Why I find funny, is how some of these people are saying that camp killing a day 1 naked newb at a priest respawner over and over again is a questionable "Gray" area whether that is considered griefing or not.
If that's not greifing what is?
Camp killer said he was doing that to like 40 people. This is how you let a small group of people ruin your entire game. What he didn't say was how many of these people were complete day 1 newbs like the person he admitted to camping. My guess is most of them.
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
Most don't play, hence the lack of popularity, at least in the MMORPG space.
Avoiding Internet tough guys could be one contributing factor I'm thinking.
I have to agree,
People not liking the rules so not playing the game, is ideally the cornerstone of why these games fail.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
If these people were really all about the money, they would be making mmo's that could attract 100 million people, yet we don't see any of those.
They aren't about maximizing money. They are about maximizing profit in an environment of competitors seeking to maximize profit. The best path to success for any particular company isn't necessarily the grandest available.
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
If these people were really all about the money, they would be making mmo's that could attract 100 million people, yet we don't see any of those.
They aren't about maximizing money. They are about maximizing profit in an environment of competitors seeking to maximize profit. The best path to success for any particular company isn't necessarily the grandest available.
Yeah the grandest is not necessarily the most money, but in the MMO space who you think will make more money 100mil customer or 1k?
You really believe these full loot PVP games are maximizing profit? Come on now who you kidding with that. Most of these mmo's are losing money hand over fist, if they even turn a profit at all is rare. If they were making profit they wouldn't be closing down left and right.
No games like fortnite is making profit. If these games were getting 100mil customers believe me they would figure out a way to turn a healthy profit from that.
What is the point of flexing towards ' carebears' if your favourite
MMORPG doesn't turn out to be financially viable because of a poorly
designed pvp system?
If things like spawn camping and
griefing are too easy and risk free for high level players for example,
you just designed a game where the trolls get to put the last nail in
its coffin.
Just to be clear, I have nothing against those FFA PVP games. I have played EVE Online for years. I just think those are not easy to design, because with so many players there is always one who will find that exploit to grief that the devs didn't foresee. And in FFA PVP that is just more punishing.
It just seemed like 2 types of game. One type of game people grind to get stronger. And another type of game people killing each other to loot their corpse.
Both are very popular. But when you mix it together, it haven't seen success.
I think the moral is people that want to kill each other will just play games that kill each other. They don't want to grind mobs just so they can kill each other.
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
Sometimes you just have to accept that developers don't care or want to listen to what the masses want. The developers set out to design the game they want and if that includes FL PvP, so be it you're not the intended market.
All these PVP devs talking about how the entire MMO's genre is dead because they cant get any people to play their trashy griefest/gankfest hardcore PVP game. If you want lots of customers then make a game that appeals to lots of customers.
I'm totally shocked that they keep trying the same exact thing.
How does it not occur to them that a level 75 is going to wtfpwn level 1 characters for lulz all day long?
THeres alot of bullies out there....In games and in real life too
How about this? If you kill a player who is lower than you and had no real chance, you are flagged as an outlaw and burdened with guilt. So burdened that you are over-encumbered and can only walk very slowly for the next 10 minutes. That makes you an easy target for the bounty hunters.
I like that!
If a player feels no remorse or guilt, make the game help them with their emotions
I can see the workaround, too: "Bio Break!"
- 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
First off, if you have issues with being twfpwn'ed by a lvl 75 you wouldn't be playing the game.
In lineage 2 we would have high levels come to the noob towns and take people out and we were like sea turtles trying to get to the ocean when we left the city - all run enmasse they can't get all of us.
That was the game.
And then we leveled so we were high enough to take care of ourselves and definitely joined a guild.
However, it's a good point in that developers need to be realistic about player population in their games. Especially if they don't have a lot of money and they can't make a high-quality game.
Not to be a bum, but the old days are gone. The current player base would not tolerate such behaviour.
