Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

[Column] General: Why No HD Remakes?

24

Comments

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

    I think this author (sadly like a certain other author on here who tried to say making dungeons and Raids were the cheapest part of an MMO) is way out of touch with the reality of costs.

     

     

    Keep in mind that the "authors" they have for columns are generally not actual journalists or professionals.  They're just random gamers who, for whatever reason, are given space here to blog.

    You make me like charity

  • AldersAlders Member RarePosts: 2,207

    You really can never go home again.

    Part of what made those older MMO's great in the minds of the players that played them was the time in their lives that they played them.  You can't recreate the wonder, the newness, or the overall excitement of what might be possible because you already know.

    Now, a new MMO with some old mechanics while getting rid of the terrible ones is a different story.

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    There are a few reasons...

    1.  Graphics and animations are some of the most expensive parts of game development, and for many of these old games, that's essentially what you'd have to gut and start over with.  Why do a remake at 80% of the cost of a new project entirely?

    2.  Remaking a game in "HD" or whatever, doesn't really do much more than attract previous players back to it for a little while.  Newer players will still be put off by the dated mechanics and quirks.

     

    What's worse is that both of those reasons sort of reinforce why the other is a bad idea for most setups.

    The mechanics are generally the best part of older games.

    And that would be an opinion that isn't shared many people.  Otherwise, they'd still be playing those older games.  EQ1 still gets regular expansions yet it's hardly a popular game.

    Not many people want to return to the days of having to spawn camp a group of orcs for hours on end so they can level up and go spawn camp a group of higher level orcs.  The mechanics sucked, plain and simple.  They had some charm, like the Death Knight (or whatever it was called) that gave an XP penalty to the group for simply being there, but it mostly just sucked.

    You make me like charity

  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    There are a few reasons...

    1.  Graphics and animations are some of the most expensive parts of game development, and for many of these old games, that's essentially what you'd have to gut and start over with.  Why do a remake at 80% of the cost of a new project entirely?

    2.  Remaking a game in "HD" or whatever, doesn't really do much more than attract previous players back to it for a little while.  Newer players will still be put off by the dated mechanics and quirks.

     

    What's worse is that both of those reasons sort of reinforce why the other is a bad idea for most setups.

    The mechanics are generally the best part of older games.

    And that would be an opinion that isn't shared many people.  Otherwise, they'd still be playing those older games.

    And you are confirmed for not understanding golden age MMOs at all.

    The biggest reason most of us aren't playing them anymore is because the CURRENT game mechanics do not remotely resemble the mechanics that were in place when we loved the game. See my post above, about how many people left DAoC, and SWG, and UO, after critical errors with mechanic changing.

     

    "Not many people want to return to the days of having to spawn camp a group of orcs for hours on end so they can level up and go spawn camp a group of higher level orcs.  The mechanics sucked, plain and simple.  "

    Out of the DOZENS of MMOs that existed before WoW, I can think of only two where this was ever a "mechanic". Stop pretending all pre WoW MMOs were as poorly designed as EverQuest, and leave the discussion of those games to people who actually played them.

  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Member Posts: 2,697
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

    I think this author (sadly like a certain other author on here who tried to say making dungeons and Raids were the cheapest part of an MMO) is way out of touch with the reality of costs.

     

     

    Keep in mind that the "authors" they have for columns are generally not actual journalists or professionals.  They're just random gamers who, for whatever reason, are given space here to blog.

    I know, that was kind of the problem I was referring to. Recent articles have been written which are based around completely unsound, and at times utterly wrong, assumptions. Such articles should not be put up on the site at all.

     

    They should educate, get more knowledgeable people, or simply not allow people without certain pieces of knowledge to write any article based around that piece of knowledge they do not have. Otherwise it just makes it all seem ridiculous.

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    There are a few reasons...

    1.  Graphics and animations are some of the most expensive parts of game development, and for many of these old games, that's essentially what you'd have to gut and start over with.  Why do a remake at 80% of the cost of a new project entirely?

    2.  Remaking a game in "HD" or whatever, doesn't really do much more than attract previous players back to it for a little while.  Newer players will still be put off by the dated mechanics and quirks.

     

    What's worse is that both of those reasons sort of reinforce why the other is a bad idea for most setups.

    The mechanics are generally the best part of older games.

    And that would be an opinion that isn't shared many people.  Otherwise, they'd still be playing those older games.

    And you are confirmed for not understanding golden age MMOs at all.

    The biggest reason most of us aren't playing them anymore is because the CURRENT game mechanics do not remotely resemble the mechanics that were in place when we loved the game. See my post above, about how many people left DAoC, and SWG, and UO, after critical errors with mechanic changing.

     

    You do realize those games didn't just randomly decide to change their mechanics right?  It was in response to having too many people leaving the games for newer stuff.  Just because YOU and your circle of friends were happy with things, doesn't mean everyone else was.

    I was playing DAoC when WoW was released and saw first hand how, over the course of about 6 months, people switched games.  It was such a breath of fresh air to have such a well-designed quest system* that let you make progress without having to spend hours at a time.  You could do a few quests and log out feeling like you accomplished something.  People left because WoW's game mechanics were better.  It's actually funny to see  how all those MMO's from around 2002-2004 suddenly started bleeding subs, and had to change stuff in a hope at salvaging things.

    Again, you don't have to agree with my personally.  But you can't argue the fact that mechanics changed for a reason.

    *believe it or not, the way WoW put such an emphasis on quests was kind of revolutionary back then, and one of the single biggest reason for it's success.

    You make me like charity

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Member Posts: 1,788
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

    I think this author (sadly like a certain other author on here who tried to say making dungeons and Raids were the cheapest part of an MMO) is way out of touch with the reality of costs.

     

     

    Keep in mind that the "authors" they have for columns are generally not actual journalists or professionals.  They're just random gamers who, for whatever reason, are given space here to blog.

    I know, that was kind of the problem I was referring to. Recent articles have been written which are based around completely unsound, and at times utterly wrong, assumptions. Such articles should not be put up on the site at all.

     

    They should educate, get more knowledgeable people, or simply not allow people without certain pieces of knowledge to write any article based around that piece of knowledge they do not have. Otherwise it just makes it all seem ridiculous.

    I just sort of got used to it around here.  It was like that with Pokket's weekly thing, where I swear the only reason she was allowed to write articles or get involved in the industry was because they need to fill the "cute gamer chick" slot.  Her articles all sounded like introductions to actual articles, until you realize that's literally all she had to say.

    You make me like charity

  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    There are a few reasons...

    1.  Graphics and animations are some of the most expensive parts of game development, and for many of these old games, that's essentially what you'd have to gut and start over with.  Why do a remake at 80% of the cost of a new project entirely?

    2.  Remaking a game in "HD" or whatever, doesn't really do much more than attract previous players back to it for a little while.  Newer players will still be put off by the dated mechanics and quirks.

     

    What's worse is that both of those reasons sort of reinforce why the other is a bad idea for most setups.

    The mechanics are generally the best part of older games.

    And that would be an opinion that isn't shared many people.  Otherwise, they'd still be playing those older games.

    And you are confirmed for not understanding golden age MMOs at all.

    The biggest reason most of us aren't playing them anymore is because the CURRENT game mechanics do not remotely resemble the mechanics that were in place when we loved the game. See my post above, about how many people left DAoC, and SWG, and UO, after critical errors with mechanic changing.

     

    You do realize those games didn't just randomly decide to change their mechanics right?  It was in response to having too many people leaving the games for newer stuff. Not really. DAoC's population didn't drop like a rock because of WoW, it dropped because of two bad expansions in a row, expansions that were completely unrelated to WoW. In fact when WoW came out, most of my guildies tried it and came back saying it was nothing new.

    I was playing DAoC when WoW was released and saw first hand how, over the course of about 6 months, people switched games.  It was such a breath of fresh air to have such a well-designed quest system*

      People left because WoW's game mechanics were better. If you check the launch date of WoW against other MMOs subscribers, you'll see that this is almost entirely bullshit. Most of WoW's playerbase came from people who never played MMOs, not veterans. WoW's mechanics were almost identical to other MMOs at the time, mostly EQ, but easier and shallower. People left their old MMOs when the dev teams tried to make their games more casual, and drove out their core players. Instead of trying to get their core players back, they just moved on to a bigger budget project.  It's actually funny to see  how all those MMO's from around 2002-2004 suddenly started bleeding subs, and had to change stuff in a hope at salvaging things. They bled because they changed, not the other way around.

     

  • Solar_ProphetSolar_Prophet Member EpicPosts: 1,960

    I would ditch my current game(s) in a heartbeat if they'd give Asheron's Call an HD graphics makeover, combined with a UI that doesn't suck.

    No, seriously. The graphics don't bother me nearly as much as the horrible UI. I can't believe I ever played & enjoyed the game like that. I guess modern MMOs have spoiled me in that regard.

    AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!

    We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD. 

    #IStandWithVic

  • Kaelaan21Kaelaan21 Member UncommonPosts: 349

    There are three games that come to mind that have already done this that I have played in the past. I find it ironic, that one of them, DAoC was in the article.

     

    DAoC has already had an engine/texture update. No, it wasn't HD, but then again - back then there was no "HD" buzzword floating around. The texture updates were nice, but this is a prime example of just updating graphics will not save an already dying or dead game. The core game itself only seemed to cater to cliche of it's current player base. And that's exactly what they ended up with. A small group of die hard fans, that really enjoy the game and that's it.

     

    UO - the remake that should up the sandbox client. The Third Dawn client that eventually was scrapped and remade multiple times under different names. It was never truly and fully accepted by the community because it altered the perception of a semi-bustling sandbox environment. Most people continued to use the 2D client as the 3D client was always optional in each of it's iterations.

     

    Eve Online - the entire engine has been overhauled at least twice. The UI was completely redesigned under the hood for performance reasons. The UI presentation is also continually tweaked to grow with the needs of the current player base. The textures and model designs are continually updated to take advantage of the current engine and allow more detail without taking away from the original concept of the ship. So far, this is the only game that I have played that has been very successful with overhauling the graphics (and sound too).

     

    I think the big reason is that the market has already shown that "if you build it (or update it)" it doesn't necessarily mean the audience will come. The other thing to keep in mind that most games we used to play, did not evolve their core mechanics along with the expectations of the current market. Sure, some games, such as UO, evolved their content to match more current games such as items similar to that found in WoW. But, the core game mechanics are kind of archaic.

     

    Whether you enjoy the more casual MMOs or the more complex MMOs, I don't want to remember slash commands to manage my guild (like DAoC). I don't want limited action sets due to only one type of interaction on an object (UO, each object pretty much only has one way to use it when used directly). It may sound simple to add a GUI to DAoC to execute the slash commands, but the entire game may need to be rewritten to allow modular changes.

  • blbetablbeta Member UncommonPosts: 144
    Originally posted by Solar_Prophet

    I would ditch my current game(s) in a heartbeat if they'd give Asheron's Call an HD graphics makeover, combined with a UI that doesn't suck.

    No, seriously. The graphics don't bother me nearly as much as the horrible UI. I can't believe I ever played & enjoyed the game like that. I guess modern MMOs have spoiled me in that regard.

    Don't know when last you played, but this past summer they remade the UI.  I have not played so I don't know if it is any good.

    June was first release of it I think

    https://www.asheronscall.com/en/content/2013-events

     

     
  • TuchakaTuchaka Member UncommonPosts: 468
    virtually every graphics overhaul i have seen was sorta meh if you already liked the game and were playing it was nice but if you had stopped a long time ago snoozers.....except for Eve online there's really did seem like a legit upgrade. Now if we are talking total remake that's another story
  • donpopukidonpopuki Member Posts: 591
    The HD remake of Zelda:Wind Waker mostly involved adding shadows, increasing the output resolution and other minor upgrades. It wasn't a total overhaul of the underlying graphics which is what a game like EQ needs.
  • GovernatorGovernator Member UncommonPosts: 7
    Originally posted by Rusque
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Help us old/less hip gamers out here, I had to Google "HD remake" to even know what this was talking about.

    Was it that difficult to put High Definition in the opening paragraph before using the abbreviation?

    image

     

    w...t...f

    What? I've never seen that expression before, ever, anywhere, so had no frame of reference.

    Never assume your audience knows what a specific abbreviation means, first rule of proper reporting at my firm.

    This is impossible. I literally don't know a single person (regardless of age) who doesn't know what HD is. Everything is HD these days, mobile phone screens, movies, TV, video games, youtube . . . just literally anything that has a display has gone HD.

    They're currently moving to Ultra HD (UHD)  just FYI. I mean, are you using a CRT monitor from the 90''s to browse MMORPG.com? I'm going to be confused for the rest of the day because of this, I just can't fathom it. Not even a little.

    You don't have to be rude about it.  Not everyone knows every tech related acronym.  Further more, it is common practice (and required in APA writing, for example) to include full spelled out names with abbreviation and then just use the abbreviation throughout the rest of the peace.  (High Definition (HD))

     

  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Member Posts: 2,697
    Originally posted by Governator
    Originally posted by Rusque
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Help us old/less hip gamers out here, I had to Google "HD remake" to even know what this was talking about.

    Was it that difficult to put High Definition in the opening paragraph before using the abbreviation?

    image

     

    w...t...f

    What? I've never seen that expression before, ever, anywhere, so had no frame of reference.

    Never assume your audience knows what a specific abbreviation means, first rule of proper reporting at my firm.

    This is impossible. I literally don't know a single person (regardless of age) who doesn't know what HD is. Everything is HD these days, mobile phone screens, movies, TV, video games, youtube . . . just literally anything that has a display has gone HD.

    They're currently moving to Ultra HD (UHD)  just FYI. I mean, are you using a CRT monitor from the 90''s to browse MMORPG.com? I'm going to be confused for the rest of the day because of this, I just can't fathom it. Not even a little.

    You don't have to be rude about it.  Not everyone knows every tech related acronym.  Further more, it is common practice (and required in APA writing, for example) to include full spelled out names with abbreviation and then just use the abbreviation throughout the rest of the peace.  (High Definition (HD))

     

    APA is very formal writing, which most internet articles are not.

     

    Would you expect someone to type out Automatic Teller Machine before using ATM? Or to type out television before using TV? Or Intelligent Quotient before using IQ? When something become mainstream vernacular most people accept that it doesn't need a declaration first. Although I guess every article on this site should start with Massively Multiplayer Online game before using MMO as well.....

     

    Is the person being snarky? Sure, I don't know if rude is quite the right word though. I think Kyleran has thick enough skin for a comment like the one above as well. 

    Is it utterly amazing that someone who plays video games and uses the internet along with other modern technology has not heard of the term High Definition? Definitely. At least it must shed some light for him on what the HDMI cable thing was all about when he was setting up his TV (the MI is Media Interface to help further). Then again I was amazed as a kid one day when I realized there was a second r in February since modern English decided not to pronounce it (but not take it out). So we all have our moments.

     

    1080p is going to blow some minds around here.

  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by Kaelaan21

    There are three games that come to mind that have already done this that I have played in the past. I find it ironic, that one of them, DAoC was in the article.

     

    DAoC has already had an engine/texture update. No, it wasn't HD, but then again - back then there was no "HD" buzzword floating around. The texture updates were nice, but this is a prime example of just updating graphics will not save an already dying or dead game. The core game itself only seemed to cater to cliche of it's current player base. And that's exactly what they ended up with. A small group of die hard fans, that really enjoy the game and that's it.

     

    I think you're confused...

    The texture update came with a massive overhaul to how the game was played from a very basic level.

    The same expansion that had the graphics update (which looked amazing) also made the game about linear quest grinding, and added in instanced dungeons. It was the last straw. The game didn't appeal to a niche of ardent players.

    The game tried to appeal to the WoW audience and drove its 250k players away, screaming from the game.

    Then, a few years later, Mythic announced that they were going to do an Origin server, rolling the game back to how it was in 2001 with a few changes here and there (like class balance). It was met with overwhelmingly positive press, tens of thousands of people came back and signed the waiting list. They were so overwhelmed by the support they announced "Wow, that's way more people than we thought, we're going to take our time to do it right!"

    But then.. EA pulled all those people from DAoC and threw them at SWTOR, which was in desperate need of help. And the project got cancelled.

     

    There was and IS a huge market for people wanting classic DAoC. We don't want current DAoC with better GUI. We want classic. No instances, no quest grinding, no Trials of Atlantis, no magic based archery system.

  • Kaelaan21Kaelaan21 Member UncommonPosts: 349
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by Kaelaan21

    There are three games that come to mind that have already done this that I have played in the past. I find it ironic, that one of them, DAoC was in the article.

     

    DAoC has already had an engine/texture update. No, it wasn't HD, but then again - back then there was no "HD" buzzword floating around. The texture updates were nice, but this is a prime example of just updating graphics will not save an already dying or dead game. The core game itself only seemed to cater to cliche of it's current player base. And that's exactly what they ended up with. A small group of die hard fans, that really enjoy the game and that's it.

     

    I think you're confused...

    The texture update came with a massive overhaul to how the game was played from a very basic level.

    The same expansion that had the graphics update (which looked amazing) also made the game about linear quest grinding, and added in instanced dungeons. It was the last straw. The game didn't appeal to a niche of ardent players.

    The game tried to appeal to the WoW audience and drove its 250k players away, screaming from the game.

    Then, a few years later, Mythic announced that they were going to do an Origin server, rolling the game back to how it was in 2001 with a few changes here and there (like class balance). It was met with overwhelmingly positive press, tens of thousands of people came back and signed the waiting list. They were so overwhelmed by the support they announced "Wow, that's way more people than we thought, we're going to take our time to do it right!"

    But then.. EA pulled all those people from DAoC and threw them at SWTOR, which was in desperate need of help. And the project got cancelled.

     

    There was and IS a huge market for people wanting classic DAoC. We don't want current DAoC with better GUI. We want classic. No instances, no quest grinding, no Trials of Atlantis, no magic based archery system.

    I'm not confused at all. I did not giving reasons of why people left. I simply stated that they have already tried a graphics update. Which the article was about.

     

    I was not referring to ToA. I was referring to the update were they replaced all three capital city graphics, created a new tutorial area, etc. It was around the time of Darkness Rising. None of these updates really changed the mechanics of the game. They simply changed the gear requirements which made PvE gear better than crafted and SCed gear. When I refer to mechanics, I am referring to how the user interacts with the world. Like binding, recalling, grouping, guilds, etc. and not the content such as items, quests, mob drops, spell changes and class balancing.

     

    On a side note, DR is around the time I lost interest as well. ToA was a let down, but it was semi-managable. The major issue that I had was how the buffs scaled when combining ToA artifacts and a 50 enhance buff bot. It's what allowed the necro and shroom classes to be totally imbalanced in PvE power leveling and what allowed small groups to hold choke points and become nearly impossible to take down.

     

    If you look at DAoC now, even if the items and class balancing were rolled back leaving the better textures - it's a bit lackluster when compared to newer MMOs. The character animations are stiff giving it a choppier, less fluid feel to it; sound is horrible; guild, house and character management is archaic. Even if you made it "HD" and rolled back to pre-TOA gear/class balance - it would still flop. This is why I think Eve was successful in their updates. The core mechanics of how the user interacted within the game changes based on the needs and desires of the players today and not just the vets of yesterday.

     

    For me to get serious about an HD version of a throw back, it would need to be ground up rewritten, but include all of the old content within the new engine. Something like that would probably mean that my old characters wouldn't be carried over. I would be okay with that though. I'd love to see DAoC with a WoW like UI and group finder. Easy to use guild controls. Housing controls more on the lines of RIFT. Up to date textures, animations and sounds. Something that feels polished but contains the content of the original Frontier lands and the original Darkness Falls dungeon. 

  • GardavsshadeGardavsshade Member UncommonPosts: 907

    @ Adam Tingle

    Some days I am optimistic about what MMO publishers can and will do, and some days I am a realist. Today is that day for me.

    from your article...

    "The criminal thing however, is the fact that very few MMORPGs have ever received this treatment. In recent memory, the only two online adventures to obtain a noticeable tune up are EverQuest post-Luclin, and Ultima Online.

    Which, I think you'll agree, is fairly odd. MMOs have the ability to spin cash over a number of years, out weighing the financial potential of everything except The Sims and Call of Duty. Given the fact a game such as Ultima Online is older than most Xbox Live users, and is still active, shows you something of brand loyalty and the ability to keep people interesting in returning to a virtual world.

    Why is it then that no developer has ever stopped to metaphorically tie the, long since undone, shoe laces of their older products? Why is every studio hitting out in search of the 'next big thing' rather than nurturing what they already have?"

