Howdy, Stranger!

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

The MMO is Dead

124678

Comments

  • DracomonDracomon Member UncommonPosts: 30

    Someone mentioned GM events in this thread and it reminded me of one i saw in EQ. It must have been 2003ish and as i was heading back to Neriak ( i used to chill out there after dinging) and 5 or 6 GM's had taken control of some low level halfling mobs that were in the forest and were calling out that they were on there way to the Dark Elf capital to avenge their fallen brothers.

    When i arrived on the scene there were poor dead Dark Elf Noobs everywhere. Being level 40 i thought i'd be able to help out. I got bitch slapped all the way back to my bind point and level 39.

    I may have been pissed, but i certainly was not bored or apathetic. In fact i had a lot of fun, Dark Elf brothers from all over the world got the call and come home to defend our cities gates from the upstart midgets.

    If i live for another 50 years i will still have a picture in my mind of one Halfling charging ahead and /shouting FOR GLORY! straight into 50 + Dark Elves.

     

    image
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Originally posted by daltanious
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by vidiotking

    Where are these types of games today?


     

    Dead.

    MMOs in general however, are alive and doing well.

    Exactly. :-) More then ever. Btw, Pacman is also dead, no matter once was my favorite game. But that is now history, just good memories.

    Pacman is immortal.

    MMORPGs are not dead. UO, EQ, DAOC, AC, AO, and a bunch of pre-WoW stuff is still alive and up and running. They are dated, old, and nothing like the games back 20 expansions or whatever ago plus probably have a cash shop and more modern mechanics intended to make the game easier and faster.

    MMOs completely changed.

    From the scope, business model, pacing, even the focus of massivley multiplayer got thrown out the window in favor of things like a focus on single player story. Both quality and quantity got thrown under the bus driven by profits. When technology should be able to push the limits and hardware is so much more powerful we still get games that can't even come close to reaching the bar WoW set let alone anywhere close to passing said bar.

    Love them or hate them you can't deny the huge changes.

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

  • MikehaMikeha Member EpicPosts: 9,196
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Sourajit
    Originally posted by vidiotking

    Archeage was the nail in the coffin for me. SWG was the pinnacle.

    P2W options, advanced bots/hacks, small & instanced worlds, easy/everyone can win gameplay and cash shops are just some of the reasons this genre is over.

    I know you can never "go back". But EQ and SWG were magical, and had it right. EQ was actually dangerous, and SWG was a living breathing, player built world.

    Where are these types of games today?

    I've been playing single player rts.....

    ArcheAge  is a disaster to begin with.

    The game developers needed HUGE time , participation, team-game-play, real- money, devotion, etc from it's player base offering them just a PvP option / guild based land grab. However if OP is looking for pure player driven economy and player built living vibrating game world or mmos of that genre ArcheAge was never the option. 

    Translation - I hate the game - so I'm just going to say it's a disaster.

    /facepalm

     

     

    This is pretty much what I see too. People just mad and jealous that they don't have anything to play. I say they deserve exactly what they are getting.

  • ApraxisApraxis Member UncommonPosts: 1,518
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Callidor
    Originally posted by Arawulf

    The rumors surrounding the death of MMORPG's have been greatly exaggerated.

    They have, however, evolved over time. I suppose to many who resent or reject this evolution, the genre may seem dead to them.

    I respectfully disagree sir, I think the problem is the lack of evolution in games. What are we really doing thats different from EQ circa 1999?

     

    What are we doing that is different from FPS games from 1999 or RTS games from 1999?  Is there anything substantially different about RPGs from 1999?  Why would MMORPGs operate substantially different from every other genre of game in the way they change?

     

    Games change based on input from the players.  The changes made since 1999 are the changes that players have been willing to pay for.  The changes that haven't been made since then are changes that didn't make the cut. 

     

     

    Ok buddy... stop.. stop here and right now. You do know that FPS and RTS changed drastically over time?

    Back then you got Doom for FPS.. later on Unreal Tournament introduced Capture the Flag(yes i know we MMO players do know it now, too.. but it was invented in FPS games, exactly UT), Domination and other game modes, introduced actually different weapons.

    Later on we could play with more players from 8 maps to no 64 vs 64 in Battlefield. We got all kind of vehicles to play with.. Tanks, Jeeps, Helicoptors and Jets and Boots on top of that. We got destructiable environment, sniping over a completely ridiculous distance(from Doom perspective) and so on and so forth.

    You can't really say that FPS games did not evolve. The evolved on a lot of levels.. oh right.. nowadays you got levels, too in your FPS.

    And RTS? It started with Dune2 and C&C and Warcraft/Starcraft was more or less the same.. as Total Annihilation and others at that time. Z made it a lot more tactical with a higher emphasis on the actual combat(before that it was more or less Build up and Zerg down). Dawn of War 1 improved upon Z and you got very intense battles with a lot of heroes with different abilities on board. Warcraft 3 took a few elements from it.. but was bascily the same old same as WC1. However DotA arised out of those ideas and RTS evolved into MOBAs. Not to talk that you got RTS games like the Total Wars Series with a different evolution.

    You really want to say RTS did not evolve over time.. and extremely so? Come on.. are you blind or what?

    And now we come to MMOs.. in the beginning was UO and EQ. Both very different SWG followed from UO as did EvE and the UO line bascily died there.. or did not evolve any further. WoW evolved out of EQ. And it stopped there. All other games tried to make a new WoW, and made partially what WoW did with EQ.. make it more casually and less complex. And there we are.. with one game more boring as the game before. Yeap there are some exceptions, but this is the exception that proves the rule.

    And i shall knew it.. because i play all three genres more or less since the very beginning up to now. However i did not play a lot of MMOs for any lengthy time the last few years.. there might be a reason for..

  • BigdaddyxBigdaddyx Member UncommonPosts: 2,039
    Originally posted by Jockan
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Sourajit
    Originally posted by vidiotking

    Archeage was the nail in the coffin for me. SWG was the pinnacle.

    P2W options, advanced bots/hacks, small & instanced worlds, easy/everyone can win gameplay and cash shops are just some of the reasons this genre is over.

    I know you can never "go back". But EQ and SWG were magical, and had it right. EQ was actually dangerous, and SWG was a living breathing, player built world.

    Where are these types of games today?

    I've been playing single player rts.....

    ArcheAge  is a disaster to begin with.

    The game developers needed HUGE time , participation, team-game-play, real- money, devotion, etc from it's player base offering them just a PvP option / guild based land grab. However if OP is looking for pure player driven economy and player built living vibrating game world or mmos of that genre ArcheAge was never the option. 

    Translation - I hate the game - so I'm just going to say it's a disaster.

    /facepalm

     

     

    This is pretty much what I see too. People just mad and jealous that they don't have anything to play. I say they deserve exactly what they are getting.

    Yes that is all there is...JEALOUSY!!! you solved the mystery.

    Ok seriously..i am subbed to two MMOs and dabble in two B2P and few F2P MMOS from time to time so i do have plenty of MMOS to play and yet i agree with others that AA is a disaster. Infact that guy is being very generous as i would go with more colorful words to describe how bad AA is.

  • hikaru77hikaru77 Member UncommonPosts: 1,123
    Originally posted by umcorian

    Even Archeage, at its roots, is still a WoW Clone. Rather than 1-2 light innovations on the WoW model, it maybe has 4-5... and an end game that replaces raid bosses with a backpack. It's no surprise it's not working.

    Company's see this - no new WoW clones by big production have started development after SWTOR's initial bomb. TESO and Wildstar were the last Themeparks to finish up in the age of the dead WoW Clone... and their flopping only proved it further.

    New games are being developed that will be quite different from the WoW model. Everything I hear about EQ Next is very positive. And if that one doesn't catch on, the games after EQ Next will. 

    MMOs will never die, they'll just evolve. 

    The only real ¨WoW Clone¨ of the last 10 years of MMO history was WILDSTAR. Everything else are standars of the MMO genre, Raids, Dungeons, Crafting, Housing, Battlegrounds, Arenas, Progression, Etc. If a game doesnt have it, people will ask for them to be implemented or quit, the ¨WoW Clone¨ is pretty much an Internet Myth where a Themepark game is something bad that need to be called ¨WoW Clone¨, but again, is a Myth But WIldstar. 

    The MMO is not dead. What is dying in the genre are the Sanboxs, being SWG the last of them. Or maybe not dying but evolving in a sub-genre into de MMO games for a core group of players.

    SWTOR was and is a Success, Also GW2 in his own way, and even when i dont like it WoW is still the king. MMOs will evolve, but they are heading towards a thempark road.

     

          

  • winterwinter Member UncommonPosts: 2,281
    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx
    Originally posted by vidiotking

    Archeage was the nail in the coffin for me. SWG was the pinnacle.

    P2W options, advanced bots/hacks, small & instanced worlds, easy/everyone can win gameplay and cash shops are just some of the reasons this genre is over.

    I know you can never "go back". But EQ and SWG were magical, and had it right. EQ was actually dangerous, and SWG was a living breathing, player built world.

    Where are these types of games today?

    I've been playing single player rts.....

    If you won't change with time you will be left behind.

    I do not support cash shop heavy games or botters and hackers but then again i have more choice now than i ever had in days of EQ and UO. 

     

     

    +1

    If the OP didn't see this coming then he either didn't bother to check anything and just bought the hype or stuck his head in the sand. Either way he has no one to blame but himself.

  • BigdaddyxBigdaddyx Member UncommonPosts: 2,039
    Originally posted by Apraxis
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by Callidor
    Originally posted by Arawulf

    The rumors surrounding the death of MMORPG's have been greatly exaggerated.

    They have, however, evolved over time. I suppose to many who resent or reject this evolution, the genre may seem dead to them.

    I respectfully disagree sir, I think the problem is the lack of evolution in games. What are we really doing thats different from EQ circa 1999?

     

    What are we doing that is different from FPS games from 1999 or RTS games from 1999?  Is there anything substantially different about RPGs from 1999?  Why would MMORPGs operate substantially different from every other genre of game in the way they change?

     

    Games change based on input from the players.  The changes made since 1999 are the changes that players have been willing to pay for.  The changes that haven't been made since then are changes that didn't make the cut. 

     

     

    Ok buddy... stop.. stop here and right now. You do know that FPS and RTS changed drastically over time?

    Back then you got Doom for FPS.. later on Unreal Tournament introduced Capture the Flag(yes i know we MMO players do know it now, too.. but it was invented in FPS games, exactly UT), Domination and other game modes, introduced actually different weapons.

    Later on we could play with more players from 8 maps to no 64 vs 64 in Battlefield. We got all kind of vehicles to play with.. Tanks, Jeeps, Helicoptors and Jets and Boots on top of that. We got destructiable environment, sniping over a completely ridiculous distance(from Doom perspective) and so on and so forth.

    You can't really say that FPS games did not evolve. The evolved on a lot of levels.. oh right.. nowadays you got levels, too in your FPS.

    And RTS? It started with Dune2 and C&C and Warcraft/Starcraft was more or less the same.. as Total Annihilation and others at that time. Z made it a lot more tactical with a higher emphasis on the actual combat(before that it was more or less Build up and Zerg down). Dawn of War 1 improved upon Z and you got very intense battles with a lot of heroes with different abilities on board. Warcraft 3 took a few elements from it.. but was bascily the same old same as WC1. However DotA arised out of those ideas and RTS evolved into MOBAs. Not to talk that you got RTS games like the Total Wars Series with a different evolution.

    You really want to say RTS did not evolve over time.. and extremely so? Come on.. are you blind or what?

    And now we come to MMOs.. in the beginning was UO and EQ. Both very different SWG followed from UO as did EvE and the UO line bascily died there.. or did not evolve any further. WoW evolved out of EQ. And it stopped there. All other games tried to make a new WoW, and made partially what WoW did with EQ.. make it more casually and less complex. And there we are.. with one game more boring as the game before. Yeap there are some exceptions, but this is the exception that proves the rule.

    And i shall knew it.. because i play all three genres more or less since the very beginning up to now. However i did not play a lot of MMOs for any lengthy time the last few years.. there might be a reason for..

    So TLDR.

    I only agree with my own perception of what 'evolving' means. Let us ignore the fact how much MMOS have changed and evolved from UO to EQ to WOW to GW2 and still continue to change. but nah..it doesn't gel with me so i am gonna reject it all.

  • vidiotkingvidiotking Member Posts: 587

    A lot of great responses. Thanks for that.

    Let me clarify a little. I called out AA and maybe that was a bit unfair. I TOTALLY enjoyed the AA Alpha. I had a small house and a farm. Spent my time playing farmville w/ mobs while occasionally getting ganked. It was the most fun I'd had in an mmo since SWG.

    When AA went live, my gameplay experience did a total 180. No way for me to get a house and a farm anymore. OK, that's a slight exageration, but it became nearly impossible to get those things and the game died for me. One can argue the valididty of the statements, but that doesn't change the fact that its was true to me.

    I've played many many mmos over the years, and since SWG it has been all down hill. I'm taking a break from them. I will probably give EQN a chance since it seems to be promising all the things I'm looking for, but my expectations are REALLY low, while my hopes are somewhat high, I can't help but remember that hope was let out of pandora's box, and so, is not a good thing.

  • PaRoXiTiCPaRoXiTiC Member UncommonPosts: 603
    Playing Guild Wars 2 and it is very much alive. Can't PvP, do World Events, or World vs World without seeing hundreds of other players.
  • doodphacedoodphace Member UncommonPosts: 1,858
    Originally posted by umcorian
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by umcorian

    Even Archeage, at its roots, is still a WoW Clone. Rather than 1-2 light innovations on the WoW model, it maybe has 4-5... and an end game that replaces raid bosses with a backpack. It's no surprise it's not working.

    Company's see this - no new WoW clones by big production have started development after SWTOR's initial bomb. TESO and Wildstar were the last Themeparks to finish up in the age of the dead WoW Clone... and their flopping only proved it further.

    New games are being developed that will be quite different from the WoW model. Everything I hear about EQ Next is very positive. And if that one doesn't catch on, the games after EQ Next will. 

    MMOs will never die, they'll just evolve. 

    And by flop, you mean doing better than any non WoW clone that came before it? SWTOR, for example, is doing better than any MMO ever released in the west not named WoW...

    Even ESO has more subs than any pre WoW MMO...

    I really don't know where you're getting your info from... but in the course of a single month, Archeage couldn't retain a fraction of the people who initially tried it. And it's a real stretch to say SWTOR and TESO weren't flops. The only reason those two games even made a blip on the radar was the IP they were attached to... and yet SWTOR was f2p within 6 months, following a catastrophic quarter which EA posted a deficit of hundreds of millions. 

    And if TESO finishes its first year with more than a 30% retention rate, I'll be surprised. 

    Even now, look at the games being hyped. There's no more Theme Park MMOs being developed - Theme Parks are *dead* with sole exception to WoW. 

    Well then, point me to a "non WoW clone" that had over a million players in the west alone after 3 years of its release...

    SWTOR has more players than any sanbox on the market. SWTOR has more players than any sandbox ever released....heck, even Rift prob has more players than any sandbox on the market....In what fantasy world are all themeparks dead with the sole exception of WoW?

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,332

    I am playing and enjoying project Gorgon,it is sort of like old school,no linear questing but carries the FFXI sub class idea.

    NO HAND holding at all,everything needs to be discovered and lots of small cool ideas.It is a low budget game but looks decent enough,it is a small team that can't afford the time or money to make tons of triple A assets but the game none the less is fun for me.

    BTW you missed the best at old school game design in the original FFXI,it did what EQ did only better with a lot more varied content and more versatility with classes.

    If your tired of linear questing and tired of playing only to chase yellow markers around until end game then give Gorgon a fair shot,i think it might grow on you.Today the 25th is a great day to join as they are trying some Halloween event with the starter town of Serbule being attacked every 3-4 hours.

     

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by umcorian
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by umcorian

    Even Archeage, at its roots, is still a WoW Clone. Rather than 1-2 light innovations on the WoW model, it maybe has 4-5... and an end game that replaces raid bosses with a backpack. It's no surprise it's not working.

    Company's see this - no new WoW clones by big production have started development after SWTOR's initial bomb. TESO and Wildstar were the last Themeparks to finish up in the age of the dead WoW Clone... and their flopping only proved it further.

    New games are being developed that will be quite different from the WoW model. Everything I hear about EQ Next is very positive. And if that one doesn't catch on, the games after EQ Next will. 

    MMOs will never die, they'll just evolve. 

    And by flop, you mean doing better than any non WoW clone that came before it? SWTOR, for example, is doing better than any MMO ever released in the west not named WoW...

    Even ESO has more subs than any pre WoW MMO...

    I really don't know where you're getting your info from... but in the course of a single month, Archeage couldn't retain a fraction of the people who initially tried it. And it's a real stretch to say SWTOR and TESO weren't flops. The only reason those two games even made a blip on the radar was the IP they were attached to... and yet SWTOR was f2p within 6 months, following a catastrophic quarter which EA posted a deficit of hundreds of millions. 

    And if TESO finishes its first year with more than a 30% retention rate, I'll be surprised. 

    Even now, look at the games being hyped. There's no more Theme Park MMOs being developed - Theme Parks are *dead* with sole exception to WoW. 

    Well then, point me to a "non WoW clone" that had over a million players in the west alone after 3 years of its release...

    SWTOR has more players than any sanbox on the market. SWTOR has more players than any sandbox ever released....heck, even Rift prob has more players than any sandbox on the market....In what fantasy world are all themeparks dead with the sole exception of WoW?

    and TOR made more than $200M in 2013 ... it is not wow or LoL numbers, but still .. if that is a flop, many companies would love to flop like that.

     

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Callidor

     

    The growth of MMOs as far as gameplay and content has stagnated. I think a lot of us old school players had brighter hopes for where the genre would end up back in say 2000.


     

    The MMOs were never supposed to end up where "a lot of us old school players had brighter hopes for".

    Not evolving into desired form or way does not mean stagnation.

     

    This response should be printed out and read out loud by ever poster here every day.

    Maybe just maybe people would understand, but I doubt it.

     

    can't blame people though ... for them "die" means "evolve to something they don't like".

     

  • JjixJjix Member UncommonPosts: 142

    can't blame people though ... for them "die" means "evolve to something they don't like".

     

    Ummm . . . yeah! For something to evolve into something else that no longer bares any resemblance to its original form means that original form is effectively dead.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Originally posted by Jjix

    can't blame people though ... for them "die" means "evolve to something they don't like".

     

    Ummm . . . yeah! For something to evolve into something else that no longer bares any resemblance to its original form means that original form is effectively dead.

    No resemblance to it original is a bit extreme.

  • JjixJjix Member UncommonPosts: 142
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Jjix

    can't blame people though ... for them "die" means "evolve to something they don't like".

     

    Ummm . . . yeah! For something to evolve into something else that no longer bares any resemblance to its original form means that original form is effectively dead.

    No resemblance to it original is a bit extreme.

    Well what games are you talking about as being the evolutionary offspring of the old school mmorpgs? Many people talk about MOBAs, and I think those bare very little resemblance to the old MMORPGs.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Ket_Viliano

    Look, DMKano, for all that AA offers, it's a steaming pile of p2w poop.

     

    The tier 9 "Delphinad" bow does 2x damage as the tier 8 "Epherium" bow, and if you just buy credits, spend them on worker's comp. potions, sell those on the AH for gold, buy logs, grind carpentry, sell the lumber to buy more logs, sell more worker's comp. pots to buy the crystals, then RNGesus your way to the best weapon in the game, you can  then WFTPWN noobz who did not spend the raw cash to keep up.

     

    The rest of the crafting is the same, if you just buy stuff on the cash shop, sell it for gold, use 5 alts, for 6 total toonz, guzzle labor like a drunkard, you get enough labor points to max any craft in just over a week, and can then afford to make the gear needed.

     

    The worst part is that each tier of gear requires the tier before it, up to to tier 6, when the RNG really kicks in, as only one in 7 pieces can be upgraded to the next tier.

     

    Having figured this out, I am done with both Trion and XLgames.

     

    Yes, AA has music you can make your own score, it has housing, if you were in for headstart ( I was ), it has boats and diving and fishing and and and, it's a p2w grind game, and this is not going to change.

     

    Once I figured this out, it was like poison, there is just no way I can pay to keep up with the reality of a cash shop driven cash grab.

    You don't like it - that's fine, thanks for at least explaining why.

     

    The thing that you might not realize is how impossibly rare it is to get best in slot gear - even if you spent tens of thousands of $ in the cash shop every month - you won't be decked out in delphinated gear.

    If someone was willing to drop millions and had several thousand crafters - you could maybe get one character fully decked out again the chances of this happening are zero.

    I think that's the part folks don't get - the difference between paying $15 per month and someone who spends $1000 might seem huge - but once you see the math of how ridiculously small chances are of getting Delphinated gear with perfect rolls - 

    it's like someone thinking they will win Powerball because they bough a 100 lotto tickets.

     

    If you like ArcheAge as a game ignoring the pay model (pretend it was pure F2P) then you like the game.

    The cash shop is there for rich players to fund the game for the rest - the idea that they can get delphinated gear with perfect rolls - haha are they in for a rude awakening.

     

    It doesn't change anything really. The game is still early. The P2W gaps are still somewhat narrow, but will widen with time. Right now, you don't need best in slot. Just better than other's slots. It's all relative and it's all in scale to how much you want to spend. You want to spend $50 bucks a month in the cash shop? Fine, you will be better than the guy who spends 20, but not as good as the guy who spends 100.

    Your immidiate shift to the "Best in Slot" example is a deflection. The relativity of the P2W factor in this game exists at all levels and scales. This example tries to make it look like P2W will be the rare exception. It's not even relevant.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Originally posted by Jjix
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Jjix

    can't blame people though ... for them "die" means "evolve to something they don't like".

     

    Ummm . . . yeah! For something to evolve into something else that no longer bares any resemblance to its original form means that original form is effectively dead.

    No resemblance to it original is a bit extreme.

    Well what games are you talking about as being the evolutionary offspring of the old school mmorpgs? Many people talk about MOBAs, and I think those bare very little resemblance to the old MMORPGs.

    Evolution is not always new.  Often it is only bring together of different elements that did not exist before, but were already present in other individuals.  The MMO world is full of that.  Often times the creation of something "new" comes from an accident or in the MMO from a game running and then a need is found and then resolved with something new.  Thinking people will sit around in a group and create "new" on a white board is insane.

  • GoldenArrowGoldenArrow Member UncommonPosts: 1,186

    Massive Multiplayer Online games are dead?

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by Jjix

    Ummm . . . yeah! For something to evolve into something else that no longer bares any resemblance to its original form means that original form is effectively dead.

    That isn't how OP's statment stands though.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by umcorian

    Even Archeage, at its roots, is still a WoW Clone. Rather than 1-2 light innovations on the WoW model, it maybe has 4-5... and an end game that replaces raid bosses with a backpack. It's no surprise it's not working.

    Company's see this - no new WoW clones by big production have started development after SWTOR's initial bomb. TESO and Wildstar were the last Themeparks to finish up in the age of the dead WoW Clone... and their flopping only proved it further.

    New games are being developed that will be quite different from the WoW model. Everything I hear about EQ Next is very positive. And if that one doesn't catch on, the games after EQ Next will. 

    MMOs will never die, they'll just evolve. 

    Don't forget about Undead labs "Class 4" either, it seems to be rather unique. Too bad WoDO was canceled though.

    But yes, the technology is changing right now and the games needs to adapt to that. When products like Oculus Rift and similar comes together with the next generation of computers we finally will be ready for VR MMOs and games like that will need to have very different mechanics from the current games to work.

