Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Classic vs. New Model MMORPG
comitron
Member UncommonPosts: 37
I have a hard time logging in anymore on any of the current MMORPG offerings. This is unfortunate as this used to be my favorite genre. At some point these social engineered games turned into more zerg than social, and lost the "it" factor. Now days, I log into <insert any MMORPG game> and probably solo. If I do get a PUG, it is more often than not, everyone spamming their abilities, running through content as fast as possible and no one is even talking/chatting. The content in itself has became more of a means to an end, rather than an enjoyable experience. I think personally this is because the devs are trying to make these games more accessible by creating classes with abilities that can tank/dps/heal at the same time. Also with no death penalty system, if you die is usually better/faster to just release and run back than to actually expect a healer to heal/resurrect you.
... I want a game with deep character customization, and game play where you have to work together in order to accomplish your goal (which should be more than just getting to the boss mob, killing ..rinse/repeat)
Anyone have a suggestion?
... I want a game with deep character customization, and game play where you have to work together in order to accomplish your goal (which should be more than just getting to the boss mob, killing ..rinse/repeat)
Anyone have a suggestion?
Comments
That's why MMO eat dirt while MOBA become flying pig .
Look at most success online game , most them are true multiplayer with forced grouping .
might be forced grouping but with progress in very short bursts....something MMORPG's fail at.
Don't Starve Together has been the best attempt so far, as it offers many layers of PVE challenges at once (you must deal with hunger while dealing with darkness, hitpoints, heat, and other challenges). But the shortcoming was that survival was measured in Game Days, and when you got good enough at the game your survival length was only limited by how many concurrent hours you were able to keep playing. So the next step beyond DST would be to dynamically send challenges at the player faster and faster relative to their success at challenges (like Geometry Wars 2 did), and then measure players' survival skill as a measure of how many and/or how difficult those challenges were (similar to score in Geometry Wars 2; you could last a very long time if you wanted, but you weren't being judged on survival duration but instead based on how much difficulty you could successfully wade through).
But the ill fit of Survival as applied to longer-form Builder games doesn't mean those games can't still be enjoyable. It just means that a lot of games with that tag aren't really much about Survival.
Builders don't work well as MMOs because the point of the game is changing the game world (reshaping terrain, building a base, etc) and the more players you share that with the less control you'll actually have individually. Survival games' brutal shortness probably works best with a smaller sweet spot of players, but in this case it doesn't necessarily prevent larger-scale servers (in fact recently someone wondered about whether a Sword Art Online-inspired MMO could work and my suggestion was rolling 200-player survival servers with permadeath where you queued into them a bit like a long-form World of Tanks match, got as far as you could, earned some long-form progression, but inevitably died.) Still, smaller servers means queues are faster and you get playing quicker, and while I'd be curious to see someone else try that SAO game, I wouldn't do it myself -- I'd make a non-MMO like DST instead most likely.
In reply to the original post, I think the real problem with modern MMORPGs is failing to at least hit the bar WOW hit in terms of core gameplay mechanics. The grouping structure and tendency to want to efficiently do things quickly (rather than sit on our thumbs in a collective group wasting time) isn't a sticking point at all for me.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
PS: Should say that I agree with the OP. However, "help" with rats, wolves, skeletons, and such is silly, but "help" with Orc Camps, dungeons, and bosses is quite in line with what I look for.
VG
@VestigeGamer: Yeah, i definitely hate those, "kill 10 rat/bat" quests. To your point.. i don't see that being even a valid quest. The world should have pesky rats/spiders/bats/snakes etc to make the world feel alive. Perhaps even need drops from them as components to crafting. When it comes to an event though.. dungeon crawling or getting jumped by a band of bandits on the way to/from someplace, that's when the good proper game content starts. And what i hate almost more than anything is for instance BDO.. 1,0000 imps are standing in a field.. ridiculous!
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The OLD school model had three forms,Asian and Namerican and JPN.SO nothing has changed,ity is still the same only adding FREE to play models which are just cheaper games hoping to entice gamers via the free/fake entrance.
Blizzard came along and actually copied the KR model which EVERYONE was insulting at the time,so i find it hilarious everyone jumped on the Wow bandwagon after cutting up KR designs.
Personally i have always known what type of game i wanted and spent years seeking it out and it is pretty much the JPN design.
KR tends to be flashy,unrealistic fast,lousy animations and spam spam spam.
JPN tends to be much slower,often turn based.
NAm tends to be or was your UO and EQ1 and AO a tad different than both JPN and KR.
Sadly there tends to be only one model and that is the cheap shotty F2p model a very sketchy model.Pretty much your MU online KR type model that was around a long time ago.
We also see NEW genres popping up but every single one of them has the same idea>>>>CHEAP simple budget game.Nobody is making an aggressive Triple A game full of mechanics and tech and graphics and depth.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
and make survival as a whole too easy/simple. So instead of personal survival maybe it becomes a caravan community or village community survival.
If only AI in games were far more advanced, there could be so many cool things that could happen. You could have a Monster Eco system that populates migrates or hunts/feeds on players, a game world of shifting AI driven factions that pits human players against each other or maybe rewarding for betrayal, or AI mobs with human like behaviors but still smart enough to "let the player win".
Here's a short write up about it at Kotaku http://kotaku.com/playing-d-d-online-is-about-to-get-easier-1784473155
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
"Go play private servers." Been there done that. Got the disappointment. Empty starter zones. Empty level 10-40 zones. Maybe even empty zones above those. A handful (maybe 100+ simultaneous) of players all in the upper levels does not promote new players well.
VG
I'm more than ready for something genuinely new.
That's actually my point here. That old games aren't inherently better than new games.
What we need is a new TAKE on the genre.
That said, I do think you can appeal wide without compromising anything. Just as long as your vision is intact. Games like the original WoW or movies like Fellowship of the Ring aren't inherently worse than some niché Tarkovsky art film or budget grognard wargame.
The key is for developers to focus on making the best game they possibly can, based on THEIR vision. If they have the talent and knowledge, the rest will take care of itself.
But whether something appeals to a wide or narrow audience - isn't necessarily about the degree of compromise.
Holy cow, that BDO example is scarey. But some say, "BDO is bestest MMO evah!"
VG
Just in case people think this isn't true. There were 1/3rd the people on the internet when EQ had 500k subscribers that are online today, and most new mmos can't even retain those numbers.
There was a time, however, in the past when I was a ranger hunting orcs in a mist covered forest, hearing rumors of an ancient fortress somewhere in the murk.
People think that the difference between old games and new is mainly about game mechanics. But I think it's more the difference between suspension of disbelief/immersion and the lack of it.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests