Two points. What if companies can't make money on $60 + $15 / month? What if, due to inflation, it now takes $1000 and $150 / month to make the same return on investment as companies were able to in 2000? Would anyone play?
And on the FREE PLAYERS comment in the original post, you don't put anything into my wallet, please refrain from trying to dictate when and how I spend whatever happens to be there.
Well, probably because their salaries would also have gone up due to inflation.
Considering that $60.00 in 1913 is over $1,000.00 today.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I'd say most players of the current generation do not know what they want.
This is because gaming has become immensely popular over the last decade, and many of the newcomers do not know what to expect of gaming.
Greedy companies have been sure to take advantage of that in form of Cash Shops, Day-1 DLCs, Early Access, preorder bonuses etc.
If these people (who now form the majority of gamers) had played older games, they'd expect a whole different kind of treatment & respect from developers, and products that are focused on quality instead of "how to get most $$$ out of consumers".
If these people (who now form the majority of gamers) had played older games, they'd expect a whole different kind of treatment & respect from developers, and products that are focused on quality instead of "how to get most $$$ out of consumers".
I have played older games (heck i started gaming with a Apple II+) and i don't see a problem with today's gaming business.
As long as I can find fun games to play, i don't see a problem. The motivation of devs does not concern me, if they can provide a fun game.
If not, i can always go somewhere else. It is good that there are so many entertainment choices.
a) His basic premise is based on a big fat fallacy. He is mind projecting like no tomorrow. He assumes what he likes personally is universally and unbiasedly good and the true way for everyone.
b) His solution of forcing own personal preferences/choices onto other people (who supposedly don't know it better and are not worthy of their freedom of choice - "they need direction") combined with his preference to silence those who might disagree is not only wong, but actually a quite dangerous way of thinking.
a) His basic premise is based on a big fat fallacy. He is mind projecting like no tomorrow. He assumes what he likes personally is universally and unbiasedly good and the true way for everyone.
b) His solution of forcing own personal preferences/choices onto other people (who supposedly don't know it better and are not worthy of their freedom of choice - "they need direction") combined with his preference to silence those who might disagree is not only wong, but actually a quite dangerous way of thinking.
I suppose you could argue companies do the exact same thing even though money is their main motivation. They try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know whats best. In many instances these things can harm your body like bad substances in our food or cloths. Microsoft recently tried to force people to convert to tablets with Windows 8 and play games on the XBox. Apple always tries to push it's locked down ideas on people trying to control what they use their computers/tablets for.
Give us a GOOD western open world sandbox without zoning, phasing or looking for group tools. Medium graphics so it will play on most computers ( not consoles ) and concentrate on rich game play instead of looks.........No " Age Of Conan " crap
Give us the tools needed to find others for like minded content so players can work together and make friends on a server. No mega servers, no mega nothing......Also make the game hard !
Give us open world PvP like Blizzard did Wayyyy back in 2004.
Don't tell us where everything is before launch as a marketing tool. Let us find it ourselves and teach each other. Sure there will be " how to play " Youtubes soon after but still leave us alone.
Most of all NO F2P OR CASH GRABS AT ALL !........$60 for the game $15 a month.
Important :
I would make a poll for this post, but the FREE PLAYERS here would vote no way............And I would guess most here on this site are FREE PLAYERS.
As it stands, Off-line games are getting better and mmos are going down hill fast.
Sure recipe for company NOT to get my money. :-) I only fully agree on "Most of all NO F2P OR CASH GRABS AT ALL !........$60 for the game $15 a month.".
I think the developer of @delete5230';s dream game would fail miserably... It would be a very nice game though.
Well, the developers don't develop freemium games because they like it. They do that because they failed to monetize the game with other methods...
1) The audience for freemium games is huge, everyone can check it out, create a character and play for a while
2) the game feels alive, everyone talks about it
3) some people pay because they like the game and some of the "free players" get involved in the game after playing for free for a long time, and start spending the money
4) some people spend huge amounts of money, like $10 000+ to "be the best", and thats huge source of income for developers
It would be better if there was no freemium (and no piracy), but the reality is different. The developers must adjust to the audience.
Furry Quest Online - New Independent MMORPG comming soon! See more at http://www.vaktu.com
Give us a GOOD western open world sandbox without zoning, phasing or looking for group tools. Medium graphics so it will play on most computers ( not consoles ) and concentrate on rich game play instead of looks.........No " Age Of Conan " crap
Give us the tools needed to find others for like minded content so players can work together and make friends on a server. No mega servers, no mega nothing......Also make the game hard !
Give us open world PvP like Blizzard did Wayyyy back in 2004.
Don't tell us where everything is before launch as a marketing tool. Let us find it ourselves and teach each other. Sure there will be " how to play " Youtubes soon after but still leave us alone.
Most of all NO F2P OR CASH GRABS AT ALL !........$60 for the game $15 a month.
Important :
I would make a poll for this post, but the FREE PLAYERS here would vote no way............And I would guess most here on this site are FREE PLAYERS.
As it stands, Off-line games are getting better and mmos are going down hill fast.
Not my ideal game but sounds better than 95% of the stuff released in the past decade.
Originally posted by Magiknight The OP wants a good game. Most people enjoy mediocre games. Sad world...
Games are a form of entertainment, thus a game "most people enjoy" is basically by definition a better game for the majority than the game the OP is proposing, which obviously less people would enjoy. Otherwise it would already be "a game most people enjoy" itself.
From the majority's viewpoint OP's game is "worse". Taste is a subjective thing, only because OP likes it doesn't mean others do too.
He can't seriously propose to force his own taste/preferences onto the majority (even if they don't want it) just because they supposedly "don't know what's good for them". We all know how dangerous this way of thinking can be.
OP's specific wish game may be the best game FOR HIM, and for the niche audience he is in. No problem at all with that.
In any case, people have to understand that devs working on big budget games will prefer targeting the majority, for obvious reasons.
On the other hand, a smaller budget game will be more likely to target a niche (hopefully yours/OP's), to avoid the saturated main market space. So there is hope.
Originally posted by Magiknight The OP wants a good game. Most people enjoy mediocre games. Sad world...
nah .. what is sad is that the OP (and may be you too) thinks that everyone should like the same game as he does, and does not understand that "good" is subjective.
a) His basic premise is based on a big fat fallacy. He is mind projecting like no tomorrow. He assumes what he likes personally is universally and unbiasedly good and the true way for everyone.
b) His solution of forcing own personal preferences/choices onto other people (who supposedly don't know it better and are not worthy of their freedom of choice - "they need direction") combined with his preference to silence those who might disagree is not only wong, but actually a quite dangerous way of thinking.
I suppose you could argue companies do the exact same thing even though money is their main motivation. They try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know whats best. In many instances these things can harm your body like bad substances in our food or cloths. Microsoft recently tried to force people to convert to tablets with Windows 8 and play games on the XBox. Apple always tries to push it's locked down ideas on people trying to control what they use their computers/tablets for.
Scenario A) Game developers try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know what's best.
Scenario Game developers use history and data to see what people already want to spend their money on and create their variation on existing, profitable examples.
To me, the latter seems far more likely.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
a) His basic premise is based on a big fat fallacy. He is mind projecting like no tomorrow. He assumes what he likes personally is universally and unbiasedly good and the true way for everyone.
b) His solution of forcing own personal preferences/choices onto other people (who supposedly don't know it better and are not worthy of their freedom of choice - "they need direction") combined with his preference to silence those who might disagree is not only wong, but actually a quite dangerous way of thinking.
I suppose you could argue companies do the exact same thing even though money is their main motivation. They try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know whats best. In many instances these things can harm your body like bad substances in our food or cloths. Microsoft recently tried to force people to convert to tablets with Windows 8 and play games on the XBox. Apple always tries to push it's locked down ideas on people trying to control what they use their computers/tablets for.
Scenario A) Game developers try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know what's best.
Scenario Game developers use history and data to see what people already want to spend their money on and create their variation on existing, profitable examples.
To me, the latter seems far more likely.
You are missing something with this argument, game developers are doing both A and B. When they look at 'data to see what people want', they are not always looking at data from those playing MMO's. The post WoW change to making MMOs more friendly to those who play solo games in particular console players was not looking at MMO player data. The casino gameplay of the last few years has come from looking at what smartphone gamers like and bringing that into MMOs.
Looking outside of MMOs and bringing in gameplay from other areas of gaming is far more A than B. The problem for existing MMO players comes when the gameplay being introduced is antithetical to existing gameplay. We have seen plenty of that over the years, to the extent that MMOs are not the games they were ten even five years ago.
So what we have seen over time is a combination of looking to MMO players for what they like and forcing gameplay on them.
Originally posted by Magiknight The OP wants a good game. Most people enjoy mediocre games. Sad world...
Games are a form of entertainment, thus a game "most people enjoy" is basically by definition a better game for the majority than the game the OP is proposing, which obviously less people would enjoy. Otherwise it would already be "a game most people enjoy" itself.
From the majority's viewpoint OP's game is "worse". Taste is a subjective thing, only because OP likes it doesn't mean others do too.
He can't seriously propose to force his own taste/preferences onto the majority (even if they don't want it) just because they supposedly "don't know what's good for them". We all know how dangerous this way of thinking can be.
Most people "enjoy" crap games, because theres nothing better on the market. They dont know what they like, because devs keep feeding them with quest grinding solo games since ten years. They dont have their preferences, because they didnt try anything else.
Most people "enjoy" crap games, because theres nothing better on the market. They dont know what they like, because devs keep feeding them with quest grinding solo games since ten years. They dont have their preferences, because they didnt try anything else.
I think I saw this post from the 'console war' thread; 'Why can't you just like PS4 / Xbox / PC / Genesis / SNES / Wii / Atari / Cup with strings?!'
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Most people "enjoy" crap games, because theres nothing better on the market. They dont know what they like, because devs keep feeding them with quest grinding solo games since ten years. They dont have their preferences, because they didnt try anything else.
I think I saw this post from the 'console war' thread; 'Why can't you just like PS4 / Xbox / PC / Genesis / SNES / Wii / Atari / Cup with strings?!'
Cool........zzax got my point.
People play what they are handed and THINK its the best way.
200 years ago horses were it. If you dident have one you were nothing. A little hint cars are better, they just dident know about them. If anything at least you stay warm in a car
Somehow we went back to horses because somehow they are more profitable for the horse sellers. We need someone to make a car.
Themeparks are easier to make than sandboxes so you probably aren't going to get what you want just yet. The genre is moving in that direction and it is being aided by better procedural content and AI. We'll get there eventually.
Most people "enjoy" crap games, because theres nothing better on the market. They dont know what they like, because devs keep feeding them with quest grinding solo games since ten years. They dont have their preferences, because they didnt try anything else.
nah .. they have tried mmorpgs and MOBAs, and many choose MOBAs. Many choose FPSes. There are plenty of choices.
You don't like those games do not make them crap. In fact, it shows that you are intolerant of others' preferences more than anything else.
Themeparks are easier to make than sandboxes so you probably aren't going to get what you want just yet. The genre is moving in that direction and it is being aided by better procedural content and AI. We'll get there eventually.
It is not about "easier" to make. The tech to make virtual worlds go back to UO & EQ.
It is about customer preferences. The genre is moving in the direction of MOBAs, instanced games, and other single player/MMO hybrid.
There are certainly some tries in sandbox, but aside from EQN, there are few AAA tries, and i doubt that will start a new trend, and time will tell.
The developers and publishers do not know what is good for us either.....they keep forcing WoW clones down our throats.
Might as well be network television forcing us to watch their crap.
I'm not sure what you mean by WoW clones. Actually, it only goes to show that we're not really all that good at differentiating between games when we say that things are a "WoW Clone". We might as well say that every game is a WoW Clone. DA:I is such a WoW Clone because it's a fantasy game.
Comments
you say players need direction, so you want them to play a sandbox? A type of game that is intentionally directionless as a selling point?
Well, probably because their salaries would also have gone up due to inflation.
Considering that $60.00 in 1913 is over $1,000.00 today.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
not that hard ... plenty of fun (to me) cash shop games .. marvel heroes, PoE, warframe ....
heck .. couple of puzzle games on iOS too (though not candy crush).
Well, the OP is, in a way, correct here.
I'd say most players of the current generation do not know what they want.
This is because gaming has become immensely popular over the last decade, and many of the newcomers do not know what to expect of gaming.
Greedy companies have been sure to take advantage of that in form of Cash Shops, Day-1 DLCs, Early Access, preorder bonuses etc.
If these people (who now form the majority of gamers) had played older games, they'd expect a whole different kind of treatment & respect from developers, and products that are focused on quality instead of "how to get most $$$ out of consumers".
Just my thoughts.
I have played older games (heck i started gaming with a Apple II+) and i don't see a problem with today's gaming business.
As long as I can find fun games to play, i don't see a problem. The motivation of devs does not concern me, if they can provide a fun game.
If not, i can always go somewhere else. It is good that there are so many entertainment choices.
I disagree.
a) His basic premise is based on a big fat fallacy. He is mind projecting like no tomorrow. He assumes what he likes personally is universally and unbiasedly good and the true way for everyone.
b) His solution of forcing own personal preferences/choices onto other people (who supposedly don't know it better and are not worthy of their freedom of choice - "they need direction") combined with his preference to silence those who might disagree is not only wong, but actually a quite dangerous way of thinking.
I suppose you could argue companies do the exact same thing even though money is their main motivation. They try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know whats best. In many instances these things can harm your body like bad substances in our food or cloths. Microsoft recently tried to force people to convert to tablets with Windows 8 and play games on the XBox. Apple always tries to push it's locked down ideas on people trying to control what they use their computers/tablets for.
Sure recipe for company NOT to get my money. :-) I only fully agree on "Most of all NO F2P OR CASH GRABS AT ALL !........$60 for the game $15 a month.".
I think the developer of @delete5230';s dream game would fail miserably... It would be a very nice game though.
Well, the developers don't develop freemium games because they like it. They do that because they failed to monetize the game with other methods...
1) The audience for freemium games is huge, everyone can check it out, create a character and play for a while
2) the game feels alive, everyone talks about it
3) some people pay because they like the game and some of the "free players" get involved in the game after playing for free for a long time, and start spending the money
4) some people spend huge amounts of money, like $10 000+ to "be the best", and thats huge source of income for developers
It would be better if there was no freemium (and no piracy), but the reality is different. The developers must adjust to the audience.
Furry Quest Online - New Independent MMORPG comming soon! See more at http://www.vaktu.com
Not my ideal game but sounds better than 95% of the stuff released in the past decade.
Games are a form of entertainment, thus a game "most people enjoy" is basically by definition a better game for the majority than the game the OP is proposing, which obviously less people would enjoy. Otherwise it would already be "a game most people enjoy" itself.
From the majority's viewpoint OP's game is "worse". Taste is a subjective thing, only because OP likes it doesn't mean others do too.
He can't seriously propose to force his own taste/preferences onto the majority (even if they don't want it) just because they supposedly "don't know what's good for them". We all know how dangerous this way of thinking can be.
OP's specific wish game may be the best game FOR HIM, and for the niche audience he is in. No problem at all with that.
In any case, people have to understand that devs working on big budget games will prefer targeting the majority, for obvious reasons.
On the other hand, a smaller budget game will be more likely to target a niche (hopefully yours/OP's), to avoid the saturated main market space. So there is hope.
nah .. what is sad is that the OP (and may be you too) thinks that everyone should like the same game as he does, and does not understand that "good" is subjective.
Scenario A) Game developers try to force their ideas on you and tell you they know what's best.
Scenario
Game developers use history and data to see what people already want to spend their money on and create their variation on existing, profitable examples.
To me, the latter seems far more likely.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I think you might be surprised had you done that poll OP, many on here don't think new MMO's are amazing just because they are in a nice gift wrapper.
You are missing something with this argument, game developers are doing both A and B. When they look at 'data to see what people want', they are not always looking at data from those playing MMO's. The post WoW change to making MMOs more friendly to those who play solo games in particular console players was not looking at MMO player data. The casino gameplay of the last few years has come from looking at what smartphone gamers like and bringing that into MMOs.
Looking outside of MMOs and bringing in gameplay from other areas of gaming is far more A than B. The problem for existing MMO players comes when the gameplay being introduced is antithetical to existing gameplay. We have seen plenty of that over the years, to the extent that MMOs are not the games they were ten even five years ago.
So what we have seen over time is a combination of looking to MMO players for what they like and forcing gameplay on them.
Most people "enjoy" crap games, because theres nothing better on the market. They dont know what they like, because devs keep feeding them with quest grinding solo games since ten years. They dont have their preferences, because they didnt try anything else.
I think I saw this post from the 'console war' thread; 'Why can't you just like PS4 / Xbox / PC / Genesis / SNES / Wii / Atari / Cup with strings?!'
It shows what PvP games are really all about, and no, it's not about more realism and immersion. It's about cowards hiding behind a screen to they can bully other defenseless players without any risk of direct retaliation like there would be if they acted like asshats in "real life". -Jean-Luc_Picard
Life itself is a game. So why shouldn't your game be ruined? - justmemyselfandi
Cool........zzax got my point.
People play what they are handed and THINK its the best way.
200 years ago horses were it. If you dident have one you were nothing. A little hint cars are better, they just dident know about them. If anything at least you stay warm in a car
Somehow we went back to horses because somehow they are more profitable for the horse sellers. We need someone to make a car.
Below this line is for developers
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
You can make a lot of money with a western sandbox open world mmo built around a community.
Themeparks are easier to make than sandboxes so you probably aren't going to get what you want just yet. The genre is moving in that direction and it is being aided by better procedural content and AI. We'll get there eventually.
nah .. they have tried mmorpgs and MOBAs, and many choose MOBAs. Many choose FPSes. There are plenty of choices.
You don't like those games do not make them crap. In fact, it shows that you are intolerant of others' preferences more than anything else.
It is not about "easier" to make. The tech to make virtual worlds go back to UO & EQ.
It is about customer preferences. The genre is moving in the direction of MOBAs, instanced games, and other single player/MMO hybrid.
There are certainly some tries in sandbox, but aside from EQN, there are few AAA tries, and i doubt that will start a new trend, and time will tell.
The developers and publishers do not know what is good for us either.....they keep forcing WoW clones down our throats.
Might as well be network television forcing us to watch their crap.
I'm not sure what you mean by WoW clones. Actually, it only goes to show that we're not really all that good at differentiating between games when we say that things are a "WoW Clone". We might as well say that every game is a WoW Clone. DA:I is such a WoW Clone because it's a fantasy game.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------