    In the past have there been a few failed tries at VR (I think Nintendo's was most spectacular so far) but the technology was simply not good enough, low resolution, lack of memory and very high prices meant it just couldn't work. It was just the same as when a classic game company put everything on CDs (they were called Cinemaware BTW, a great developer of it's time), they were too early and lost everything because it. But the people who put the money in at the right time got really rich (Sonys playstation did and almost killed Nintendo because of it).

    MMOs do need to evolve and adapt to new ideas and technology. 

    The difficulty is another thing completely though. Current trend is to make it so easy a 5 year old kid can play it besides th endgame raids, but these things change on and off. It is not unlikely to think that next generation of people would want something harder again (or something so easy their dog can play it).

  • randomtrandomt Member UncommonPosts: 1,220

    The mmo becoming mainstream and trying to attract the average console player is what has turned what used to be a complex genre into a simpleton's game for casual play.

    There has been attempts over the years to create something, but they are indies who just dont have the funding or manpower to produce

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Jjix

    Well what games are you talking about as being the evolutionary offspring of the old school mmorpgs? Many people talk about MOBAs, and I think those bare very little resemblance to the old MMORPGs.

    Evolution is not always new.  Often it is only bring together of different elements that did not exist before, but were already present in other individuals.  The MMO world is full of that.  Often times the creation of something "new" comes from an accident or in the MMO from a game running and then a need is found and then resolved with something new.  Thinking people will sit around in a group and create "new" on a white board is insane.

    Interesting topic.

    And sometimes people actually do create new things on a whiteboard, or for that matter based their ideas on completely different things (Minecraft comes from Lego for example and MMOs comes from computer RPGs and MUDs who are based on pen and paper RPGs).

    Sometimes just taking things from different older games works excellent but you can't always do that or we would just play advanced versions of Tetris and Space invaders today.

    I think MMOs should look more on pen and paper RPGs, many of those have great ideas that would fit perfectly in a MMO (Shadowrun and Warhammer fantasy RPG (not to be confused with the not so great MMO that useed it's name and a little of the lore) are 2 great examples.

    Some MMOs in the past did have some excellent ideas that are forgotten today and can be brought back (I am looking on you, Asherons call) as well.

    The most important thing though is that new MMOs shouldn't feel just exactly like older ones we already played for years. In that case most people just don't bother to change since we already spent years with our current toons and a slightly different world just ain't enough for most of us to start from the beginning again.

  • MikehaMikeha Member EpicPosts: 9,196
    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx
    Originally posted by Jockan
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Sourajit
    Originally posted by vidiotking

    Archeage was the nail in the coffin for me. SWG was the pinnacle.

    P2W options, advanced bots/hacks, small & instanced worlds, easy/everyone can win gameplay and cash shops are just some of the reasons this genre is over.

    I know you can never "go back". But EQ and SWG were magical, and had it right. EQ was actually dangerous, and SWG was a living breathing, player built world.

    Where are these types of games today?

    I've been playing single player rts.....

    ArcheAge  is a disaster to begin with.

    The game developers needed HUGE time , participation, team-game-play, real- money, devotion, etc from it's player base offering them just a PvP option / guild based land grab. However if OP is looking for pure player driven economy and player built living vibrating game world or mmos of that genre ArcheAge was never the option. 

    Translation - I hate the game - so I'm just going to say it's a disaster.

    /facepalm

     

     

    This is pretty much what I see too. People just mad and jealous that they don't have anything to play. I say they deserve exactly what they are getting.

    Yes that is all there is...JEALOUSY!!! you solved the mystery.

    Ok seriously..i am subbed to two MMOs and dabble in two B2P and few F2P MMOS from time to time so i do have plenty of MMOS to play and yet i agree with others that AA is a disaster. Infact that guy is being very generous as i would go with more colorful words to describe how bad AA is.

     

    What are those games? As for ArcheAGe how can it be a disaster when the game if full of people playing it? This is what makes these kind of statements look silly. How and why are people logging in everyday to a disaster?

    Forgot to mention that I don't even play ArcheAge. Tried it when it came out for a couple of weeks but quit because I did not like the combat, there was no real open world dungeons and even though there is a lot to do it had too much of a focus on doing the bland quest to progess.

Sign In or Register to comment.