Well to the last poster.... You might be able to go blast stuff in those other games but at the same time your supporting shallow game design and very little effort by the developer.
Subscription games are also VERY few and of those you are likely to see a LOT more effort put into the game design.
I don't agree that MP is baked into most games,the premise is that it exists but not in fact.What we are actually seeing is ONLINE added into every game so that devs can force you to login and support their cash shop which is added into every game.
To me the latter makes me sick,adding in cash shops to shallow single player games.Even if you can join up with 1-2 other friends,we have always called that CO-OP and has existed already for years with NEVER the need for added cash shops.
Then to add a kicker to the argument,i can play the most skilled shooter on the planet "UT" "with friends"if so desired for FREE while your paying devs for Destiny or Anthem or GTA<<<cash shops love you.
That is all we have seen from GTA online here on this site is an advertisement supporting their cash shop,several of these articles...ahem adverts.Are we GAMING or is this the era of cash shops?
That last poster seems to not like mmorpgs anyway...... That guy shouldn't count.
It's like going to a NASCAR race and saying you like horse racing better.
I own and have played just about any western (and many asian) MMOs on the market today and keep playing Guild Wars 2 (solo) from time to time (on new episodes). But that doesn't stop me to callout shit when I see one. You might want to check that statement again.
About the cash shop argument ... MTX are everywhere, including MMOs, single player games you name it. As always, you can >>> choose <<< not to pay a dime in those games. As long as they are not P2W this is fine. I haven't spent a dime in Destiny (outside of DLCs) not in Overwatch (outside the box price) not in APEX legends, not in borderlands not in Anthem or anywhere else. I could care less about skins. Gameplay is what is important to me. And if a paywall is barring me from achieving something, I automatically blacklist that game. Funny enough, most MMOs have paygates now. Or wait ... it's not really a pay gate. It's a "timegated content" that you could overcome by opening your bloody wallet. Yeah, pass.
Today we are expected to accept games that release and are not really finished games for a couple of years after early access and accept "casino play" in place of game play. But you know what, when they release the graphics look as good as they are ever going to get, content and gameplay are just secondary concerns.
You couldn't be more right. Recently I downloaded Battlefield 4 because I liked the gameplay of CoD:MW but I'm not buying that also BF1 and BF5 sucks ass so I went with the closest denominator and poof, the game looks as if it is made from top to bottom to completely new with fresh new UI and high tickrate servers.
And it was a buggy mess at launch that didn't hold my interest for more than a week. It's actually fun now.
Thing A: Graphics are no substitute for good game design.
Thing B: In designing a MMOG, being able to reach a wide audience works toward one's favor. Lowering the bar in terms of minimum system requirements can be a good move.
In short, OP has a point. Going for graphics over game design basics is like pushing Scorcese films out of a theatre in favor of the MCU.
In an ideal world we'd have both, but if it's one or the other I'd prefer to play a well designed game with lots of other people.
I do enjoy a good walking simulator or other brief and pretty experience from time to time.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
I would be all for graphical improvements in all games as long as everything else kept up, but often times, it does not.
Resources are finite in game development. You have to pick and choose where your resources go. Bioware used to be king of the RPG where story reigned supreme. Then they switched to the open world format with the Frostbite engine which gives fantastic visuals, but is extremely difficult to work with when it comes to RPG's. For me, their games may look great, but since the focus has changed to more of a visual experience with story taking a backseat to everything else they have become a joke. You know it's bad when a Ubisoft game does a better story than Bioware has lately (personal opinion).
In an mmo or any story driven game, I would rather the story and mechanics be good and visuals be mediocre.
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
I always thought it was corporate greed that did us in. The games are expensive to make because tech and service is expensive (corporate greed) and because the higher ups take most of the money for themselves instead of putting it into the games. That’s my perspective anyhow.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The rest of the industry advanced and improved. The MMORPG genre did not. It's really that simple.
Indeed, the only thing that improved in the mmorpg genre is the monetization..now they can nickle and dime us hella more than they used to and for those about to say so...... it not cause of improved gfx/visuals.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
I think the basic problem with the genre is that the graphics haven't kept up with other genres. This is causing lack of interest from newer players (of all ages) that are already accustomed to better graphics. The cost and difficulty *per unit* are the same for MMORPGs and FPSs. Yet, FPS games are near the bleeding edge, while most MMORPGs are far from that same standard. Yes, MMORPGs have a larger requirement for graphic elements, but they've not attempted to keep up.
The MMORPG developers take the approach that all elements of the game need to have the same quality. Instead, why not a stratified approach, focusing on high quality elements for characters and mobs (the things that are of most interest in most games) and settling for lesser quality for background elements, such as buildings or landscapes or UIs? Even venerable old EQ1 tried on a couple of occasions to rejuvenate the game by reworking some of the artwork (bats, skeletons, some NPC models, zones, trees, etc).
I don't know about anyone else, but I turn off all the glitzy graphics features. I don't need weeds or grass or super detailed shadows or water effects. This is where I think that the development costs of MMORPGs could be streamlined. These graphics effects are good for screen shots, but that isn't something I need to see when I play. To me, the graphics in North Qeynos and Qeynos Hills are just as effective as Oceangreen Village and Oceangreen Hills and far less complex. Less complexity generally leads to cheaper and faster development.
So, what is holding back the industry is the idea that graphics and animations need to be photorealistic. Both the developers and customers seem to have this expectation. That is driving the cost and time for development.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I think the OP is suggesting that improved graphics replaced content. I don't know that it did.
The people that helped popularize MMO(RPGs) were the gamers that started with MUDs and isometric games. MMO(RPGs) were the natural evolution of those games. Once someone saw that money could be made with MMO(RPGs) they were catered towards the masses which preferred a less social, more solo friendly environment. 99% of the most recent MMO(RPGs) could be re-released as a single player/multi-player RPG with zero changes to the game.
So, the problem isn't that they sacrificed a good story line and content with improved graphics. The problem is they never had a good story line and content from the beginning.
Part of my enjoyment of mmorpgs is seeing the artistry of how landscapes, oceans, sunsets and sunrises, castles, towns, and cities are all depicted. I would never want to give that up, and I will never regret experiencing it.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Tell me, why would I grind my ass off in a MMO, when I can go blast some shit in Destiny or Anthem with friends?
Because I hate shooters and mobas. It is always the same old stuff with a different skin. I prefer an MMO that has a "long game" where I can develop a truly meaningful character and make friends to hang out with... rather than the single serving friends and 9 year olds dropping the F-bomb on voice chat in popular multi player games.
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Because I hate shooters and mobas. It is always the same old stuff with a different skin. I prefer an MMO that has a "long game" where I can develop a truly meaningful character and make friends to hang out with... rather than the single serving friends and 9 year olds dropping the F-bomb on voice chat in popular multi player games.
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
I played Defiance briefly when it launched and it seemed like one to me too. But after that and PS I can't think of any others.
I think a lot of people look at things that WOW added to MMOs that weren't MMO features - instant teleport dungeons and instanced PVP arenas - things that were imported into MMOs from FPS games, and post-WOW think that if an online game has those things and a lot of people can be in a lobby queue somewhere waiting for their PUG to form they are MMOs.
That's how this site and Massively end up calling Path of Exile and MMO.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
You say PS is a MMOFPS then say you don't see it as a MMO. Typo? Do you not see it as a RPG?
Regardless, what makes PS different from something you do consider a MMO(RPG)? I don't "role play" in any MMO, so I don't see any MMO(RPG) as an actual RPG. Yet, to try and separate one from the other due to my personal take on the genre, just to try and prove some ridiculous point, is silly.
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
You say PS is a MMOFPS then say you don't see it as a MMO. Typo? Do you not see it as a RPG?
Regardless, what makes PS different from something you do consider a MMO(RPG)? I don't "role play" in any MMO, so I don't see any MMO(RPG) as an actual RPG. Yet, to try and separate one from the other due to my personal take on the genre, just to try and prove some ridiculous point, is silly.
There are some gaming genres which are subsets/bracnches of the MMO genre, MMOFPS is one of the easiest to identify. I see it more as trying to establish clarity, do you get more information from calling a game a MMO or a MMOFPS? The problem is that there are not that many appellations that gamers will immediately identify. The other side of this is we endlessly go on about such definitions, it is a staple of the forums, welcome to the party.
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
I played Defiance briefly when it launched and it seemed like one to me too. But after that and PS I can't think of any others.
destiny 1 / 2
Shared world shooter is what those are called. If you want handy dandy initials for that genre you'd have to invent one (SWS? just a thought...) not borrow something that means something else and mislabel it with it.
Saying those are massively multiplayer is the same as saying that every human male on the planet has a massive dick.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
The genre started dying off when PVE was mixed with PVP. Trying to cater to both sides will NEVER WORK. I have stated this from day1...you CANNOT have PVP with PVE ...simple as that!
Laugh at those old fools, they clearly know nothing about movies, right?
...can't speak for what they know but can tell you certainly don't know what fallacious appeal to authority is.
What free2play said was spot on.
MMO market is currently bigger than "ever" - in revenue, titles, player counts.
Those who say 'MMO market is dead' need to get their heads out if their arses...
OP said mmorpgs
You are saying MMOs
2 different things
Planetside is a MMO, Defiance is a MMO but neither is a mmorpg,
WoW, Rift, Everquest are mmorpgs - a very specific genre
Weak sauce. People have been saying MMO to mean MMORPG forever. Just how many massively multiplayer games have there even been that weren't also RPGs anyway? 2? 3?
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
Planetside is a MMOFPS, no idea if Defiance deserves that appellation; PS is a favourite of mine, I just don't play it think this is a MMO.
I played Defiance briefly when it launched and it seemed like one to me too. But after that and PS I can't think of any others.
destiny 1 / 2
Shared world shooter is what those are called. If you want handy dandy initials for that genre you'd have to invent one (SWS? just a thought...) not borrow something that means something else and mislabel it with it.
Saying those are massively multiplayer is the same as saying that every human male on the planet has a massive dick.
tomato , tumato.
Exactly:
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What killed off mmorpgs was the gold rush the entire gaming industry had in response to the success of WoW. Instead of learning that you cant lift the whole design and systems, with cheap quick development and expect to match or surpass the profit of the most popular MMO the world had ever seen, developers took it as "mmorpgs are a worthless waste of time" and abandoned it for greener pastures like mxt mobile markets.
WoW was one the weakest mmorpgs in terms of "enhanced graphics" when it was released. Blizzard was confidant in their design talent and vision and to this day they have a huge playerbase that just doesnt care that it looks like cardboard. The "enhanced graphics" push you speak of was entirely developer based. They marketed graphics because they had no amazing ideas for gameplay and making something prettier is a quick, shallow way to get attention in ANY market.
Even Fortnite, that looks like a low poly playground, surpassed PUBG with its more realistic graphics. Epic did it thanks to having a design aesthetic that was more appealing to a wider audience and could be handled on a wider range of systems, like WoW.
The genre started dying off when PVE was mixed with PVP. Trying to cater to both sides will NEVER WORK. I have stated this from day1...you CANNOT have PVP with PVE ...simple as that!
So, it started dying off at the same moment the genre was born? If you say so....
On topic, improvements in graphics are indeed a contributary factor in the stagnation of the MMORPG genre.
Numerous game devs have come out and said exactly that. Many have told us that it is simply impossible to sell a game based on gameplay. It is pretty much only possible for a game to sell well if you are able to advertise good looking / pretty scenes. You can't put deep gameplay mechanics on a poster or in a 30second TV ad, but you can put some awesome graphics in there.
MMOs get hit with a double-whammy on the graphics front though. Not only is it expensive to develop awesome graphics which leaves less time/money for other things, but the technical difficulties of processing graphics increase with more and more players. In a massively multiplayer game, with the potential for 100s or 1000s of players to be in the same area, high graphics will make the game unplayable because the way we process graphics makes large numbers harder.
So, not only are we spending lots of money on graphics, those very same graphics mean that developers can't make use of the one unique selling point - being massively multiplayer. Just think about it: when was the last time you participated in content with more than 24 players?
What is the solution?
Surprisingly, gameplay mechanics are actually quite cheap to develop (according to devs). A single dev is able to create/code some pretty advanced mechanics in a relatively short period of time. What takes teh time/cost is everything that needs happen after the mechanics has been implemented - all the animations for new skills, for example, take at least 10x as long to implement than the actual code for what each skill does.
The issue with good gameplay is not that it is difficult to implement, it is that it is difficult to design. In my experience, most game designers at the big companies simply don't have the bredth of knowledge required to design awesome gameplay. They may know a few things and have clear ideas - typically story and world design - but everything else is outside of their main focus and so ends up being mediocre. Just think of the amount of games you've played which had features that felt "tacked-on".
I think MMO devs need to take a different approach to development.
Most other game genres need to generate most of their money at launch through initial sales. this is why graphics-as-a-sales-tool are so important.
MMOs are different, they can make their money over a very long time. The initial sales may well be low without good graphics, but if the gameplay is really good then word-of-mouth referrals will keep a steady stream of new players coming into the game, and the good gameplay should keep them there for a long time. MMOs have an opportunity to build their community over time, rather than requiring it all at once. Eventually, down the road, they can reinvest their money in better graphics.
Finally, not having cutting edge graphics doesn't mean the game has to look bad. It's very possible to have a great looking game with low graphics by going the stylised route. The tricky thing here is how to be stylised without looking childish, something a lot of artists seem to struggle with.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
About the cash shop argument ... MTX are everywhere, including MMOs, single player games you name it. As always, you can >>> choose <<< not to pay a dime in those games. As long as they are not P2W this is fine. I haven't spent a dime in Destiny (outside of DLCs) not in Overwatch (outside the box price) not in APEX legends, not in borderlands not in Anthem or anywhere else. I could care less about skins. Gameplay is what is important to me. And if a paywall is barring me from achieving something, I automatically blacklist that game. Funny enough, most MMOs have paygates now. Or wait ... it's not really a pay gate. It's a "timegated content" that you could overcome by opening your bloody wallet. Yeah, pass.
And it was a buggy mess at launch that didn't hold my interest for more than a week. It's actually fun now.
Thing B: In designing a MMOG, being able to reach a wide audience works toward one's favor. Lowering the bar in terms of minimum system requirements can be a good move.
In short, OP has a point. Going for graphics over game design basics is like pushing Scorcese films out of a theatre in favor of the MCU.
In an ideal world we'd have both, but if it's one or the other I'd prefer to play a well designed game with lots of other people.
I do enjoy a good walking simulator or other brief and pretty experience from time to time.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Resources are finite in game development. You have to pick and choose where your resources go. Bioware used to be king of the RPG where story reigned supreme. Then they switched to the open world format with the Frostbite engine which gives fantastic visuals, but is extremely difficult to work with when it comes to RPG's. For me, their games may look great, but since the focus has changed to more of a visual experience with story taking a backseat to everything else they have become a joke. You know it's bad when a Ubisoft game does a better story than Bioware has lately (personal opinion).
In an mmo or any story driven game, I would rather the story and mechanics be good and visuals be mediocre.
I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Nice try tho.
And no, I don't buy into the idea that online shooters with nothing even remotely close to being massively multiplayer qualify as MMOs. MMO means the same thing whether you append RPG or FPS to it.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
You can either adapt or move along.
I think a lot of people look at things that WOW added to MMOs that weren't MMO features - instant teleport dungeons and instanced PVP arenas - things that were imported into MMOs from FPS games, and post-WOW think that if an online game has those things and a lot of people can be in a lobby queue somewhere waiting for their PUG to form they are MMOs.
That's how this site and Massively end up calling Path of Exile and MMO.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Saying those are massively multiplayer is the same as saying that every human male on the planet has a massive dick.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED