All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out. So the potential WAS their.
If Vanguard really had such a "huge" following, they wouldn't have been forced to shut it down, it would still be running as a commercially very successful game.
As we all know an mmorpg gets only one chance, just one.
Regardless of a huge bad chain of events, sadly it was doomed. No chance of recovery without a large windfall of surprise money that no one in their right mind would supply at that point of no return.
Final fantasy got a second chance and are doing very well. ESO was terrible at launch and for awhile was a ghost town and has since recovered well. So I don't know about the just one chance. Even Secret World evolved into Secret World Legends and to my surprise is still running and both games have not had to shut down.
Games that adapt best to the majority of players needs survive and continue, games that resist change because in their minds players still want what they offer and discover they don't, come to an end.
Two of those three recovered because their publishers had deep pockets and could afford to spend money to fix, something Vanguard lacked.
SOE never had any real incentive to do more than try and recover their purchase, which once achieved they called it a day.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?
is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.
The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.
With so little innovation about what MMOs can do, looking to the past to see what has been lost seems reasonable to do. You talk about their being "so little options", you seem to forget that so many things that old MMOs have were dropped. Some call that streamlining, I call it a move to easymode, if you remove features and complexity what else is it?
Features which were standard like roleplaying ones, player housing, guild housing, player trading economies and gameplay like raids and the need to group even occasionally are now optional. I am not saying they are all must haves but what have we got in return for what we lost? Better graphics and action (don't get me started) combat...we have hardly gained anything.
All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out. So the potential WAS their.
If Vanguard really had such a "huge" following, they wouldn't have been forced to shut it down, it would still be running as a commercially very successful game.
Few things but first off on this comment. Vanguard had a huge following for the time during alpha and beta and I was one of those early alpha and then beta testers. Vanguard was shaping up to be a great game through alpha and then in earlier beta. It still needed maybe 6 months but Sigil lost their publisher who pulled out and so did the money and the only ones they could get was SoE. During the talks SoE said they would offer some advice but mostly let Sigil devs do their thing accepting the timelime. Within a couple weeks though SoE came back saying they couldn't wait and either Sigil was going to rush nearly right off into open beta for a month and then release or SoE would pull out. Sigil was left with no choice but to allow SoE devs to *assist* in rushing the game out 6 months before it should have been with a lot of content still empty and no real content for those who reach max level. Come release many of us beta players and some new players reached max level in adv and crafting like I did relatively quick and ran out of things to do. I was a bard as my main and could solo most of top level range boss's that would take a group if they didn't know how. Most of us built our houses and maxed everything and quit before they even released any semblence of endgame content. Add in many of the zones were barely populated as planned. This is why Vanguard died quick, all because of SoE and it was probably SoE's biggest failure ever. Vanguard never could recover.
Now ontop the actual topic. Classic old school games (EQ, UO, DAoC) and the like were NOT a testing ground for a good model. They were games designed by gamer geeks turned Devs to make a great fun game, they were NOT about making money and becoming filthy rich. Old game makers didn't give a damn about hitting it rich but instead cared about making an awesome game people loved and enough to call it a decent job. This is the major thing that changed over the years as all the old gamer geeks turned devs vanished and replaced by big publishers whose goal was making big money instead of a knockout killer game. Further the oldest games like EQ, UO, and DAoC weren't even themeparks imo as they allowed you to follow your own path and create your own adventure in essence YOU created your own quests but instead of being rewarded at some npc with some coin you were rewarded as an adventure and fun. It wasn't until WoW that they really started trying to direct players in a specific path which only grew from being a tiny overgrown path into the quest superway that you virtually HAD to follow.
I recall betaing Vanguard very early. I was disturbed by the performance but naively thought it would improve. Then all the shenanigans including car park firing and SOE comes in.
Game launches and I buy it and to may utter dismay the performance is still bad. I am so upset because the game is so lovely. I recall just standing on top of that hill with that magnificent vista of Khal below.
I played all the while hoping things would improve. The game didn't do well even the initial numbers that bought the game were not very high. I think most people who betaed realised the horrible state it was in.
By the time SOE fixed some of the more glaring issues it was woefully too late.
You cannot really do a post mortem of Vanguard and pinpoint that its difficulty or old style gameplay was the reason people enjoyed or left the game, simply because the technical difficulties and performance of the game was so dreadful even its staunchest supporters fell aside silenced by their own frustration.
I would like a chance to play a game like Everquest again but I doubt the difficulty will really have any impact on me , not after 19 years of playing other games. I will have fun though reliving my memories.
Old school term still remains valid. The fact that old school games used to be played by nerds, first generation of gamers, escapes the most. Games are something different nowadays because everyone plays the games today. This is why they are watered down, simplified, shallow. There are still old school games out there, like Wurm Online or EVEO, but they are niche games appealing to 1% of gamer population. Games like fortnite, pubg etc appeal to most, which are not nerdie old school gamers but just "regular" folks who want to escape their dull lifes. Period.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
I have some projects lined up for the next few weeks. Thinking about jumping into Anarchy Online once things settle down.
AO is one of my favorite fall back games.
AO is a great fall back game, but it's probably the game most in need of a graphics overhaul. It's difficult to tell which way characters are facing. I can't seem to manage more than a week at a time before I give up on this.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I have some projects lined up for the next few weeks. Thinking about jumping into Anarchy Online once things settle down.
AO is one of my favorite fall back games.
AO is a great fall back game, but it's probably the game most in need of a graphics overhaul. It's difficult to tell which way characters are facing. I can't seem to manage more than a week at a time before I give up on this.
This type of stuff stops me from playing any "old" first generation games.
Their either: 1) Too old in function 2) modernized to the point they suck
I think a better approach might be to evolve newer style MMORPGs, which I feel is the road taken by ArcheAge, ESO, GW2 and BDO
Now some may not like the design changes made by these four, I don't but each has changes from the WOW model which I agree on which I'd rather see improved on, combined into a single game or perhaps taken back a notch.
Quests aren't evil, but quest driven progression is problematic.
Progression is an issue, endless new levels aren't sensible, and I think Zenimax has done the best job of the four to make the entire game world better.
I still prefer EVEs way of dealing with progression but it really is a different sort of game and it's system would not work in every design model.
I think Ashes has the best chance of succeeding as it seems they are trying to build a better ArcheAge which had some great design ideas but failed to execute in delivery due to badly managed monetization.
I backed CU back in the KSer, but I'm likely to not play, old school RVR non stop isn't anything I'm looking forward to, unless they decide to once again open a Red server.
Endlessly trading keeps has no appeal, I prefer actual territory control with consequences, a "reason to fight" if you will.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?
is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.
The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.
With so little innovation about what MMOs can do, looking to the past to see what has been lost seems reasonable to do. You talk about their being "so little options", you seem to forget that so many things that old MMOs have were dropped. Some call that streamlining, I call it a move to easymode, if you remove features and complexity what else is it?
Features which were standard like roleplaying ones, player housing, guild housing, player trading economies and gameplay like raids and the need to group even occasionally are now optional. I am not saying they are all must haves but what have we got in return for what we lost? Better graphics and action (don't get me started) combat...we have hardly gained anything.
Well... to be honest... Players that "disliked" the aforementioned "features" have rejoiced in these losses. Now they're the ones the publishers shoot for. :shrug:
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I recall betaing Vanguard very early. I was disturbed by the performance but naively thought it would improve. Then all the shenanigans including car park firing and SOE comes in.
I played all the while hoping things would improve. The game didn't do well even the initial numbers that bought the game were not very high. I think most people who betaed realised the horrible state it was in.
You cannot really do a post mortem of Vanguard and pinpoint that its difficulty or old style gameplay was the reason people enjoyed or left the game, simply because the technical difficulties and performance of the game was so dreadful even its staunchest supporters fell aside silenced by their own frustration.
Even though I don't agree with Delete's premise that regression is progression, I will say that while it was in development, Vanguard had a fair amount of followers keeping an eye on it.
But, as kitarad says, people who were following development/beta quickly learned how horrible the state of the game was. People knew well before launch that VG was a train-wreck. Even people who weren't in beta knew about it being in shambles, due to the beta players on forums(yes, there used to be other forums on the internet than this one!).
For instance, the Fires of Heaven guild had massive threads constantly talking about the state it was in, the fact that Brad never even showed up to the office, the bad programming, etc.
Point being, if VG had been a well-developed game, it likely would have kept the old-school type of game around and more developers interested in creating non-WoW mold games. VG, possibly, was to traditional MMOs what some theorize Star Citizen is possibly going to be to Kickstarter MMOs.
I'm certainly not saying it would have had millions of players, but it would have broken the 500k mark that EQ had set in its prime.
I know my friends and I gave up on the game before it ever launched. I never played it after beta, tbh. We all knew what the launch game was going to be like I think there's a large group of people who went the same route.
Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?
is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.
The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.
With so little innovation about what MMOs can do, looking to the past to see what has been lost seems reasonable to do. You talk about their being "so little options", you seem to forget that so many things that old MMOs have were dropped. Some call that streamlining, I call it a move to easymode, if you remove features and complexity what else is it?
Features which were standard like roleplaying ones, player housing, guild housing, player trading economies and gameplay like raids and the need to group even occasionally are now optional. I am not saying they are all must haves but what have we got in return for what we lost? Better graphics and action (don't get me started) combat...we have hardly gained anything.
Well... to be honest... Players that "disliked" the aforementioned "features" have rejoiced in these losses. Now they're the ones the publishers shoot for. :shrug:
Well if I am honest the only housing I thought was necessary was guild housing, player housing had some roleplay functionality but not much so I was never a great fan of it. But the point is what great features have most MMOs now got we never had before?
Everything has been chucked out so that developers can keep up with the graphics and gameplay style of solo player RPG's.
I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it.
Good point.
Not really, even if an older game is still around they play very differently, either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.
I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.
AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of. L2, a wasteland these days. The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.
Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.
I just think it was worth noting that right now a player can choose from:
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it.
Good point.
Not really, even if an older game is still around they play very differently, either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.
I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.
AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of. L2, a wasteland these days. The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.
Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.
I just think it was worth noting that right now a player can choose from:
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
Have the older MMOs not been changed so much that they have many similarities to the newer MMOs? So that scratches out 1.
Not sure the "opportunity" to play test a game was what I came into gaming for, so going to scratch out 4.
That leaves us with 2 and 3, nice to have choices but not as many as you seem to have.
I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it.
Good point.
Not really, even if an older game is still around they play very differently, either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.
I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.
AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of. L2, a wasteland these days. The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.
Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.
I just think it was worth noting that right now a player can choose from:
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
Have the older MMOs not been changed so much that they have many similarities to the newer MMOs? So that scratches out 1.
Not sure the "opportunity" to play test a game was what I came into gaming for, so going to scratch out 4.
That leaves us with 2 and 3, nice to have choices but not as many as you seem to have.
I'd say option 3 was the only real choice, however if a gamer doesn't care for their designs it means they are pretty much out of luck.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it.
Good point.
Not really, even if an older game is still around they play very differently, either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.
I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.
AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of. L2, a wasteland these days. The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.
Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.
I just think it was worth noting that right now a player can choose from:
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
Have the older MMOs not been changed so much that they have many similarities to the newer MMOs? So that scratches out 1.
Not sure the "opportunity" to play test a game was what I came into gaming for, so going to scratch out 4.
That leaves us with 2 and 3, nice to have choices but not as many as you seem to have.
I'd say option 3 was the only real choice, however if a gamer doesn't care for their designs it means they are pretty much out of luck.
Or they go back to EVE like I keep doing.
Wish I could get into the space drama. I have tried.
I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it.
Good point.
Not really, even if an older game is still around they play very differently, either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.
I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.
AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of. L2, a wasteland these days. The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.
Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.
I just think it was worth noting that right now a player can choose from:
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
Have the older MMOs not been changed so much that they have many similarities to the newer MMOs? So that scratches out 1.
Not sure the "opportunity" to play test a game was what I came into gaming for, so going to scratch out 4.
That leaves us with 2 and 3, nice to have choices but not as many as you seem to have.
I'd say option 3 was the only real choice, however if a gamer doesn't care for their designs it means they are pretty much out of luck.
Or they go back to EVE like I keep doing.
Wish I could get into the space drama. I have tried.
Well I havent either the past 2 years.. so I'm in the same boat.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Comments
SOE never had any real incentive to do more than try and recover their purchase, which once achieved they called it a day.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Features which were standard like roleplaying ones, player housing, guild housing, player trading economies and gameplay like raids and the need to group even occasionally are now optional. I am not saying they are all must haves but what have we got in return for what we lost? Better graphics and action (don't get me started) combat...we have hardly gained anything.
Now ontop the actual topic. Classic old school games (EQ, UO, DAoC) and the like were NOT a testing ground for a good model. They were games designed by gamer geeks turned Devs to make a great fun game, they were NOT about making money and becoming filthy rich. Old game makers didn't give a damn about hitting it rich but instead cared about making an awesome game people loved and enough to call it a decent job. This is the major thing that changed over the years as all the old gamer geeks turned devs vanished and replaced by big publishers whose goal was making big money instead of a knockout killer game. Further the oldest games like EQ, UO, and DAoC weren't even themeparks imo as they allowed you to follow your own path and create your own adventure in essence YOU created your own quests but instead of being rewarded at some npc with some coin you were rewarded as an adventure and fun. It wasn't until WoW that they really started trying to direct players in a specific path which only grew from being a tiny overgrown path into the quest superway that you virtually HAD to follow.
Game launches and I buy it and to may utter dismay the performance is still bad. I am so upset because the game is so lovely. I recall just standing on top of that hill with that magnificent vista of Khal below.
I played all the while hoping things would improve. The game didn't do well even the initial numbers that bought the game were not very high. I think most people who betaed realised the horrible state it was in.
By the time SOE fixed some of the more glaring issues it was woefully too late.
You cannot really do a post mortem of Vanguard and pinpoint that its difficulty or old style gameplay was the reason people enjoyed or left the game, simply because the technical difficulties and performance of the game was so dreadful even its staunchest supporters fell aside silenced by their own frustration.
I would like a chance to play a game like Everquest again but I doubt the difficulty will really have any impact on me , not after 19 years of playing other games. I will have fun though reliving my memories.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Their either:
1) Too old in function
2) modernized to the point they suck
Leaves many of us with nothin
Now some may not like the design changes made by these four, I don't but each has changes from the WOW model which I agree on which I'd rather see improved on, combined into a single game or perhaps taken back a notch.
Quests aren't evil, but quest driven progression is problematic.
Progression is an issue, endless new levels aren't sensible, and I think Zenimax has done the best job of the four to make the entire game world better.
I still prefer EVEs way of dealing with progression but it really is a different sort of game and it's system would not work in every design model.
I think Ashes has the best chance of succeeding as it seems they are trying to build a better ArcheAge which had some great design ideas but failed to execute in delivery due to badly managed monetization.
I backed CU back in the KSer, but I'm likely to not play, old school RVR non stop isn't anything I'm looking forward to, unless they decide to once again open a Red server.
Endlessly trading keeps has no appeal, I prefer actual territory control with consequences, a "reason to fight" if you will.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
But, as kitarad says, people who were following development/beta quickly learned how horrible the state of the game was. People knew well before launch that VG was a train-wreck.
Even people who weren't in beta knew about it being in shambles, due to the beta players on forums(yes, there used to be other forums on the internet than this one!).
For instance, the Fires of Heaven guild had massive threads constantly talking about the state it was in, the fact that Brad never even showed up to the office, the bad programming, etc.
Point being, if VG had been a well-developed game, it likely would have kept the old-school type of game around and more developers interested in creating non-WoW mold games. VG, possibly, was to traditional MMOs what some theorize Star Citizen is possibly going to be to Kickstarter MMOs.
I'm certainly not saying it would have had millions of players, but it would have broken the 500k mark that EQ had set in its prime.
I know my friends and I gave up on the game before it ever launched. I never played it after beta, tbh. We all knew what the launch game was going to be like
Everything has been chucked out so that developers can keep up with the graphics and gameplay style of solo player RPG's.
1. Some great older games that are still available to be played, albeit they are not as good as they used to be.
2. Some very good second generation games; e/g., EQ2 and WoW;
3. A slew of newer games; and
4. Opportunities to playtest a bunch of new games that are spiritual successors to classic games.
Are there problems with all of these? You betcha. But it's still nice to have choices.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Not sure the "opportunity" to play test a game was what I came into gaming for, so going to scratch out 4.
That leaves us with 2 and 3, nice to have choices but not as many as you seem to have.
Or they go back to EVE like I keep doing.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon