Path of least resistence. Make something easier and it will become the norm.
Not easier .. more convenient. There is a huge difference.
Look at Diablo 3 .. it becomes MORE popular (xfire data) AFTER 1.05 where you can choose levels of difficulties (and hence the game can be much more difficult than before).
It is not about being easy. It is about to be able to jump in and do some quick (but can be challenging) combat. That is also why LOL is so popular (although i don't play it myself because i am not a pvp fan).
no there isent.
You can't see the difference does not mean that there isn't any.
If you think that waiting 20 min for a boat is in the same league as fighting a hard boss .... well ... i guess i just have to ignore your opinion.
Its right there in the definition. So its your opinion i think ill ignore.
Your not the type that wants to get lost in there game. That time spent waiting for a boat i was talking to someone about his gear while waiting for that boat.
having a conversation with someone just because he happen to be in the same place waiting on the same thing. It may be all about the quick fights and loot for you but for some of us it about a little bit more then that.
EDIT: I would just like to say that its ok that you have these games to play. Im not saying that you shouldnt enjoy your game time the way you want to.
We just have diffrerent types of games we like. Problem is, there not really making my game So i do tend to get a little pissed when talking about this subject.
We're talking about the future of the genre, with affects ALL of us. There's a couple million of us who have spent the last 8 years watching our favorite genre get destroyed.
Apparently not. Otherwise, games like SWG and Vanguard wouldn't have been complete failures.
Er, SWG was a huge success until it was turned into a themepark game. So, point goes against you there.
And there was enough interest in Vanguard for it to sell several hundred thousand copies on the first day, despite it being the same week as Buning Crusade's launch. The problem with Vanguard was that it launched 8 months too early, not the gameplay.
At no point SWG or any sandbox ever had couple of milion players which contradict your claim of 'couple of millions'.
I never claimed that a sandbox game, or SWG, had a couple million players.
I claimed that there were a couple million MMO veterans who have been displaced for the past 8 years, and that's a modest estimate I'd say.
Reading comprehension bud.
And really, if you're going to try to say anything about Vanguard, at least look up information on it even briefly, because you have zero idea what you're talking about.
Yeah modest sure..lol. For someone who pulls numbers out of his behind take your own advice maybe? the struggling states of sandbox MMOS puts a big hole in your modest estimations.
Couple of million of displaced vets for 8 years..lol...you are a funny guy!
We're talking about the future of the genre, with affects ALL of us. There's a couple million of us who have spent the last 8 years watching our favorite genre get destroyed.
Apparently not. Otherwise, games like SWG and Vanguard wouldn't have been complete failures.
Er, SWG was a huge success until it was turned into a themepark game. So, point goes against you there.
And there was enough interest in Vanguard for it to sell several hundred thousand copies on the first day, despite it being the same week as Buning Crusade's launch. The problem with Vanguard was that it launched 8 months too early, not the gameplay.
At no point SWG or any sandbox ever had couple of milion players which contradict your claim of 'couple of millions'.
I never claimed that a sandbox game, or SWG, had a couple million players.
I claimed that there were a couple million MMO veterans who have been displaced for the past 8 years, and that's a modest estimate I'd say.
Reading comprehension bud.
And really, if you're going to try to say anything about Vanguard, at least look up information on it even briefly, because you have zero idea what you're talking about.
Yeah modest sure..lol. For someone who pulls numbers out of his behind take your own advice maybe? the struggling states of sandbox MMOS puts a big hole in your modest estimations.
Couple of million of displaced vets for 8 years..lol...you are a funny guy!
Kid, I'm not talking about sandbox MMOs, when will you people realize this? I'm talking about veteran MMO fans, that includes UO, AC, SWG, DAoC, EQ. Or are you the mindset that all pre WoW MMOs were sandboxes, because they weren't themeparks?
Between all the old golden age MMOs, there were quite a few more than a couple million people, but I made a conservative estimate, because not all those people are still around, or even want hardcore MMOs.
We're talking about the future of the genre, with affects ALL of us. There's a couple million of us who have spent the last 8 years watching our favorite genre get destroyed.
Apparently not. Otherwise, games like SWG and Vanguard wouldn't have been complete failures.
Er, SWG was a huge success until it was turned into a themepark game. So, point goes against you there.
And there was enough interest in Vanguard for it to sell several hundred thousand copies on the first day, despite it being the same week as Buning Crusade's launch. The problem with Vanguard was that it launched 8 months too early, not the gameplay.
At no point SWG or any sandbox ever had couple of milion players which contradict your claim of 'couple of millions'.
I never claimed that a sandbox game, or SWG, had a couple million players.
I claimed that there were a couple million MMO veterans who have been displaced for the past 8 years, and that's a modest estimate I'd say.
Reading comprehension bud.
And really, if you're going to try to say anything about Vanguard, at least look up information on it even briefly, because you have zero idea what you're talking about.
Yeah modest sure..lol. For someone who pulls numbers out of his behind take your own advice maybe? the struggling states of sandbox MMOS puts a big hole in your modest estimations.
Couple of million of displaced vets for 8 years..lol...you are a funny guy!
Kid, I'm not talking about sandbox MMOs, when will you people realize this? I'm talking about veteran MMO fans, that includes UO, AC, SWG, DAoC, EQ. Or are you the mindset that all pre WoW MMOs were sandboxes, because they weren't themeparks?
Between all the old golden age MMOs, there were quite a few more than a couple million people, but I made a conservative estimate, because not all those people are still around, or even want hardcore MMOs.
If you read my first reply to your abusurd claims of 'us couple of million vets' you will notice that i didn't just mention sandbox MMO.
And calling me 'kid' won't make your 'modest' estimate look any less far fetched. A lot of good MMOS.. hybrid as well as sandbox came out in last few years and all of these MMOS struggled to stay afloat. If there really were couple of million strolling around waiting for something old school, they had the oppertuinty to put money where there mouth is. But i guess they were to busy complaining on forums instead of supporting these games.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Instancing ruined mmos Dungeon finder is a symptom not the disease
This is the correct prespective.
Instancing should not be part of mmos.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Originally posted by ShakyMo Instancing ruined mmos Dungeon finder is a symptom not the disease
This is the correct prespective.
Instancing should not be part of mmos.
Absolutely not. They do serve one good purpose though. If an MMO has instancing, its pretty much guaranteed to be a bad MMO. If a game requires instancing to function, it was designed poorly and the priorities aren't there. If they're spending more money on scripted singleplayer missions in an MMO, you know the rest of the game sucks.
We're talking about the future of the genre, with affects ALL of us. There's a couple million of us who have spent the last 8 years watching our favorite genre get destroyed.
Apparently not. Otherwise, games like SWG and Vanguard wouldn't have been complete failures.
Er, SWG was a huge success until it was turned into a themepark game. So, point goes against you there.
And there was enough interest in Vanguard for it to sell several hundred thousand copies on the first day, despite it being the same week as Buning Crusade's launch. The problem with Vanguard was that it launched 8 months too early, not the gameplay.
At no point SWG or any sandbox ever had couple of milion players which contradict your claim of 'couple of millions'.
I never claimed that a sandbox game, or SWG, had a couple million players.
I claimed that there were a couple million MMO veterans who have been displaced for the past 8 years, and that's a modest estimate I'd say.
Reading comprehension bud.
And really, if you're going to try to say anything about Vanguard, at least look up information on it even briefly, because you have zero idea what you're talking about.
Yeah modest sure..lol. For someone who pulls numbers out of his behind take your own advice maybe? the struggling states of sandbox MMOS puts a big hole in your modest estimations.
Couple of million of displaced vets for 8 years..lol...you are a funny guy!
Kid, I'm not talking about sandbox MMOs, when will you people realize this? I'm talking about veteran MMO fans, that includes UO, AC, SWG, DAoC, EQ. Or are you the mindset that all pre WoW MMOs were sandboxes, because they weren't themeparks?
Between all the old golden age MMOs, there were quite a few more than a couple million people, but I made a conservative estimate, because not all those people are still around, or even want hardcore MMOs.
If you read my first reply to your abusurd claims of 'us couple of million vets' you will notice that i didn't just mention sandbox MMO.
And calling me 'kid' won't make your 'modest' estimate look any less far fetched. A lot of good MMOS.. hybrid as well as sandbox came out in last few years and all of these MMOS struggled to stay afloat. If there really were couple of million strolling around waiting for something old school, they had the oppertuinty to put money where there mouth is. But i guess they were to busy complaining on forums instead of supporting these games.
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
Man you 'couple of million vets' are really picky aren't ya? you guys will only play AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOS. I thought it was all about finding an old school MMO which is not your typical themepark clone regardless of whether it is AAA or not.
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
Man you 'couple of million vets' are really picky aren't ya? you guys will only play AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOS. I thought it was all about finding an old school MMO which is not your typical themepark clone regardless of whether it is AAA or not.
Yes, we're so very picky. How dare we expect a game with an actual budget and a team of more than 15 people. How dare we expect a finished game made by experienced developers.
Listen, you have a very strange point of view,, you seem to be going for outright trolling rather than logical arguing.
Yes, veterans, by and large, have higher standards than the WoW crowd. Many of us don't settle for rehashes like WoW and its clones, or find the themepark grind very entertaining.
That being said, when interesting and well made games come along, we're eager to see them do well. Sadly, that has not happened in a great long while.
But I'm sure if this long list of well made innovative oldschool games exists, you'd be willing to give it to me?
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
Man you 'couple of million vets' are really picky aren't ya? you guys will only play AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOS. I thought it was all about finding an old school MMO which is not your typical themepark clone regardless of whether it is AAA or not.
Yes, we're so very picky. How dare we expect a game with an actual budget and a team of more than 15 people. How dare we expect a finished game made by experienced developers.
Listen, you have a very strange point of view,, you seem to be going for outright trolling rather than logical arguing.
Yes, veterans, by and large, have higher standards than the WoW crowd. Many of us don't settle for rehashes like WoW and its clones, or find the themepark grind very entertaining.
That being said, when interesting and well made games come along, we're eager to see them do well. Sadly, that has not happened in a great long while.
But I'm sure if this long list of well made innovative oldschool games exists, you'd be willing to give it to me?
Logic states that old school MMO vets (couple of million) would play an old school MMO regardless of its budget as long as it is well made and strays away from WOW clone model. The term AAA wasn't even coined back in the days of EQ, UO etc. So it is just an excuse nothing more.
But i find it interestign how you can speak on behalf of couple of million vets (even though their existance is dubious at best). Us and we...as if they are following you around like lemmings.
There have been interesting and well made games in past 'Fallen Earth' for example. It was no AAA but it wasn't a low budget mess either. Spellborn another well made old school MMO which shut down because not enough people supported it. So that is two examples for starters.
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
Man you 'couple of million vets' are really picky aren't ya? you guys will only play AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOS. I thought it was all about finding an old school MMO which is not your typical themepark clone regardless of whether it is AAA or not.
Yes, we're so very picky. How dare we expect a game with an actual budget and a team of more than 15 people. How dare we expect a finished game made by experienced developers.
Listen, you have a very strange point of view,, you seem to be going for outright trolling rather than logical arguing.
Yes, veterans, by and large, have higher standards than the WoW crowd. Many of us don't settle for rehashes like WoW and its clones, or find the themepark grind very entertaining.
That being said, when interesting and well made games come along, we're eager to see them do well. Sadly, that has not happened in a great long while.
But I'm sure if this long list of well made innovative oldschool games exists, you'd be willing to give it to me?
Logic states that old school MMO vets (couple of million) would play an old school MMO regardless of its budget as long as it is well made and strays away from WOW clone model. The term AAA wasn't even coined back in the days of EQ, UO etc. So it is just an excuse nothing more.
But i find it interestign how you can speak on behalf of couple of million vets (even though their existance is dubious at best).
There have been interesting and well made games in past 'Fallen Earth' for example. It was no AAA but it wasn't a low budget mess either. Spellborn another well made old school MMO which shut down because not enough people supported it. So that is two examples for starters.
Spellborn was NOT an oldschool game by any stretch. WoW style graphics, same quest hub based leveling, and it wasn't a very good game. Not to mention it had barely any media exposure. Hardly anyone had ever heard of it.
And while Fallen Earth was indeed one of the only good MMOs of the last 8 years, it still isn't a fantastic game, and the setting puts a lot of people off. And it has instanced dungeons. It's very unconventional, and its carved out its own niche, but it'd be foolish to expect everyone to play a game that focuses on such a small subset of people's interests.
And yes, the term AAA did indeed exist back in the day. Games like SWG were AAA, as were Asheron's Call 2, Sims Online, Final Fantasy 11. Even games like UO, to some extent, were AAA games of their time.
And no, logic dictates that if someone makes a good game, people will play it. MMO vets have higher standards, they're not going to play a bad game just because it has a death penalty. And they're not going to play a WoW clone just because it has a budget.
Spellborn was NOT an oldschool game by any stretch. WoW style graphics, same quest hub based leveling, and it wasn't a very good game. Not to mention it had barely any media exposure. Hardly anyone had ever heard of it.
And while Fallen Earth was indeed one of the only good MMOs of the last 8 years, it still isn't a fantastic game, and the setting puts a lot of people off. And it has instanced dungeons. It's very unconventional, and its carved out its own niche, but it'd be foolish to expect everyone to play a game that focuses on such a small subset of people's interests.
And yes, the term AAA did indeed exist back in the day. Games like SWG were AAA, as were Asheron's Call 2, Sims Online, Final Fantasy 11. Even games like UO, to some extent, were AAA games of their time.
And no, logic dictates that if someone makes a good game, people will play it. MMO vets have higher standards, they're not going to play a bad game just because it has a death penalty. And they're not going to play a WoW clone just because it has a budget.
Sorry but the term AAA never existed back in days of AC ans SWG. now you are just making shit up. But anyways Spellborn wasn't just a quest hub based leveling MMO. And i don't even know what the fuck does 'WOW style grahpic means'.
Thing is the perfect MMO only exists in your head. So no matter how many examples i will give you will just shoot it down as 'not good enough'. And since you are such a purist when it comes to MMOS and old school feel. I can bet that you will spend rest of your life complaining on these forums.
I just think these imaginary couple of million vets need to get back to re election because they chose a wrong leader for their heard.
Spellborn was NOT an oldschool game by any stretch. WoW style graphics, same quest hub based leveling, and it wasn't a very good game. Not to mention it had barely any media exposure. Hardly anyone had ever heard of it.
And while Fallen Earth was indeed one of the only good MMOs of the last 8 years, it still isn't a fantastic game, and the setting puts a lot of people off. And it has instanced dungeons. It's very unconventional, and its carved out its own niche, but it'd be foolish to expect everyone to play a game that focuses on such a small subset of people's interests.
And yes, the term AAA did indeed exist back in the day. Games like SWG were AAA, as were Asheron's Call 2, Sims Online, Final Fantasy 11. Even games like UO, to some extent, were AAA games of their time.
And no, logic dictates that if someone makes a good game, people will play it. MMO vets have higher standards, they're not going to play a bad game just because it has a death penalty. And they're not going to play a WoW clone just because it has a budget.
Sorry but the term AAA never existed back in days of AC ans SWG. now you are just making shit up. But anyways Spellborn wasn't just a quest hub based leveling MMO. And i don't even know what the fuck does 'WOW style grahpic means'.
Thing is the perfect MMO only exists in your head. So no matter how many examples i will give you will just shoot it down as 'not good enough'. And since you are such a purist when it comes to MMOS and old school feel. I can bet that you will spend left of your life complainign on these forums.
I just think these imaginary couple of million vets need to get back to re election because they chose a wrong leader for their heard.
Still waiting for that list of great unique oldschool styled AAA MMOs.
Still waiting for that list of great unique oldschool styled AAA MMOs.
You really think i will waste my time giving you more names so that you can just shrug it off because they aren't good enough for you? i am sorry but no thanks. I am not here to convert you or anything.
Also you keep throwigng AAA now in every post but your original argument wasn't about AAA old school MMOS but well made old school MMOS regardless of how much money is spent on it.
Still waiting for that list of great unique oldschool styled AAA MMOs.
You really think i will waste my time giving you more names so that you can just shrug it off because they aren't good enough for you? i am sorry but no thanks. I am not here to convert you or anything.
Also you keep throwigng AAA now in every post but your original argument wasn't about AAA old school MMOS but well made old school MMOS regardless of how much money is spent on it.
If you aren't going to attempt to debate then you shouldn't keep posting in the thread.
And people don't generally play underfunded half broken indie games, which seem to be the "MMOs" you're referencing.
But no, keep on believing that there isn't a large audience of oldschool gamers waiting for the next real MMO. Keep blinding yourself to the fact that the majority of threads on this site are about exactly that.
Still waiting for that list of great unique oldschool styled AAA MMOs.
You really think i will waste my time giving you more names so that you can just shrug it off because they aren't good enough for you? i am sorry but no thanks. I am not here to convert you or anything.
Also you keep throwigng AAA now in every post but your original argument wasn't about AAA old school MMOS but well made old school MMOS regardless of how much money is spent on it.
If you aren't going to attempt to debate then you shouldn't keep posting in the thread.
And people don't generally play underfunded half broken indie games, which seem to be the "MMOs" you're referencing.
But no, keep on believing that there isn't a large audience of oldschool gamers waiting for the next real MMO. Keep blinding yourself to the fact that the majority of threads on this site are about exactly that.
I have been debating for all this time i just don't want to 'continue ' the debate. There is difference. I have no intention to bang my head against the wall.
If you aren't going to attempt to debate then you shouldn't keep posting in the thread.
And people don't generally play underfunded half broken indie games, which seem to be the "MMOs" you're referencing.
But no, keep on believing that there isn't a large audience of oldschool gamers waiting for the next real MMO. Keep blinding yourself to the fact that the majority of threads on this site are about exactly that.
People generally say one thing but buy another.
Look at every 'Boycott COD / FIFA / EA games / Acti Games' ever.
People keep on bringing up this mystical 'hidden gamer base that is just waiting for X' but there is no proof that it exists.
If a business invests millions of dollars to create something without any concrete data that there is a market, that's not good business.
Whether you think a business should or shouldn't do is irrelevant unless you are willing to front up the millions yourself.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
If you aren't going to attempt to debate then you shouldn't keep posting in the thread.
And people don't generally play underfunded half broken indie games, which seem to be the "MMOs" you're referencing.
But no, keep on believing that there isn't a large audience of oldschool gamers waiting for the next real MMO. Keep blinding yourself to the fact that the majority of threads on this site are about exactly that.
People generally say one thing but buy another.
Look at every 'Boycott COD / FIFA / EA games / Acti Games' ever.
People keep on bringing up this mystical 'hidden gamer base that is just waiting for X' but there is no proof that it exists.
It's not hidden.
There is more evidence to suggest that core MMORPGs are successful than there is to suggest that themeparks are where the money is. We didn't have failures as gargantuan as most of the themeparks over the last 8 years.
The problem is, publishers don't have their finger on the pulse of the MMORPG community, they take a cursory glance, see WoW is doing well, and go "copy that". The people that actually know how to make a good MMO don't get publisher backing most of the time.
I would love to play an updated version of Everquest with tough leveling and hard death penaltys. I also see the value in a group finder, where I have 2 hours after work to play, I don't want to mess around for 45 minutes trying to get a group who may flake after 20 minutes. Now that is two very distinct game types. I think that the market should have plenty of room for different game types. The problem is not that the instancing is ruining games, the games that do it are already going away from the type of world dynamic that would make an open world interesting. What the main issue is now, is that no one is making an actual open world full of contended content. Vanguard was the last one, based on PvE at least.
There is more evidence to suggest that core MMORPGs are successful than there is to suggest that themeparks are where the money is. We didn't have failures as gargantuan as most of the themeparks over the last 8 years.
The problem is, publishers don't have their finger on the pulse of the MMORPG community, they take a cursory glance, see WoW is doing well, and go "copy that". The people that actually know how to make a good MMO don't get publisher backing most of the time.
And what evidence is that?
In terms of actual evidence, all I see are themeparks making more $$$ then sandboxes.
I'm just stating factual numbers.
Whether you like those factual numbers or not is irrelevant.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
There is more evidence to suggest that core MMORPGs are successful than there is to suggest that themeparks are where the money is. We didn't have failures as gargantuan as most of the themeparks over the last 8 years.
The problem is, publishers don't have their finger on the pulse of the MMORPG community, they take a cursory glance, see WoW is doing well, and go "copy that". The people that actually know how to make a good MMO don't get publisher backing most of the time.
And what evidence is that?
In terms of actual evidence, all I see are themeparks making more $$$ then sandboxes.
I'm just stating factual numbers.
Whether you like those factual numbers or not is irrelevant.
You see WoW making more than Eve. What other themepark is beating Eve?
Though, it depends on what the group finder does. If it is used as an in-game advertisement of your group that is looking or the player that is looking for a group, and then allowing those two parties to group up, then that's fine. However, how it is often used today, is that not only does it group you, it teleports both parties together, and at their desired location. So for instance, a city, a quest location, a PvP location, a dungeon, etc.
That type of group finder literally destroys all of the hard work that the designers spent hours slaving over just because people are too damn lazy to travel ten minutes to get to wherever they want to be. The sad part is that the people have the money, and what the people want is what the people will get.
There are a few things that prevent me from playing a game anymore. No housing is one, instant adventure style questing (like group finder), and kill streak rewards that unbalance the game(Yes, I'm taking a shot at COD). There may be some others, but those are the big ones, and I just can't ook past them.
In terms of actual evidence, all I see are themeparks making more $$$ then sandboxes.
I'm just stating factual numbers.
Whether you like those factual numbers or not is irrelevant.
You see WoW making more than Eve. What other themepark is beating Eve?
How about Aion?
How about SWTOR (latest is 500k-1M)?
Here's another question, name one other sandbox MMO other than EVE that's above 100k subs?
By the way I always reference factual numbers rather than 'my guild died so MMO X is dying!'.
Aion makes what? They are pretty popular overseas from my understanding. Not sure the numbers in the West, ToR developers said they needed at least 500k subs to break even. They are going FtP, so they are having issues. Eve is far cheaper to run, and they have been going at it for years.
No idea of any other Sandbox game on the market. I hear about Darkfall and Mortal, but they are not sandboxes. There is Wurm and Xyson, but I would rather play Minecraft than them.
I am not a big supporter of Sandboxes, I think they have a place and could possibly do well. I was an Eq player and Vanguard after that.
There is more evidence to suggest that core MMORPGs are successful than there is to suggest that themeparks are where the money is. We didn't have failures as gargantuan as most of the themeparks over the last 8 years.
The problem is, publishers don't have their finger on the pulse of the MMORPG community, they take a cursory glance, see WoW is doing well, and go "copy that". The people that actually know how to make a good MMO don't get publisher backing most of the time.
And what evidence is that?
In terms of actual evidence, all I see are themeparks making more $$$ then sandboxes.
I'm just stating factual numbers.
Whether you like those factual numbers or not is irrelevant.
Christ, this isn't about sandboxes, why do you WoW fans always try to cast everything that isn't a WoWclone a sandbox?
If we take FACTS, TRENDS, and HISTORY into account, as a model, themeparks do not work and do not keep people playing long term.
Oldschool MMOs though, did.
Old MMOs grew over time and peaked years after release.
New MMOs peak at launch and collapse right away.
Where are all these incredibly successful themepark games? AoC, collapsed and died so harshly that it bankrupted two of Funcom's sister companies. Aion died in the west almost right away. WAR, dead as a doornail. DCUO, never got off the ground. STO, imploded in a spectacular fashion. SWG, as soon as it became a themepark, dead. DAoC, as soon as it became a themepark, dead. SWTOR, died so hard it took a huge chunk out of the biggest gaming company in the world. Rift, has already had to merge servers about 3-4 times.
None of these games have been very big successes. Hell, I'd bet whoever is running AoC would do a backflip in joy if it suddenly had as many subs as a modestly successful oldschool game, like UO.
Themeparks are designed for people to play them like singleplayer games burn through the content, and leave. It is not a sustainable business model. You need features that tie people to the world, you need mechanics that allow PLAYERS to generate experiences, not the game to dictate them.
If themepark game swere designed and budgeted with this in mind, and sold more as online COOP games with monthly content packs, they'd probably do better. But publishers don't want fair and reasonable pricing, they want WoW, so they make a half assed online game and slap a monthly fee on it, and are dismayed when afterwards they realize no one is sticking around long enough for them to make any money off the monthly fee.
Comments
con·ven·ience
[kuhn-veen-yuhns] Show IPAnoun
2.anything that saves or simplifies work, adds to one's ease or comfort, etc., as an appliance, utensil, or the like.
3.a convenient situation or time: at your convenience.
4.advantage or accommodation: a shelter for the convenience of travelers.
5. Chiefly British . water closet ( def. 1 ) .
Yeah modest sure..lol. For someone who pulls numbers out of his behind take your own advice maybe? the struggling states of sandbox MMOS puts a big hole in your modest estimations.
Couple of million of displaced vets for 8 years..lol...you are a funny guy!
Kid, I'm not talking about sandbox MMOs, when will you people realize this? I'm talking about veteran MMO fans, that includes UO, AC, SWG, DAoC, EQ. Or are you the mindset that all pre WoW MMOs were sandboxes, because they weren't themeparks?
Between all the old golden age MMOs, there were quite a few more than a couple million people, but I made a conservative estimate, because not all those people are still around, or even want hardcore MMOs.
If you read my first reply to your abusurd claims of 'us couple of million vets' you will notice that i didn't just mention sandbox MMO.
And calling me 'kid' won't make your 'modest' estimate look any less far fetched. A lot of good MMOS.. hybrid as well as sandbox came out in last few years and all of these MMOS struggled to stay afloat. If there really were couple of million strolling around waiting for something old school, they had the oppertuinty to put money where there mouth is. But i guess they were to busy complaining on forums instead of supporting these games.
This is the correct prespective.
Instancing should not be part of mmos.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
Absolutely not. They do serve one good purpose though. If an MMO has instancing, its pretty much guaranteed to be a bad MMO. If a game requires instancing to function, it was designed poorly and the priorities aren't there. If they're spending more money on scripted singleplayer missions in an MMO, you know the rest of the game sucks.
There were no AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOs in the last couple of years. GW2 is probably the most non WoW clone-y AAA MMO since Vanguard, and thats not saying much.
There's clearly still an audience. Why do you think the EQ classic server that came out a couple years ago drew in so many people that they had to make TWO classic servers and an overflow?
Man you 'couple of million vets' are really picky aren't ya? you guys will only play AAA hybrid or sandbox MMOS. I thought it was all about finding an old school MMO which is not your typical themepark clone regardless of whether it is AAA or not.
Yes, we're so very picky. How dare we expect a game with an actual budget and a team of more than 15 people. How dare we expect a finished game made by experienced developers.
Listen, you have a very strange point of view,, you seem to be going for outright trolling rather than logical arguing.
Yes, veterans, by and large, have higher standards than the WoW crowd. Many of us don't settle for rehashes like WoW and its clones, or find the themepark grind very entertaining.
That being said, when interesting and well made games come along, we're eager to see them do well. Sadly, that has not happened in a great long while.
But I'm sure if this long list of well made innovative oldschool games exists, you'd be willing to give it to me?
Logic states that old school MMO vets (couple of million) would play an old school MMO regardless of its budget as long as it is well made and strays away from WOW clone model. The term AAA wasn't even coined back in the days of EQ, UO etc. So it is just an excuse nothing more.
But i find it interestign how you can speak on behalf of couple of million vets (even though their existance is dubious at best). Us and we...as if they are following you around like lemmings.
There have been interesting and well made games in past 'Fallen Earth' for example. It was no AAA but it wasn't a low budget mess either. Spellborn another well made old school MMO which shut down because not enough people supported it. So that is two examples for starters.
Spellborn was NOT an oldschool game by any stretch. WoW style graphics, same quest hub based leveling, and it wasn't a very good game. Not to mention it had barely any media exposure. Hardly anyone had ever heard of it.
And while Fallen Earth was indeed one of the only good MMOs of the last 8 years, it still isn't a fantastic game, and the setting puts a lot of people off. And it has instanced dungeons. It's very unconventional, and its carved out its own niche, but it'd be foolish to expect everyone to play a game that focuses on such a small subset of people's interests.
And yes, the term AAA did indeed exist back in the day. Games like SWG were AAA, as were Asheron's Call 2, Sims Online, Final Fantasy 11. Even games like UO, to some extent, were AAA games of their time.
And no, logic dictates that if someone makes a good game, people will play it. MMO vets have higher standards, they're not going to play a bad game just because it has a death penalty. And they're not going to play a WoW clone just because it has a budget.
Sorry but the term AAA never existed back in days of AC ans SWG. now you are just making shit up. But anyways Spellborn wasn't just a quest hub based leveling MMO. And i don't even know what the fuck does 'WOW style grahpic means'.
Thing is the perfect MMO only exists in your head. So no matter how many examples i will give you will just shoot it down as 'not good enough'. And since you are such a purist when it comes to MMOS and old school feel. I can bet that you will spend rest of your life complaining on these forums.
I just think these imaginary couple of million vets need to get back to re election because they chose a wrong leader for their heard.
Still waiting for that list of great unique oldschool styled AAA MMOs.
You really think i will waste my time giving you more names so that you can just shrug it off because they aren't good enough for you? i am sorry but no thanks. I am not here to convert you or anything.
Also you keep throwigng AAA now in every post but your original argument wasn't about AAA old school MMOS but well made old school MMOS regardless of how much money is spent on it.
If you aren't going to attempt to debate then you shouldn't keep posting in the thread.
And people don't generally play underfunded half broken indie games, which seem to be the "MMOs" you're referencing.
But no, keep on believing that there isn't a large audience of oldschool gamers waiting for the next real MMO. Keep blinding yourself to the fact that the majority of threads on this site are about exactly that.
I have been debating for all this time i just don't want to 'continue ' the debate. There is difference. I have no intention to bang my head against the wall.
People generally say one thing but buy another.
Look at every 'Boycott COD / FIFA / EA games / Acti Games' ever.
People keep on bringing up this mystical 'hidden gamer base that is just waiting for X' but there is no proof that it exists.
If a business invests millions of dollars to create something without any concrete data that there is a market, that's not good business.
Whether you think a business should or shouldn't do is irrelevant unless you are willing to front up the millions yourself.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
It's not hidden.
There is more evidence to suggest that core MMORPGs are successful than there is to suggest that themeparks are where the money is. We didn't have failures as gargantuan as most of the themeparks over the last 8 years.
The problem is, publishers don't have their finger on the pulse of the MMORPG community, they take a cursory glance, see WoW is doing well, and go "copy that". The people that actually know how to make a good MMO don't get publisher backing most of the time.
And what evidence is that?
In terms of actual evidence, all I see are themeparks making more $$$ then sandboxes.
I'm just stating factual numbers.
Whether you like those factual numbers or not is irrelevant.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
You see WoW making more than Eve. What other themepark is beating Eve?
Group Finder is lazy.
Though, it depends on what the group finder does. If it is used as an in-game advertisement of your group that is looking or the player that is looking for a group, and then allowing those two parties to group up, then that's fine. However, how it is often used today, is that not only does it group you, it teleports both parties together, and at their desired location. So for instance, a city, a quest location, a PvP location, a dungeon, etc.
That type of group finder literally destroys all of the hard work that the designers spent hours slaving over just because people are too damn lazy to travel ten minutes to get to wherever they want to be. The sad part is that the people have the money, and what the people want is what the people will get.
There are a few things that prevent me from playing a game anymore. No housing is one, instant adventure style questing (like group finder), and kill streak rewards that unbalance the game(Yes, I'm taking a shot at COD). There may be some others, but those are the big ones, and I just can't ook past them.
How about Aion?
How about SWTOR (latest is 500k-1M)?
Here's another question, name one other sandbox MMO other than EVE that's above 100k subs?
By the way I always reference factual numbers rather than 'my guild died so MMO X is dying!'.
To stay on topic, even EVE-Online has a 'group finder'. Yeah, that's right. The largest sandbox MMO has a group finder.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Aion makes what? They are pretty popular overseas from my understanding. Not sure the numbers in the West, ToR developers said they needed at least 500k subs to break even. They are going FtP, so they are having issues. Eve is far cheaper to run, and they have been going at it for years.
No idea of any other Sandbox game on the market. I hear about Darkfall and Mortal, but they are not sandboxes. There is Wurm and Xyson, but I would rather play Minecraft than them.
I am not a big supporter of Sandboxes, I think they have a place and could possibly do well. I was an Eq player and Vanguard after that.
Christ, this isn't about sandboxes, why do you WoW fans always try to cast everything that isn't a WoWclone a sandbox?
If we take FACTS, TRENDS, and HISTORY into account, as a model, themeparks do not work and do not keep people playing long term.
Oldschool MMOs though, did.
Old MMOs grew over time and peaked years after release.
New MMOs peak at launch and collapse right away.
Where are all these incredibly successful themepark games? AoC, collapsed and died so harshly that it bankrupted two of Funcom's sister companies. Aion died in the west almost right away. WAR, dead as a doornail. DCUO, never got off the ground. STO, imploded in a spectacular fashion. SWG, as soon as it became a themepark, dead. DAoC, as soon as it became a themepark, dead. SWTOR, died so hard it took a huge chunk out of the biggest gaming company in the world. Rift, has already had to merge servers about 3-4 times.
None of these games have been very big successes. Hell, I'd bet whoever is running AoC would do a backflip in joy if it suddenly had as many subs as a modestly successful oldschool game, like UO.
Themeparks are designed for people to play them like singleplayer games burn through the content, and leave. It is not a sustainable business model. You need features that tie people to the world, you need mechanics that allow PLAYERS to generate experiences, not the game to dictate them.
If themepark game swere designed and budgeted with this in mind, and sold more as online COOP games with monthly content packs, they'd probably do better. But publishers don't want fair and reasonable pricing, they want WoW, so they make a half assed online game and slap a monthly fee on it, and are dismayed when afterwards they realize no one is sticking around long enough for them to make any money off the monthly fee.