loved it, it did not age very well in most aspects and it had some real issues with end-game. Now with that said there are tons of game sout there that both match it and surpass it game-play wise. But it will always have one of the most robust character creators on the market.
I wish someone would start a company and revive all shut down MMOs. Make them all playable for one fee and have all content unlocked.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
Marvel Heroes ... much better game (for me, of course, since "great" is subjective) than SWG, CoH or TR.
In case you forgot I play MH, no way is that game a match for the likes of CoH. A nice game but the real advantage it has is the ability to use Marvel characters. Which is also the worse thing about it, ten Ironmans, five Thors etc all in Xaviers school, too silly for words.
Originally posted by sludgebeard Exactly, MMOs give way too much now. You do not earn anything or create, you are simply an NPC with a wider skill set that jumps around in circles for no apparent reason.
Earn? Earn?! Why should I have to earn anything in an MMO? It is an entertainment product.
Its like going to to a movie and then the movie stops and refuses to show the ending until you "earn" it by completing menial tasks for over a year.
I go to my job and earn my paycheck by working for it so I will not come home just to start another job by working at a video game because I have not earned my armor yet.
Entertainment products have to work to earn something from me(namely, my time and money), not the other way around.
Originally posted by DMKano Are people forgetting how broken Tabula Rasa was? CoH was solid, SWG - which iteration? If these games came back - after 1 month the only one to have more than 30K playing would be CoH. This is why these games are dead and won't be coming back.
+1. Stop trying to relive the past. Move on.
Move on to what exactly? Games that launch that make the games of old look good or play that easy mode, take nap during the boss fight in a raid, pre-teen cartoon of game that is the equivalent of the NCAA's NIT tournament? I mean if a brain dead monkey can play it successfully it has to be good right?
In case you were wondering, I am talking about WoW, the game that has done more to destroy the genre than any other. Before too long you will create a character and start with the best raid gear in game and only have 1 skill to use called "I win". I can see it now, everyone in PvP will get a trophy because Blizzard won't want to hurt anyone's feelings by labeling them a loser.
yeah, move on. How about moving on to other forms of entertainment because the crap these companies are coming out with are pure and simple garbage.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
" 'Bad' is subjective. MMORPG is certainly driven in a different direction (more games, less world), but whether it is bad is a matter of perspective."
Only to a certain extent. For example, if you design a game purely as a linear themepark which serves as a single-player game with a shared world, then only a certain amount of content and replayability will exist as is and players will inevitably exhaust it at their own pace. But, if you design a game around dynamic, open-ended community activities, then the game will have lots of replayability as is--possibly even an infinite amount of it.
Why does this example matter? Because players of all tastes want replayability in their games, especially if they really love them. Yet, there are only certain ways in which you can create replayability in certain games.
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by LungingWolf
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
"And don't confuse about 'not understanding' with 'not agreeing'. I certainly have seen people treat MMOs as a job, and stuff in there as 'real life achievement'. I just don't agree that illusion of achievements in video games (i am talking mostly about pve 'achievement's, not e-sports) are important.
I don't feel a sense of achievement in watching a movie, and certainly i do not play games for that. Sense of achievement, to me, is reserved for real world activities (such as publishing a paper, for example). Now, others can have any values they want, and if they want to find achievement in video games, it is their prerogative. But video games, to me, are just entertainment products."
Of course, I agree that this is ultimately a matter of personal perspective. I cannot argue with that.
Though, from my perspective, I differentiate between different types of achievements. For me, real life achievements are the most important. They are fundamental, real, and necessary to me. But, within the realm of having fun (I do need a break, you know), I can place a secondary value on achieving things within a game, particularly things which others rarely do. They help give having fun in a game more deeper layers for me. It's all about having fun from different angles.
See the difference? Both sets of achievements are important achievements for me, but in different respects, each in what I believe are healthy places.
But what you are getting at is something different. That is, the phenomenon of people treating in-game achievements as equal to, in the same respects, as real life achievements (i.e. doing extreme grinds which the average person cannot endure). This is something that I also disagree with. It doesn't have to be this way.
In this situation, I advocate restoring a sense of "old school" achievement to MMORPGs under a "new school" context, from my perspective of in-game achievements. For example, in WoW-like games, I would eliminate all vendor-sold "welfare stuff" and have all loot come straight from exploration, defeating NPC enemies in the wilderness, and so on. But, I would carefully craft the wilderness--a truly huge world--to have different gradients of harshness, which allows more casual players to get a good, solid, confident start before facing random tougher challenges that are meant for different skill levels and/or more people. And, of course, fun gameplay--as in fun combat, fun customization, etc.--would be my number one universal priority, within the context of a good balance. Sure, this is a basic example (I have some other, more specific ideas which would make this post very, very long), but I hope that you get the picture.
So, from my perspective, I think that you are talking in extremes. And, of course, the divide between "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers cannot be bridged in any meaningful sense, if people keep framing the discussion in extremes.
But yeah, if you are an "old school" gamer who has adopted the "new school" view of MMORPGs, then I am not accusing you of "not understanding". But, if so, then I think that you are part of the minority of "new school" gamers. And, as my previous post hinted, I believe that most "new school" gamers are completely ignorant of what we are speaking about here.
I hope that this helps clarify what I am saying. :-)
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
Marvel Heroes ... much better game (for me, of course, since "great" is subjective) than SWG, CoH or TR.
In case you forgot I play MH, no way is that game a match for the likes of CoH. A nice game but the real advantage it has is the ability to use Marvel characters. Which is also the worse thing about it, ten Ironmans, five Thors etc all in Xaviers school, too silly for words.
That is pure subjective. I tried CoH too, and MH is 10x better for me.
In fact, you named the biggest issue of MH. It would have been an even better game if it is single player (with online modes). However, at its current form, it is still much better than CoH. I do not want a knock-off hero, i want to play iron man, wolverine, and so on ... plus MH has much better (for me) combat.
Why does this example matter? Because players of all tastes want replayability in their games, especially if they really love them. Yet, there are only certain ways in which you can create replayability in certain games.
So, from my perspective, I think that you are talking in extremes. And, of course, the divide between "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers cannot be bridged in any meaningful sense, if people keep framing the discussion in extremes.
But yeah, if you are an "old school" gamer who has adopted the "new school" view of MMORPGs, then I am not accusing you of "not understanding". But, if so, then I think that you are part of the minority of "new school" gamers. And, as my previous post hinted, I believe that most "new school" gamers are completely ignorant of what we are speaking about here.
I hope that this helps clarify what I am saying. :-)
Says who? I don't want replayability. I want good content .. and when I finish it, i move onto the next game. (Now don't get me wrong, some games i do repeat play ... like Diablo .. but that is not a must). I prefer quality (a lot of fun) over quantity (replay again and again). And there are more games than i can finish. So i don't need replayability to fuel my entertainment.
And yes, i am talking in extreme because i believe there is no reason to tolerant anything in my entertainment. If i don't like a game in anyway, i won't play it. And there is no reason to bridge the "old school" and "new school" gamers. It is not like i want to play with strangers.
Now I can not speak about what others know or do not know. So may be some "new school" gamers are ignorant ... but that does not detract from the fact that there are also those who take a look, reject the old way, and embrace the new way.
Why does this example matter? Because players of all tastes want replayability in their games, especially if they really love them. Yet, there are only certain ways in which you can create replayability in certain games.
"Says who? I don't want replayability. I want good content .. and when I finish it, i move onto the next game. (Now don't get me wrong, some games i do repeat play ... like Diablo .. but that is not a must). I prefer quality (a lot of fun) over quantity (replay again and again). And there are more games than i can finish. So i don't need replayability to fuel my entertainment."
There is no inherent dichotomy between providing good content (or quality) and providing replayability (or quantity). Both can be in the same game. And, if you want to play good content and a game has good content which is replayable in some way, then there is no strict reason why you should not be open to replaying the said content on some basis, especially when you lack fresh good content at the moment for some reason. For example, as you said, you do replay Diablo.
Good, satisfying content is good, satisfying content. It's as simple as that.
With all due respect, I can handle agreeing to disagree and letting things go. I'm prepared to do it now. But, at this point, I think that you are arguing just to argue. /Shrug.
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
Comments
But why did the developers' expectations change? Greed of their overseers and providers, of course. But, also, player expectations, the complexity of the tasks which go with it, and the costs which go with it have also increased. So, even in eliminating the greed factor, there will still be a creep of expectations in order to cover increasing costs. Otherwise, the MMORPG in question will develop more slowly proportionally.
But, I do agree that developer attitudes like "one size fits all" are unnecessary and are borne from suspect motives.
What we need to modify is player expectations. Fun--I mean proper fun--can be had without top-of-the-line graphics, complete voice acting, and all of those other superficial bells and whistles. Such things become front and center issues only when general priorities are out of whack.
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
MMOs were not that fun pre-WoW. By reading these forums you would think that MMOs back then were the holy grail and everyone is super happy and there were shooting rainbows everywhere and all problems turned to pixie dust.
My only explanation is a severe stage of nostalgia and also for a lot of people their first MMO was one of those MMOs (most commonly EQ) and this i why they still have that first MMO love relationship with it.
EQ was so bad, how could people throw away their ENTIRE life playing that game. Did you guys spend 12-14 hours everyday grinding like maniacs to get 0 progress? Was that fun?
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Yeah people say that when MMOs are dead. When alive most of people didn't give a damn about Tabula Rasa . hence the shut down.
I would to, I just unsubbed to that shit of a SWTOR. 3.0 is the CU of that game.
My first MMO was Asheron's Call where I would spend 12-20 hours just chatting with friends and not accomplishing a damn thing. And YES that was FUN. Maybe it's not the button mashing fun the younger generation likes. You see, we older players come from a time when people actually spoke face to face with one another and cooperated to complete a common goal. Unlike todays so called smart phone users who want instant gratification and are so into texting and tweeting that I often think that the Zombie Apocalypse has already occurred.
Every generation complains about the generation before. Are you still playing Asheron's Call? Probably not....
If you are right Zarf do tell us what MMOs are out today that are as great as any that were mentioned? Feel for you OP, but I only ever play one MMO at a time, of those you mentioned it would be CoH.
I'm currently playing The Repopulation. Whether it is as good as you think the other games are is irrelevant. What I am saying is that many of these old games that people keep going on about can still be played, but very few people actually play them anymore.
I think that you are missing the point. This issue--what they are getting at (I believe)--is primarily about more abstract experiences like experiencing consequences for your actions in terms of personal responsibility and personal reliance, earning things, getting a feeling of accomplishment when you do something, building community in the face of adversity, and so on. Exactly how they experienced these things through these "old school" games is purely a secondary issue which obfuscates the primary issue.
The problem is that "new school" gamers in general don't understand these things. They say things like, " 'A sense of accomplishment'? What? These are just games. Gimmie my money's worth." And, with this attitude, they drive the MMORPG market in bad directions.
In this sense, "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers are talking past each other on these forums.
The only way to make "new school" gamers understand these things is to somehow show them and have them experience what "old school" gamers have experienced. But, I would agree that this requires a different approach than simply reviving "old school" games and saying, "Here ... play them!" Clearly, "new school" gamers don't want to.
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
Exactly, MMOs give way too much now. You do not earn anything or create, you are simply an NPC with a wider skill set that jumps around in circles for no apparent reason.
There is also another factor in the differences.
I agree, assuming I understood your previous post, in that I didn't play MMORPGs for fun. I played them to achieve something.
But there was another factor. The "Old School" games had a depth to them. They were layered games. There were games within the game that people played and they could chose paths they wanted to follow along them. Generally they involved crafting, gathering, social positioning, and as in the case of SWG, a political system. What I refer to as "Meta-Game" This kind of layered gaming is gone. And Developers have replaced it with their attempts to "revolutionize" MMORPG Combat systems. I've always thought the 2 were not mutually exclusive and yet, in the new games, if you are killing something, you aren't progressing.
I think these experiences are gone for another reason. One I've never seen discussed here. This issue is that most if not all of that layerd meta gaming comes as a result of the players interacting through an in-game economy. But the truth is, the way that "new School" games have been monetized has destroyed any kind of hope for any kind of player influenced economy.