In the past, there weren't that many choices to play mmorpgs so you either sucked it up or not played anything at all. Now there's way too many games catering to almost every playstyle for someone to stick with a game they find frustrating.
But the old players are not gone.
Developers need to know who they are making their games for and realistically figure out if they can make their game given their current player base.
Look, there are people playing EVE. There are people showing up for Mortal Online 2 beta. There are players.
Now the developers have to develop for those players and be able to make the game they want given how much they will realistically make.
Some (probably many) of these old players are too busy with life now to waste their precious time being ganked. When I was younger I had no issues spending hours to form parties to grinding for hours in the same spot to gain levels. Now? there's no way in hell I'm going to do that when I can play other games that are more user friendly.
Time is precious, I as probably many others don't want to waste their couple hours of playtime being frustrated.
I was one of those "old players" when I started EQ in 2001. I more time now then I did back then (semi-retired).
I'd love to find another MMORPG that has me wanting to spend days, weeks, months, and years playing again. Not a one now does that for me.
So I play the many other single player games I can find that I enjoy
To Sovrath's point, I'm also one the players that have zero desire to PvP. The few times I've tried, it was a cesspool of tea-bagging and derision. Except in WoW when my guild mates and I tried to see who could make the other members laugh the hardest (shrinking and skeleton potions galore).
I do hope that players who find PvP (even full loot open world types) games they like to play. I'll certainly miss out on that game, too
- 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
If these people were really all about the money, they would be making mmo's that could attract 100 million people, yet we don't see any of those.
They aren't about maximizing money. They are about maximizing profit in an environment of competitors seeking to maximize profit. The best path to success for any particular company isn't necessarily the grandest available.
Yeah the grandest is not necessarily the most money, but in the MMO space who you think will make more money 100mil customer or 1k?
You really believe these full loot PVP games are maximizing profit? Come on now who you kidding with that. Most of these mmo's are losing money hand over fist, if they even turn a profit at all is rare. If they were making profit they wouldn't be closing down left and right.
No games like fortnite is making profit. If these games were getting 100mil customers believe me they would figure out a way to turn a healthy profit from that.
As the amount brought in is in isolation from all the other factors that go into profitability it is irrelevant which brings is more.
Any for profit game attempts to maximize profit to the extent possible. That extent isn't guaranteed to be sustainable such that the game can endure or even present at all if it is running at an ongoing loss.
If a type of game routinely fails to be sustainable it suggests the interest in such is inadequate for it to be suitable as a for profit offering.
Any game that endures is sufficiently profitable or is expected to be so in a reasonable period of time. For profit game companies aren't charitable institutions nor do they operate social programs. Sentiment alone won't delay their pulling of the plug.
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
I have literally played every one of these games to end game , and right now UO is still the best MMORPG virtual world on the market , with more activities than any other MMO for a player to engage in and its not even close .. With great combat and encounters with players , you really can tell a good player and you never know what you up against ( Player Build ) Which adds to the combat . And the PVE combat is more challenging than any modern MMOs easily .. with a real risk/reward system ingrained in both ..
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
Sure, set the bar low enough and everyone is a winner, sort of like giving every child an award for participation in competitive events.
By most reasonable definitions MO is an under performing game run by a poorly managed studio which a saavy investor such as yourself would steer away from even after their 11 years of "success"
Hence the generic use of the term "failure" in the conversation but you are just splitting hairs here seeing your argument doesn't hold up in anything but a very narrow light.
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
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
MO actually had massive layoffs and cut their whole staff except for their owner Heinrich and his best friend the main programmer Sebastian. They lost money quarter after quarter when they launched. They switched development to games like this in order to survive:
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
Sure, set the bar low enough and everyone is a winner, sort of like giving every child an award for participation in competitive events.
By most reasonable definitions MO is an under performing game run by a poorly managed studio which a saavy investor such as yourself would steer away from even after their 11 years of "success"
Hence the generic use of the term "failure" in the conversation but you are just splitting hairs here seeing your argument doesn't hold up in anything but a very narrow light.
they have earned Millions over the last 11 years .. How about you .
And i would not or have no need to invest in them ..
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
MO actually had massive layoffs and cut their whole staff except for their owner Heinrich and his best friend the main programmer Sebastian. They lost money quarter after quarter when they launched. They switched development to games like this in order to survive:
Yes they had a rough launch but staff is at 15 now and has been for a while now .. and they have new offices .. And every Dev has layoffs .. Every single one .. and there is always backlash and tears about it here .. Its part of the business like any other ..
But most people consider being able to earn money and keep any business up and running and expanding after 11 years a success..
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
This is really the cornerstone of the discussion.
When people say "They just did not do it right" or "it was just not a good game" but, if there is no one that did it right, the answer is simply not that simple.
When no one has done it right, that tells me there is a inherent design flaw in that idea.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
Makes you imagine if it is actually a good game, how it would turn out.
Quite honestly most FFA full loot mmorpg just isn't good. It might turn out better if more budget and developer is put in.
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
MO actually had massive layoffs and cut their whole staff except for their owner Heinrich and his best friend the main programmer Sebastian. They lost money quarter after quarter when they launched. They switched development to games like this in order to survive:
Yes they had a rough launch but staff is at 15 now and has been for a while now .. and they have new offices ..
But most people consider being able to earn money and keep any business up and running and expanding after 11 years a success..
Simple as that
My point is that they didn't "keep their entire staff working and paid for 11 years". They were all fired except for 1 guy and the owner. That's a failure. And the only reason they are still around is because Heinrich's Dad was really rich and his associates funded the kid's hobby. And as shown, they had to resort to VR Kitten games to survive as well. That doesn't make Mortal Online a success. Company and game are 2 different things. I do give them credit for not giving up, but you can do that when you are financially well off and do not need income to survive.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
MO actually had massive layoffs and cut their whole staff except for their owner Heinrich and his best friend the main programmer Sebastian. They lost money quarter after quarter when they launched. They switched development to games like this in order to survive:
Yes they had a rough launch but staff is at 15 now and has been for a while now .. and they have new offices ..
But most people consider being able to earn money and keep any business up and running and expanding after 11 years a success..
Simple as that
My point is that they didn't "keep their entire staff working and paid for 11 years". They were all fired except for 1 guy and the owner. That's a failure. And the only reason they are still around is because Heinrich's Dad was really rich and his associates funded the kid's hobby. And as shown, they had to resort to VR Kitten games to survive as well. That doesn't make Mortal Online a success. Company and game are 2 different things. I do give them credit for not giving up, but you can do that when you are financially well off and do not need income to survive.
Fair enuff and agree with some of these points .. I know his father has helped him .. But again Many business get similar help ..
But they have a footing now and maybe from lessons learned they can deliver with MO2 ..
And now just for fun im going to Give Away a few copies of MO2 when they have it ready thru Steam .. Steam page is up but cannot purchase at this time
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
I have literally played every one of these games to end game , and right now UO is still the best MMORPG virtual world on the market , with more activities than any other MMO for a player to engage in and its not even close .. With great combat and encounters with players , you really can tell a good player and you never know what you up against ( Player Build ) Which adds to the combat . And the PVE combat is more challenging than any modern MMOs easily .. with a real risk/reward system ingrained in both ..
A 25 year experiment ... Got it
Since UO, was in fact the first of it's kind, yes, it is an experiment, just like EQ is a first gen experiment.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
These threads are always so great , its good that we have them so all the snowflakes can unload there feelings ..
If you dont like the rules .. Dont play the game .. Simple as that you would think ..
That is totally true. No such thing as "forced" PvP. But I do think it's valid to ask WHY games fail. In most cases it's not because of the PvP rules, or at least not solely due to them. Most are just bad games on many levels. You can't just make a bad game and toss PvP on top of it and expect success.
The other problem with this thread is the very narrow thought process of defining fail for many here ..
Even Mortal Online ( which most say failed )
Is a success , MO has been up and running for 11 years now .
MO has managed to have hardware , and engine upgrades ..
MO has managed to release new content regularly for there customers
MO has managed to keep there entire staff working and getting paid for 11 years ..
MO has been Successful enough to do all this and put SV in position to release MO2 ..
Now if most here managed that with there own buisness , would they call it a Fail ..?
You open a store , you keep your employess working for 11 years you keep your small customer base spending to put you in position to open another store ..
is fail .. ?
LOL
Everything cant be WOw .. People need to broaden there horizons and think straight .. Instead of blind rage at Devs ..
MO actually had massive layoffs and cut their whole staff except for their owner Heinrich and his best friend the main programmer Sebastian. They lost money quarter after quarter when they launched. They switched development to games like this in order to survive:
Yes they had a rough launch but staff is at 15 now and has been for a while now .. and they have new offices ..
But most people consider being able to earn money and keep any business up and running and expanding after 11 years a success..
Simple as that
My point is that they didn't "keep their entire staff working and paid for 11 years". They were all fired except for 1 guy and the owner. That's a failure. And the only reason they are still around is because Heinrich's Dad was really rich and his associates funded the kid's hobby. And as shown, they had to resort to VR Kitten games to survive as well. That doesn't make Mortal Online a success. Company and game are 2 different things. I do give them credit for not giving up, but you can do that when you are financially well off and do not need income to survive.
Fair enuff and agree with some of these points .. I know his father has helped him .. But again Many business get similar help ..
But they have a footing now and maybe from lessons learned they can deliver with MO2 ..
And now just for fun im going to Give Away a few copies of MO2 when they have it ready thru Steam .. Steam page is up but cannot purchase at this time
That's cool. I actually hope they take this time to get the game complete before shipping and avoid the issues that plagued MO1. Too many people just keep telling them: LAUNCH!! IT'S GOOD!! WE WANT PERSISTANCE!!!!
But that would have just doomed the game to repeat it's failures. Hopefully he has another free trial weekend before launch. If so I will check it out. No chance (literally zero) that I would repeat the mistakes of MO1 and buy it prior to seeing it demonstrated as feature complete (and that includes the actual Territory Control via sieges etc...)
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
I have literally played every one of these games to end game , and right now UO is still the best MMORPG virtual world on the market , with more activities than any other MMO for a player to engage in and its not even close .. With great combat and encounters with players , you really can tell a good player and you never know what you up against ( Player Build ) Which adds to the combat . And the PVE combat is more challenging than any modern MMOs easily .. with a real risk/reward system ingrained in both ..
A 25 year experiment ... Got it
Since UO, was in fact the first of it's kind, yes, it is an experiment, just like EQ is a first gen experiment.
It may be fair to say it was an experiment in 97-98 ..
After 25 years its not an experiment .. Its an extremely well established and successfull MMORPG that continues to be quite profitable after 25 years , which is more than we can say for ... hmm lets say Crowfall ..
A lot of them fail because the game is bad before you can even get into what kind of game they are.
Why don't you play this game that sucks just because it has PVP you ask for? Same reason people don't play PvE games that suck.
Ok.. so what game did it right?
and.. why is everyone not playing that game.
None of them. I have literally never played an open world FFA PvP that wasn't a terrible game except UO. UO was fun but totally an experiment. A terrible game I mean just buggy, bad combat, bad gameplay.
I have literally played every one of these games to end game , and right now UO is still the best MMORPG virtual world on the market , with more activities than any other MMO for a player to engage in and its not even close .. With great combat and encounters with players , you really can tell a good player and you never know what you up against ( Player Build ) Which adds to the combat . And the PVE combat is more challenging than any modern MMOs easily .. with a real risk/reward system ingrained in both ..
A 25 year experiment ... Got it
Since UO, was in fact the first of it's kind, yes, it is an experiment, just like EQ is a first gen experiment.
It may be fair to say it was an experiment in 97-98 ..
After 25 years its not an experiment .. Its an extremely well established and successfull MMORPG that continues to be quite profitable after 25 years , which is more than we can say for ... hmm lets say Crowfall ..
It really continuing to be highly profitable even today?
As that would be such a novelty to be honest, I highly doutb it, since it's gone F2P, and by 2006, it had a population of around 20K and in direct decline (I wager you could thank WoW for that) and it's last expansion was in 2015.
Knowing you, if any other game had those kinds of statistic, you would have cried that it was in maintenance mode, and limping along, kept alive for nostalgia and because it's already paid back it's creation funding decades ago.
I get that you would refuse that premise, because it is your go-to game.
But if you have some real numbers on how fiscally success UO is, I would love to hear them. Looking at the stats from the outside, it looks like a dead game played by a few hold outs.
Post edited by Ungood on
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Comments
Why I find funny, is how some of these people are saying that camp killing a day 1 naked newb at a priest respawner over and over again is a questionable "Gray" area whether that is considered griefing or not.
If that's not greifing what is?
Camp killer said he was doing that to like 40 people. This is how you let a small group of people ruin your entire game. What he didn't say was how many of these people were complete day 1 newbs like the person he admitted to camping. My guess is most of them.
People not liking the rules so not playing the game, is ideally the cornerstone of why these games fail.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
They aren't about maximizing money. They are about maximizing profit in an environment of competitors seeking to maximize profit. The best path to success for any particular company isn't necessarily the grandest available.
You really believe these full loot PVP games are maximizing profit? Come on now who you kidding with that. Most of these mmo's are losing money hand over fist, if they even turn a profit at all is rare. If they were making profit they wouldn't be closing down left and right.
No games like fortnite is making profit. If these games were getting 100mil customers believe me they would figure out a way to turn a healthy profit from that.
Both are very popular. But when you mix it together, it haven't seen success.
I think the moral is people that want to kill each other will just play games that kill each other. They don't want to grind mobs just so they can kill each other.
- 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
- 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
If a type of game routinely fails to be sustainable it suggests the interest in such is inadequate for it to be suitable as a for profit offering.
Any game that endures is sufficiently profitable or is expected to be so in a reasonable period of time. For profit game companies aren't charitable institutions nor do they operate social programs. Sentiment alone won't delay their pulling of the plug.
By most reasonable definitions MO is an under performing game run by a poorly managed studio which a saavy investor such as yourself would steer away from even after their 11 years of "success"
Hence the generic use of the term "failure" in the conversation but you are just splitting hairs here seeing your argument doesn't hold up in anything but a very narrow light.
"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
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
When people say "They just did not do it right" or "it was just not a good game" but, if there is no one that did it right, the answer is simply not that simple.
When no one has done it right, that tells me there is a inherent design flaw in that idea.
Makes you imagine if it is actually a good game, how it would turn out.
Quite honestly most FFA full loot mmorpg just isn't good. It might turn out better if more budget and developer is put in.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
But that would have just doomed the game to repeat it's failures. Hopefully he has another free trial weekend before launch. If so I will check it out. No chance (literally zero) that I would repeat the mistakes of MO1 and buy it prior to seeing it demonstrated as feature complete (and that includes the actual Territory Control via sieges etc...)
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
As that would be such a novelty to be honest, I highly doutb it, since it's gone F2P, and by 2006, it had a population of around 20K and in direct decline (I wager you could thank WoW for that) and it's last expansion was in 2015.
Knowing you, if any other game had those kinds of statistic, you would have cried that it was in maintenance mode, and limping along, kept alive for nostalgia and because it's already paid back it's creation funding decades ago.
I get that you would refuse that premise, because it is your go-to game.
But if you have some real numbers on how fiscally success UO is, I would love to hear them. Looking at the stats from the outside, it looks like a dead game played by a few hold outs.