    Because they (the MMO Publishers) are NOT looking towards the next big thing.... they are looking toward the next bigger Customer Base. MMO publishers are NOT MMO Gamers, they are not MMO Devs, they are business People of the twenty-first century that don't care one Iota about the individual customer because there are SEVEN BILLION customers they can pick and choose from, and they are tired and fed-up with customers like me. They are willing to anything to get any other customers except MMO Gamers.

    Oh sure... they want MMO Gamers to beta test they games, hype their games, review their games... and then they want us to dry up and blow away like an old maple leaf. They want young customers, preferably children with stupid parents, not grown adults that have a brain in their heads.

    That's why the old MMOs don't get facelifts. They don't want to attract the People that would play such MMOs. They already know the newer customers they want aren't interested in those old MMOs, even with a HD upgrade.

    On days like this, when faced with a question like yours, I am reminded that THIS (the MMO genre) is the Battle of Serenity Valley, and our "Superiors"(MMO Publishers) have already sold us out to the Alliance and abandoned the fight. We are already "dead men" (abandoned in favor of a newer non-MMO Gamer Customer base).

    This is why I have argued in the past that the MMO genre should be an Art form FIRST, and a business second... but I will ever have enough money to force that change so it will never be that way again. It was that way to an extent in the beginning of MMOs, but the innocence is gone and like everything else in this miserable century it's all just about Money now.

    Depressing as Hell.

     

     

  • TibernicuspaTibernicuspa Member UncommonPosts: 1,199
    Originally posted by Kaelaan21
    Originally posted by Tibernicuspa
    Originally posted by Kaelaan21

    There are three games that come to mind that have already done this that I have played in the past. I find it ironic, that one of them, DAoC was in the article.

     

    DAoC has already had an engine/texture update. No, it wasn't HD, but then again - back then there was no "HD" buzzword floating around. The texture updates were nice, but this is a prime example of just updating graphics will not save an already dying or dead game. The core game itself only seemed to cater to cliche of it's current player base. And that's exactly what they ended up with. A small group of die hard fans, that really enjoy the game and that's it.

     

    I think you're confused...

    The texture update came with a massive overhaul to how the game was played from a very basic level.

    The same expansion that had the graphics update (which looked amazing) also made the game about linear quest grinding, and added in instanced dungeons. It was the last straw. The game didn't appeal to a niche of ardent players.

    The game tried to appeal to the WoW audience and drove its 250k players away, screaming from the game.

    Then, a few years later, Mythic announced that they were going to do an Origin server, rolling the game back to how it was in 2001 with a few changes here and there (like class balance). It was met with overwhelmingly positive press, tens of thousands of people came back and signed the waiting list. They were so overwhelmed by the support they announced "Wow, that's way more people than we thought, we're going to take our time to do it right!"

    But then.. EA pulled all those people from DAoC and threw them at SWTOR, which was in desperate need of help. And the project got cancelled.

     

    There was and IS a huge market for people wanting classic DAoC. We don't want current DAoC with better GUI. We want classic. No instances, no quest grinding, no Trials of Atlantis, no magic based archery system.

    I'm not confused at all. I did not giving reasons of why people left. I simply stated that they have already tried a graphics update. Which the article was about.

     

    I was not referring to ToA. I was referring to the update were they replaced all three capital city graphics, created a new tutorial area, etc. It was around the time of Darkness Rising. None of these updates really changed the mechanics of the game.

    The expansion you're thinking of came before DR. It was Catacombs, and it greatly changed the gameplay.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Help us old/less hip gamers out here, I had to Google "HD remake" to even know what this was talking about.

    Was it that difficult to put High Definition in the opening paragraph before using the abbreviation?

    image

     

    w...t...f

    What? I've never seen that expression before, ever, anywhere, so had no frame of reference.

    Never assume your audience knows what a specific abbreviation means, first rule of proper reporting at my firm.

    It's also seems an odd term to use for PC games since they aren't at a fixed resolution. I had to look the term up as well, because I figured HD meant something else there as high-definition doesn't make sense in that sentence. 

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

    Overall art is now the most expensive aspect of game creation, much like movie special effects. The quality level people expect is time intensive and takes lots of artists lots of time to pull off. Taking a 14 year old MMO and making the entire world modern high resolution, high poly count models would cost easily 50-100 million dollars to do. Then the entire engine would have to be overhauled to be able to handle this new art, adding millions more.

    Overall the main point is if you are the type of person who won't play an older game because *GASP* the graphics aren't as nice, then you aren't going to want to play and older game that has all the issues that older games do, but that now has nicer graphics.

    Those two paragraphs hit on what seem to be the biggest reasons why it often isn't done. I don't know the cost in dollars to upgrade the look of a game, but I do know the kind of hours that have to go into it. To do it means not just redoing character skins but everything in the game world, otherwise the continuity and overall look gets really screwed up. In some cases it means new models, in others you're now looking at creating additional layers to the textures, as well. 

    The other thing is the performance hit. The game over time has probably been upgraded and expanded with the features in mind, but how will a graphical upgrade affect when combined with everything else that has been piled on. 

    Also, what if the existing playerbase doesn't like the graphical update and rejects it like the UO crowd did?

     

    All that said, if Turbine ever finds away to upgrade the graphics of Asheron's Call and retain the existing game mechanics, I think you'd have the next massive Action RPG hit right there. 

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • PolantarisPolantaris Member Posts: 54

    Let's really be honest.  Is a graphical update the ONLY reason people don't play those games?  Unlikely.  There's a few stalwart warriors who will not touch older looking games, but for the most part people stop playing games because they get old, in everything.  The mechanics are outdated, the core game is missing features, etc.  The developer can attempt to tack all that new stuff on all they want, but really, the game was not built to support new concepts and as a result you can only implement so much to an already existing system.  It's like adding band-aids on top of band-aids on top of band-aids.

    Some games, at their core, just lack what is necessary to continue to survive.  There's plenty of games that I've played over the years that I wouldn't go back to because they feel crappy in comparison to what is now available.  Sure, ten years ago it was the best you'll ever see but not anymore.  The only way to fix those types of problems is a complete overhaul of EVERYTHING about the game.  The UI, the control, the engine, every single thing.  If they were going to commit to that kind of a revamp, they'd mind as well just make a new game, give it a new title, and they'd be far more likely to get players to come back, even if the core concept of the game is exactly the same.

    This idea that graphics is everything is not true, especially for MMOs.  MMOs can look good, but if they don't have what it takes to keep people playing then they die, because MMOs require revenue to survive.  If a non-MMO game doesn't get enough profit, then a sequel just doesn't get made and the multiplayer servers, if any, get taken down but the core of the game survives forever (for the most part).  However, if an MMO doesn't get profit, then it gets shut down and it disappears forever.  To survive and make revenue, the game must be fun, must be playable, and above all else, must match up to the other games on the market.  That's not just graphics, that's everything about the game.

    ---
    This is but a brief parting.

  • GravargGravarg Member UncommonPosts: 3,424
    If they did an HD remake of DAoC without any expansions (maybe SI, I liked that one and DR), I would play it another 8+ years.  The main reason I left DAoC was because there were hardly ever any massive battles anymore in the frontiers.  It's all a group of gankers running around until they meet up with another group of gankers.  I miss the days when you had 100+ people charging into a keep and people dying all around you...that's what made DAoC so great :)
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,273

    I said the same myself in a post here

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/6076030#6076030

    To take an idea from the PvP column, does that mean my idea was poached? :)

    I do agree, with some gameplay smoothing those big world MMOs would make todays look like rat runs.

  • jpnzjpnz Member Posts: 3,529
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Help us old/less hip gamers out here, I had to Google "HD remake" to even know what this was talking about.

    Was it that difficult to put High Definition in the opening paragraph before using the abbreviation?

    image

     

    w...t...f

    What? I've never seen that expression before, ever, anywhere, so had no frame of reference.

    Never assume your audience knows what a specific abbreviation means, first rule of proper reporting at my firm.

    It's also seems an odd term to use for PC games since they aren't at a fixed resolution. I had to look the term up as well, because I figured HD meant something else there as high-definition doesn't make sense in that sentence. 

     

    The term 'HD remake of FF7' has been around for years and SquareEnix hates money so they'll release a 'HD remake of FF10 and FF10-2'.

    But regardless, I'd say there isn't really a good business sense to do an 'HD Remake'.

    EVE Online did it but I don't think that generated a 'bump' higher than the normal 'Post Expansion Bump'

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

Sign In or Register to comment.