Couldn't agree more with the OP, but this isn't new. Maybe the OP just realized that he belongs to a club of players who have felt this way for a while now.
Still waiting for a game that matches the excellence of Ultima Online but made with modern technology. Still waiting...
I don't believe that it was a worry that MMOs would become obsolete. There was always a group of hard core RPG fans who would have payed to play hardcore games. The problem is the hard core games disappeared because of greed and the pursuit of money. This started with World of Warcraft trying to achieve mass market appeal and succeeding. Now the people who really cared about the MMORPG or RPGs in general are punished because of corporate greed and a market of players that seem to want to change MMOs into single player experiences. I should not be surprised though. It happens to everything that goes mass market and many things are these days.
Greed is good. That is how market works. If games are only shooting for niche small hardcore audience, do you think they can afford good art, animation, features, and stuff like that? Look at all the indie (or KS) effort on MMOs. None appeals to me. May be you will like some of them, but from where i see, they lack resources to polish a game enough.
And what is wrong with devs who want to be successful, and have more customers instead of serving a small hardcore audience? It is their game. They don't owe hardcore users anything.
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
I don't believe that it was a worry that MMOs would become obsolete. There was always a group of hard core RPG fans who would have payed to play hardcore games. The problem is the hard core games disappeared because of greed and the pursuit of money. This started with World of Warcraft trying to achieve mass market appeal and succeeding. Now the people who really cared about the MMORPG or RPGs in general are punished because of corporate greed and a market of players that seem to want to change MMOs into single player experiences. I should not be surprised though. It happens to everything that goes mass market and many things are these days.
Greed is good. That is how market works. If games are only shooting for niche small hardcore audience, do you think they can afford good art, animation, features, and stuff like that? Look at all the indie (or KS) effort on MMOs. None appeals to me. May be you will like some of them, but from where i see, they lack resources to polish a game enough.
And what is wrong with devs who want to be successful, and have more customers instead of serving a small hardcore audience? It is their game. They don't owe hardcore users anything.
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
Pretty much lol
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
But not as well as Diablo 3, Starcraft, Halo and CoD.
Sure .. Day-Z is doing well .. otherwise, there won't be a million zombie games.
Dark soul sold 2.3M copies (from its wiki page). It is certainly a success ... but no where close to the success of top games. Heck, even GW2 sold more in its first month.
Actually you can get more hardcore than that .. D3 hardcore mode. There are like more than 1M players (6M+ characters) playing D3 on HC.
But even given this number, casual still outnumber hardcore probably 10 to 1 (actually that ratio is higher on D3 for SC vs HC).
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
But not as well as Diablo 3, Starcraft, Halo and CoD.
Sure .. Day-Z is doing well .. otherwise, there won't be a million zombie games.
Dark soul sold 2.3M copies (from its wiki page). It is certainly a success ... but no where close to the success of top games. Heck, even GW2 sold more in its first month.
Actually you can get more hardcore than that .. D3 hardcore mode. There are like more than 1M players (6M+ characters) playing D3 on HC.
But even given this number, casual still outnumber hardcore probably 10 to 1 (actually that ratio is higher on D3 for SC vs HC).
I wonder how many of those people are playing the game to try and make money out of it by selling gold or items. Every time I would log into Diablo 3 when I played it I had about 10 invites from a gold farmer. If this is what makes a good game then perhaps MMOs are going in the wrong direction. They should have never been about buying and selling virtual items for real money in the first place. They are simple games to be played with a lot of other people online. I also like to point out again then Diablo 3 isn't an MMO. 4 people playing together isn't massively multiplayer. I'd also point out again that Diablo 3 is more of a grind tne any old MMO was. You repeat the same content over and over again killing the same mobs over and over again for lot. You said you didn't like old MMOs because of grinding mobs, but you have no issue grinding mobs in Diablo 3 which has much less content then any of the old MMOs did and much more shallow group play.
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
But not as well as Diablo 3, Starcraft, Halo and CoD.
Sure .. Day-Z is doing well .. otherwise, there won't be a million zombie games.
Dark soul sold 2.3M copies (from its wiki page). It is certainly a success ... but no where close to the success of top games. Heck, even GW2 sold more in its first month.
Actually you can get more hardcore than that .. D3 hardcore mode. There are like more than 1M players (6M+ characters) playing D3 on HC.
But even given this number, casual still outnumber hardcore probably 10 to 1 (actually that ratio is higher on D3 for SC vs HC).
Are you using the number of people that play hardcore characters on Diablo 3 to measure how many people like more "hardcore" games ???
That aside...
I never said that there were more "hardcore" gamers than there are casual gamers. I said that the hardcore gaming audience is not a "niche" audience that can't support AAA game development. 2.3 million copies sold is definitely enough to support a AAA budget. Unless you are Square Enix of course lol.
Also, GW2 is (or at least was) the fastest selling MMORPG of all time...I don't think that GW2 beating the sales of another game is any proof that the game didn't sell well. That's like saying "Heck, even Michael Jordan is better at basketball than him!"
I wonder how many of those people are playing the game to try and make money out of it by selling gold or items. Every time I would log into Diablo 3 when I played it I had about 10 invites from a gold farmer. If this is what makes a good game then perhaps MMOs are going in the wrong direction. They should have never been about buying and selling virtual items for real money in the first place. They are simple games to be played with a lot of other people online. I also like to point out again then Diablo 3 isn't an MMO. 4 people playing together isn't massively multiplayer. I'd also point out again that Diablo 3 is more of a grind tne any old MMO was. You repeat the same content over and over again killing the same mobs over and over again for lot. You said you didn't like old MMOs because of grinding mobs, but you have no issue grinding mobs in Diablo 3 which has much less content then any of the old MMOs did and much more shallow group play.
The RMAH is closed down already ... so may be we will talk about your other points since even blizz don't think RMAH is a good idea.
D3 is not a MMO ... yes .. but that is just semantics. If you are the kind of MMO players who go queue up your instances, there is little difference. I don't get a wildly different feel when i play D3 versus a "MMO" ... so it is close enough for me.
Grind .. that is the point ... people grind D3 (or at least i do) because it is a fun grind .. mainly because combat is good. I am not against grinding mobs ... i am against grinding mobs with boring combat (that includes static spawn, non-action combat, bad combat mechanics ....).
I also don't like old MMOs because you are forced to socialize and you depends on others for fun (like camping) and there is none of that in D3.
Shadow group-play ... i don't think it is much more shallow than 5-man dungeon. True, there is no trinity, but if you watch youtube D3 videos, there are those who adjust their builds (and there are more) for group play. Now certainly there is no pvp, or large scale combat, but i don't play RPGs for that.
I love gw3 now because of the grind, it's just damn fun because at the appropriate level for you skill it becomes challenging while satisfying. It's how old heroics felt in wow in a way.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I wonder how many of those people are playing the game to try and make money out of it by selling gold or items. Every time I would log into Diablo 3 when I played it I had about 10 invites from a gold farmer. If this is what makes a good game then perhaps MMOs are going in the wrong direction. They should have never been about buying and selling virtual items for real money in the first place. They are simple games to be played with a lot of other people online. I also like to point out again then Diablo 3 isn't an MMO. 4 people playing together isn't massively multiplayer. I'd also point out again that Diablo 3 is more of a grind tne any old MMO was. You repeat the same content over and over again killing the same mobs over and over again for lot. You said you didn't like old MMOs because of grinding mobs, but you have no issue grinding mobs in Diablo 3 which has much less content then any of the old MMOs did and much more shallow group play.
The RMAH is closed down already ... so may be we will talk about your other points since even blizz don't think RMAH is a good idea.
D3 is not a MMO ... yes .. but that is just semantics. If you are the kind of MMO players who go queue up your instances, there is little difference. I don't get a wildly different feel when i play D3 versus a "MMO" ... so it is close enough for me.
Grind .. that is the point ... people grind D3 (or at least i do) because it is a fun grind .. mainly because combat is good. I am not against grinding mobs ... i am against grinding mobs with boring combat (that includes static spawn, non-action combat, bad combat mechanics ....).
I also don't like old MMOs because you are forced to socialize and you depends on others for fun (like camping) and there is none of that in D3.
Shadow group-play ... i don't think it is much more shallow than 5-man dungeon. True, there is no trinity, but if you watch youtube D3 videos, there are those who adjust their builds (and there are more) for group play. Now certainly there is no pvp, or large scale combat, but i don't play RPGs for that.
I realize they took the real money auction house out of the game, but most of the people you get invites from are trying to sell money outside of the real money auction house. The same thing happens in world of warcraft.
Diablo 3 combat can be pretty challenging, but again it's generally the same thing over and over again. The game has very little content. A game like EQ had far more options in terms of where you were going to grind. The mobs had a large variety of different abilities to use against you. I don't see why the grind in D3 would be better. I think I'm done with the days of repeating the same content over 100 times. About the 10-15th time through D3 I was about ready to quit. I wasn't really having fun anymore regardless of if the game was challenging or not.
Invites? You just join groups. I've never had such issues with gold sellers. Diablo2 was awesome even though players constantly repeated content - and new flavour of d3 is no different, it's pure distilled Diabo style gameplay in effect, where content = evolving new builds. Just not your style of game style flyte.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I realize they took the real money auction house out of the game, but most of the people you get invites from are trying to sell money outside of the real money auction house. The same thing happens in world of warcraft.
Diablo 3 combat can be pretty challenging, but again it's generally the same thing over and over again. The game has very little content. A game like EQ had far more options in terms of where you were going to grind. The mobs had a large variety of different abilities to use against you. I don't see why the grind in D3 would be better. I think I'm done with the days of repeating the same content over 100 times. About the 10-15th time through D3 I was about ready to quit. I wasn't really having fun anymore regardless of if the game was challenging or not.
Again, out of the game gold selling is prevalent in MMOs anyway .. so let's not disgress on it. In fact, it is pretty good evidence that D3 is viewed as a MMO.
You are kidding me about the comparison between EQ and D3. Combat is night and day .. particularly in tactical varieties.
D3 mobs are far far more interesting with interesting combo of abilities. There is little physical effects in EQ. No mobs will pull you towards them, or slow down time, or put rotating destruction beams on the group .. or a thousand things you need to avoid. EQ mobs won't rush you with 20 mobs .. and block off your exit (because there is no collison detection).
EQ mobs are horribly static and boring. D3 mobs are exciting and vary. Heck, when i back in EQ grinding levels, you can simply root/nuke almost at all level with single spawn. That is horribly boring and uninteresting.
I have not even talked about the very many build (some dependent on gear) that you can use. Not only differnet classes play differnetly .. even different builds play differently in D3.
.. another big difference is this ... D3 is all instanced .. i don't have to play with anyone if i don't want to.
Originally posted by Bladestrom Invites? You just join groups. I've never had such issues with gold sellers. Diablo2 was awesome even though players constantly repeated content - and new flavour of d3 is no different, it's pure distilled Diabo style gameplay in effect, where content = evolving new builds. Just not your style of game style flyte.
I'm talking about friend invites. You get spammed with them from %goldforsale!% we sell gold at premium www.goldrus.com. I saw a bunch of them every time I loged in. It was the same in World of Warcraft.
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
I realize they took the real money auction house out of the game, but most of the people you get invites from are trying to sell money outside of the real money auction house. The same thing happens in world of warcraft.
Diablo 3 combat can be pretty challenging, but again it's generally the same thing over and over again. The game has very little content. A game like EQ had far more options in terms of where you were going to grind. The mobs had a large variety of different abilities to use against you. I don't see why the grind in D3 would be better. I think I'm done with the days of repeating the same content over 100 times. About the 10-15th time through D3 I was about ready to quit. I wasn't really having fun anymore regardless of if the game was challenging or not.
Again, out of the game gold selling is prevalent in MMOs anyway .. so let's not disgress on it. In fact, it is pretty good evidence that D3 is viewed as a MMO.
You are kidding me about the comparison between EQ and D3. Combat is night and day .. particularly in tactical varieties.
D3 mobs are far far more interesting with interesting combo of abilities. There is little physical effects in EQ. No mobs will pull you towards them, or slow down time, or put rotating destruction beams on the group .. or a thousand things you need to avoid. EQ mobs won't rush you with 20 mobs .. and block off your exit (because there is no collison detection).
EQ mobs are horribly static and boring. D3 mobs are exciting and vary. Heck, when i back in EQ grinding levels, you can simply root/nuke almost at all level with single spawn. That is horribly boring and uninteresting.
I have not even talked about the very many build (some dependent on gear) that you can use. Not only differnet classes play differnetly .. even different builds play differently in D3.
.. another big difference is this ... D3 is all instanced .. i don't have to play with anyone if i don't want to.
Actually there was collision detection in EQ. I remember people blocking door ways. There were also many more spells with many more different effects then in D3. There was snare to slow you down. There was root to stop you from moving. There was damage over time. There was fear to make you run away. There was mez to keep you from doing anything. There are a lot more then that, but that is just a taste.
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
But it adds to the realism of the world you are in.
Now adays mmo dont even have that, which is sad....
Originally posted by Quirhid For any game, its gameplay. If you want to narrow it down in the case of MMORPGs, its combat gameplay. That should be your first focus as a developer unless you're deathly allergic to money.