Trion has shown you cannot have a player driven economy and a cash shop at the same time. Well, at least one where you have cash shop items that can be traded in game anyway. Developers know this so unless we see a different kind of business model where the real money and the game are kept separate, there will never be anything more than single player focused experiences with group combat.
Marvel Heroes ... much better game (for me, of course, since "great" is subjective) than SWG, CoH or TR.
"Bad" is subjective. MMORPG is certainly driven in a different direction (more games, less world), but whether it is bad is a matter of perspective.
And don't confuse about "not understanding" with "not agreeing". I certainly have seen people treat MMOs as a job, and stuff in there as "real life achievement". I just don't agree that illusion of achievements in video games (i am talking mostly about pve "achievement"s, not e-sports) are important.
I don't feel a sense of achievement in watching a movie, and certainly i do not play games for that. Sense of achievement, to me, is reserved for real world activities (such as publishing a paper, for example). Now, others can have any values they want, and if they want to find achievement in video games, it is their prerogative. But video games, to me, are just entertainment products.
I can't argue any of these points. As you said, they are all subjective. I personally don't look for achievements in video games (specifically, PvE), either. The only difference is in understanding where we each derive our fun.
Personally, I have a lot more fun experiencing things with others than I do in experiencing them by myself. Even if my allies aren't actively communicating the entire time, whenever we collectively do something amazing, you tend to see people pipe up to at least say, "Holy shit, that was awesome!" Sometimes this leads to further communication, sometimes just agreement and then silence. Either way, it's a much cooler experience to me if there are multiple folks working together. Usually, this kind of thing happens in PvP situations, but I've seen it happen in PvE ones, too.
For folks like me, the old school MMO more accurately targets what we consider most fun. MOBAs do too, if only for PvP. I cannot say I'd play any of the OP mentioned games if they were still around (maybe Tabula Rasa, I really liked that game), but I would play a game where, upon login, the majority of players were looking to get together to do things instead of rush through content solo. It needn't be overtly user-averse. The UI doesn't need to be cumbersome and complicated. The process doesn't have to be a huge grind (though grinding becomes much more palatable when done in good company). It doesn't need to force folks to play a type of content they don't want to (such as open world PvP). It just needs to, by its nature, encourage folks not to completely ignore the multiplayer portion of a massively multiplayer game.
Well i get that you are coming from. Those games where fun, especially for their own time. TR i never got that in to as i caught in on the tail end but to some degree i think Defiance does a good job of capturing the feeling i remember from TR
But i can not say i share your love for SWG... Sure it was a very special animal but if you set out to do something make sure you do it right or adjust your vision to fit your abilities. SWG was broken... Really broken...Fun... but in the end broken... Then they kind of broke it again while trying to fix it. But i guess you are right that there is no game like it... Probably for the best.
As for CoH... .. . Well... As much as i loved it, it did not age very well in most aspects and it had some real issues with end-game. Now with that said there are tons of game sout there that both match it and surpass it game-play wise. But it will always have one of the most robust character creators on the market.
This have been a good conversation
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
In case you forgot I play MH, no way is that game a match for the likes of CoH. A nice game but the real advantage it has is the ability to use Marvel characters. Which is also the worse thing about it, ten Ironmans, five Thors etc all in Xaviers school, too silly for words.
If SWG, CoH, or Tabula Rasa still lived...
...i would be playing The Chronicles of Spellborn.
Its like going to to a movie and then the movie stops and refuses to show the ending until you "earn" it by completing menial tasks for over a year.
I go to my job and earn my paycheck by working for it so I will not come home just to start another job by working at a video game because I have not earned my armor yet.
Entertainment products have to work to earn something from me(namely, my time and money), not the other way around.
Move on to what exactly? Games that launch that make the games of old look good or play that easy mode, take nap during the boss fight in a raid, pre-teen cartoon of game that is the equivalent of the NCAA's NIT tournament? I mean if a brain dead monkey can play it successfully it has to be good right?
In case you were wondering, I am talking about WoW, the game that has done more to destroy the genre than any other. Before too long you will create a character and start with the best raid gear in game and only have 1 skill to use called "I win". I can see it now, everyone in PvP will get a trophy because Blizzard won't want to hurt anyone's feelings by labeling them a loser.
yeah, move on. How about moving on to other forms of entertainment because the crap these companies are coming out with are pure and simple garbage.