The Secret World would probably be among the top MMO's if they had gotten that right.
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
But it adds to the realism of the world you are in.
Now adays mmo dont even have that, which is sad....
A lot of people just don't seem to get it. There are intangibles in a lot of things that were taken out new games. Having day and night obviously means the world feels more real and certain things happen only at certain times. Something might better fit only happening at night and another only in the day. Finding a group of vampires or a werewolf would be a lot more interesting in the night. Traveling at night would be a lot scarier than in the day time. Traveling in the day would feel a lot safer and more relaxing.
i dont feel the need to explore the whole planet while playing mmo's.. it gets boring after you've seen it all.
i do however like it when they make it a big part of the game and dont just have you camp a main city at level cap. there should allways be a reason to visit and revisit maps imo. unfortunately exploration just is'nt a good enough incentive as many would like.
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
But it adds to the realism of the world you are in.
Now adays mmo dont even have that, which is sad....
A lot of people just don't seem to get it. There are intangibles in a lot of things that were taken out new games. Having day and night obviously means the world feels more real and certain things happen only at certain times. Something might better fit only happening at night and another only in the day. Finding a group of vampires or a werewolf would be a lot more interesting in the night. Traveling at night would be a lot scarier than in the day time. Traveling in the day would feel a lot safer and more relaxing.
A day-night cycle by itself is just fluff. It needs to have actual game features tied to it. The idea about warewolves and vampires coming out at night is a good start but you really need more features that make it something that would appeal to players.
Way too many arguments in favor of open world MMORPGs seem to boil down to:
A day-night cycle by itself is just fluff. It needs to have actual game features tied to it. The idea about warewolves and vampires coming out at night is a good start but you really need more features that make it something that would appeal to players.
Way too many arguments in favor of open world MMORPGs seem to boil down to:
Step 1: Have an open world
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Great MMORPG
So i guess trees, rocks, water, clouds and basically anything that isn't tied to gameplay is fluff and unnecessary.
The reason why aspects like day and night cycles are important to so many players is because it breathes quality and life into the game, therefore adding a critical layer of enjoyment.
The trick is to build a world and fill with enough content to give it gameplay functionality, but not so much that every 5 seconds something has to be there.
The world, the gameplay, the combat, the features, all of it as to work together to create a fun, immersive and engaging experience.
If day and night indeed have purpose and are used well, if the mood is conveyed well, if some areas are dangerous at night, if it influences gameplay by having to maybe carry a light, etc, then I agree it can add a lot of immersion and could even be used for some interesting gameplay mechanics.
But if it's just aesthetic, then it's a toss up. Has both up and downsides.
For instance, it can be an annoyance to many players who will just perceive it as a hinderance to vision.
You also have to take the technical side into account, having static or semi-static lighting opens up a lot of possibilities that can raise the quality of the visuals, this then makes up for the lost immersion of not having a day night cycle by having better quality lighting overall.
Things like GI are hard to pull off in a dynamic setting with day/night cycles. There are several MMOs that ditched a real cycle with changing sun directions in order to use precalced lighting. Some others have hybrid approaches with faked cycles by just shifting hues and brightness around while maintaining a static system. DAoC had an expansion that was basically entirely underground, "coincidentally" they started using lightmaps all over those areas in the same expansion to boost visual quality.
With the advancement of tech we are at a point where these technical things are slowly diminishing away ofcourse, so hopefully the future will bring real day/night cycles back again without having to give up lighting quality or speed for it, but none the less, MMOs don't usually target high end hardware and it is currently still something to keep in mind.
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
But it adds to the realism of the world you are in.
Now adays mmo dont even have that, which is sad....
So? Games are not real. Realism does not equate more fun or more entertaining.
Day/life cycle is simple to do. The reason that it is not more popular is that it does not add to the fun of many.
Not only a game does not need to be realistic to be fun, sometimes too realistic is a barrier to fun (to me, of course).
For example, it is more realistic to walk for a day before you see the next town ... do you really want to spend 8 hours play-time walking? It is more realistic to die and never come-back ... do you want a game that you have only ONE chance to play it?
Comments
Couldn't agree more with the OP, but this isn't new. Maybe the OP just realized that he belongs to a club of players who have felt this way for a while now.
Still waiting for a game that matches the excellence of Ultima Online but made with modern technology. Still waiting...
Dark Souls and Day-Z tend to do pretty well and you can't get much more hardcore than those...
I think that the problem is this misconception that the hardcore audience is a small niche when it really isn't.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Pretty much lol
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
But not as well as Diablo 3, Starcraft, Halo and CoD.
Sure .. Day-Z is doing well .. otherwise, there won't be a million zombie games.
Dark soul sold 2.3M copies (from its wiki page). It is certainly a success ... but no where close to the success of top games. Heck, even GW2 sold more in its first month.
Actually you can get more hardcore than that .. D3 hardcore mode. There are like more than 1M players (6M+ characters) playing D3 on HC.
But even given this number, casual still outnumber hardcore probably 10 to 1 (actually that ratio is higher on D3 for SC vs HC).
I wonder how many of those people are playing the game to try and make money out of it by selling gold or items. Every time I would log into Diablo 3 when I played it I had about 10 invites from a gold farmer. If this is what makes a good game then perhaps MMOs are going in the wrong direction. They should have never been about buying and selling virtual items for real money in the first place. They are simple games to be played with a lot of other people online. I also like to point out again then Diablo 3 isn't an MMO. 4 people playing together isn't massively multiplayer. I'd also point out again that Diablo 3 is more of a grind tne any old MMO was. You repeat the same content over and over again killing the same mobs over and over again for lot. You said you didn't like old MMOs because of grinding mobs, but you have no issue grinding mobs in Diablo 3 which has much less content then any of the old MMOs did and much more shallow group play.
World does not equal quality gameplay.
You can have a large detailed world and the worst gameplay making the game worthless.
And SWG proved that you can have horrible worlds that were created with a random generator and end up with a great game anway, just with gameplay.
So, no. The world is not the most important thing, but it doesn't hurt to have one that is well designed.
Are you using the number of people that play hardcore characters on Diablo 3 to measure how many people like more "hardcore" games
???
That aside...
I never said that there were more "hardcore" gamers than there are casual gamers. I said that the hardcore gaming audience is not a "niche" audience that can't support AAA game development. 2.3 million copies sold is definitely enough to support a AAA budget. Unless you are Square Enix of course lol.
Also, GW2 is (or at least was) the fastest selling MMORPG of all time...I don't think that GW2 beating the sales of another game is any proof that the game didn't sell well. That's like saying "Heck, even Michael Jordan is better at basketball than him!"
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
The RMAH is closed down already ... so may be we will talk about your other points since even blizz don't think RMAH is a good idea.
D3 is not a MMO ... yes .. but that is just semantics. If you are the kind of MMO players who go queue up your instances, there is little difference. I don't get a wildly different feel when i play D3 versus a "MMO" ... so it is close enough for me.
Grind .. that is the point ... people grind D3 (or at least i do) because it is a fun grind .. mainly because combat is good. I am not against grinding mobs ... i am against grinding mobs with boring combat (that includes static spawn, non-action combat, bad combat mechanics ....).
I also don't like old MMOs because you are forced to socialize and you depends on others for fun (like camping) and there is none of that in D3.
Shadow group-play ... i don't think it is much more shallow than 5-man dungeon. True, there is no trinity, but if you watch youtube D3 videos, there are those who adjust their builds (and there are more) for group play. Now certainly there is no pvp, or large scale combat, but i don't play RPGs for that.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I realize they took the real money auction house out of the game, but most of the people you get invites from are trying to sell money outside of the real money auction house. The same thing happens in world of warcraft.
Diablo 3 combat can be pretty challenging, but again it's generally the same thing over and over again. The game has very little content. A game like EQ had far more options in terms of where you were going to grind. The mobs had a large variety of different abilities to use against you. I don't see why the grind in D3 would be better. I think I'm done with the days of repeating the same content over 100 times. About the 10-15th time through D3 I was about ready to quit. I wasn't really having fun anymore regardless of if the game was challenging or not.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Even Animal Crossing have day and night cycle!!!!!
ok, just wana get this off my chest...
RIP Orc Choppa
Again, out of the game gold selling is prevalent in MMOs anyway .. so let's not disgress on it. In fact, it is pretty good evidence that D3 is viewed as a MMO.
You are kidding me about the comparison between EQ and D3. Combat is night and day .. particularly in tactical varieties.
D3 mobs are far far more interesting with interesting combo of abilities. There is little physical effects in EQ. No mobs will pull you towards them, or slow down time, or put rotating destruction beams on the group .. or a thousand things you need to avoid. EQ mobs won't rush you with 20 mobs .. and block off your exit (because there is no collison detection).