Only to a certain extent. For example, if you design a game purely as a linear themepark which serves as a single-player game with a shared world, then only a certain amount of content and replayability will exist as is and players will inevitably exhaust it at their own pace. But, if you design a game around dynamic, open-ended community activities, then the game will have lots of replayability as is--possibly even an infinite amount of it.
Why does this example matter? Because players of all tastes want replayability in their games, especially if they really love them. Yet, there are only certain ways in which you can create replayability in certain games.
Of course, I agree that this is ultimately a matter of personal perspective. I cannot argue with that.
Though, from my perspective, I differentiate between different types of achievements. For me, real life achievements are the most important. They are fundamental, real, and necessary to me. But, within the realm of having fun (I do need a break, you know), I can place a secondary value on achieving things within a game, particularly things which others rarely do. They help give having fun in a game more deeper layers for me. It's all about having fun from different angles.
See the difference? Both sets of achievements are important achievements for me, but in different respects, each in what I believe are healthy places.
But what you are getting at is something different. That is, the phenomenon of people treating in-game achievements as equal to, in the same respects, as real life achievements (i.e. doing extreme grinds which the average person cannot endure). This is something that I also disagree with. It doesn't have to be this way.
In this situation, I advocate restoring a sense of "old school" achievement to MMORPGs under a "new school" context, from my perspective of in-game achievements. For example, in WoW-like games, I would eliminate all vendor-sold "welfare stuff" and have all loot come straight from exploration, defeating NPC enemies in the wilderness, and so on. But, I would carefully craft the wilderness--a truly huge world--to have different gradients of harshness, which allows more casual players to get a good, solid, confident start before facing random tougher challenges that are meant for different skill levels and/or more people. And, of course, fun gameplay--as in fun combat, fun customization, etc.--would be my number one universal priority, within the context of a good balance. Sure, this is a basic example (I have some other, more specific ideas which would make this post very, very long), but I hope that you get the picture.
So, from my perspective, I think that you are talking in extremes. And, of course, the divide between "old school" gamers and "new school" gamers cannot be bridged in any meaningful sense, if people keep framing the discussion in extremes.
But yeah, if you are an "old school" gamer who has adopted the "new school" view of MMORPGs, then I am not accusing you of "not understanding". But, if so, then I think that you are part of the minority of "new school" gamers. And, as my previous post hinted, I believe that most "new school" gamers are completely ignorant of what we are speaking about here.
I hope that this helps clarify what I am saying. :-)
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
That is pure subjective. I tried CoH too, and MH is 10x better for me.
In fact, you named the biggest issue of MH. It would have been an even better game if it is single player (with online modes). However, at its current form, it is still much better than CoH. I do not want a knock-off hero, i want to play iron man, wolverine, and so on ... plus MH has much better (for me) combat.
Says who? I don't want replayability. I want good content .. and when I finish it, i move onto the next game. (Now don't get me wrong, some games i do repeat play ... like Diablo .. but that is not a must). I prefer quality (a lot of fun) over quantity (replay again and again). And there are more games than i can finish. So i don't need replayability to fuel my entertainment.
And yes, i am talking in extreme because i believe there is no reason to tolerant anything in my entertainment. If i don't like a game in anyway, i won't play it. And there is no reason to bridge the "old school" and "new school" gamers. It is not like i want to play with strangers.
Now I can not speak about what others know or do not know. So may be some "new school" gamers are ignorant ... but that does not detract from the fact that there are also those who take a look, reject the old way, and embrace the new way.
There is no inherent dichotomy between providing good content (or quality) and providing replayability (or quantity). Both can be in the same game. And, if you want to play good content and a game has good content which is replayable in some way, then there is no strict reason why you should not be open to replaying the said content on some basis, especially when you lack fresh good content at the moment for some reason. For example, as you said, you do replay Diablo.
Good, satisfying content is good, satisfying content. It's as simple as that.
With all due respect, I can handle agreeing to disagree and letting things go. I'm prepared to do it now. But, at this point, I think that you are arguing just to argue. /Shrug.
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).