EQ mobs are horribly static and boring. D3 mobs are exciting and vary. Heck, when i back in EQ grinding levels, you can simply root/nuke almost at all level with single spawn. That is horribly boring and uninteresting.
I have not even talked about the very many build (some dependent on gear) that you can use. Not only differnet classes play differnetly .. even different builds play differently in D3.
.. another big difference is this ... D3 is all instanced .. i don't have to play with anyone if i don't want to.
I'm talking about friend invites. You get spammed with them from %goldforsale!% we sell gold at premium www.goldrus.com. I saw a bunch of them every time I loged in. It was the same in World of Warcraft.
Day night cycle is nothing new. They even had that back in Ultima 6 or 7. It really does not add a lot of a game, except that you have to wait for the stores to open or some events to occur.
Actually there was collision detection in EQ. I remember people blocking door ways. There were also many more spells with many more different effects then in D3. There was snare to slow you down. There was root to stop you from moving. There was damage over time. There was fear to make you run away. There was mez to keep you from doing anything. There are a lot more then that, but that is just a taste.
But it adds to the realism of the world you are in.
Now adays mmo dont even have that, which is sad....
RIP Orc Choppa
The Secret World would probably be among the top MMO's if they had gotten that right.
A lot of people just don't seem to get it. There are intangibles in a lot of things that were taken out new games. Having day and night obviously means the world feels more real and certain things happen only at certain times. Something might better fit only happening at night and another only in the day. Finding a group of vampires or a werewolf would be a lot more interesting in the night. Traveling at night would be a lot scarier than in the day time. Traveling in the day would feel a lot safer and more relaxing.
Take a deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep breath.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6a69dMLb_k
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
i dont feel the need to explore the whole planet while playing mmo's.. it gets boring after you've seen it all.
i do however like it when they make it a big part of the game and dont just have you camp a main city at level cap. there should allways be a reason to visit and revisit maps imo. unfortunately exploration just is'nt a good enough incentive as many would like.
I had fun once, it was terrible.
A day-night cycle by itself is just fluff. It needs to have actual game features tied to it. The idea about warewolves and vampires coming out at night is a good start but you really need more features that make it something that would appeal to players.
Way too many arguments in favor of open world MMORPGs seem to boil down to:
Step 1: Have an open world
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Great MMORPG
So i guess trees, rocks, water, clouds and basically anything that isn't tied to gameplay is fluff and unnecessary.
The reason why aspects like day and night cycles are important to so many players is because it breathes quality and life into the game, therefore adding a critical layer of enjoyment.
The trick is to build a world and fill with enough content to give it gameplay functionality, but not so much that every 5 seconds something has to be there.
The world, the gameplay, the combat, the features, all of it as to work together to create a fun, immersive and engaging experience.
Interesting day night cycle discussion.
I would say it depends on the implementation.
If day and night indeed have purpose and are used well, if the mood is conveyed well, if some areas are dangerous at night, if it influences gameplay by having to maybe carry a light, etc, then I agree it can add a lot of immersion and could even be used for some interesting gameplay mechanics.
But if it's just aesthetic, then it's a toss up. Has both up and downsides.
For instance, it can be an annoyance to many players who will just perceive it as a hinderance to vision.
You also have to take the technical side into account, having static or semi-static lighting opens up a lot of possibilities that can raise the quality of the visuals, this then makes up for the lost immersion of not having a day night cycle by having better quality lighting overall.
Things like GI are hard to pull off in a dynamic setting with day/night cycles. There are several MMOs that ditched a real cycle with changing sun directions in order to use precalced lighting. Some others have hybrid approaches with faked cycles by just shifting hues and brightness around while maintaining a static system. DAoC had an expansion that was basically entirely underground, "coincidentally" they started using lightmaps all over those areas in the same expansion to boost visual quality.
With the advancement of tech we are at a point where these technical things are slowly diminishing away ofcourse, so hopefully the future will bring real day/night cycles back again without having to give up lighting quality or speed for it, but none the less, MMOs don't usually target high end hardware and it is currently still something to keep in mind.
So? Games are not real. Realism does not equate more fun or more entertaining.
Day/life cycle is simple to do. The reason that it is not more popular is that it does not add to the fun of many.
Not only a game does not need to be realistic to be fun, sometimes too realistic is a barrier to fun (to me, of course).
For example, it is more realistic to walk for a day before you see the next town ... do you really want to spend 8 hours play-time walking? It is more realistic to die and never come-back ... do you want a game that you have only ONE chance to play it?
Video games are entertainment, not real life.