Old School, something to think about

delete5230

AGE OF FIRST GENERATION MMORPG'S 
Ask yourself this question.... Do you refer back to 1999 when you think of Old School ? 
Understand this is 19 years ago !

I bring this point up again, because no one can comprehend the "possibilities of evolution and fresh ideas" that could be invented all because development had stopped permanently of Old School so many years ago.  



I say this because I had played P1999 and its OLD.  Everquest 1 is a great game.  I can't find much fault it I zoomed back 19 years ago. But being a first time player in 2018 it gives the feeling of not being worth it TO A NEW PLAYER and best left to nostalgia players. Only because features are ancient and experimental for it's time.   

Why do you feel this style can't be made fresh and modern ?  
 

Scot

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

iixviiiix

I see no problem with open world , less quests and reasonable grind . Aside from unreasonable stress that developers put on early old school game to forced player to pay the subscribe , i find the old school mmo formula being more casual and enjoyable .

Normal people (aka majority) don't like complex stuffs , that's why the wow clone keep failing while casual game like farmville , candy crush , or clash of clans be come hit .

delete5230

Scot said:

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

Very good point, 
Older mmorpg's were "experiments".  I have a deep admiration for those that made and played them.  However the experiments were STOPPED and REPLACED  !!! 

Because they were STOPPED and RELPACED people seem to think historically about THIS STYLE OF PLAY. 

Kyleran

delete5230 said:7

Scot said:

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

Very good point, 
Older mmorpg's were "experiments".  I have a deep admiration for those that made and played them.  However the experiments were STOPPED and REPLACED  !!! 

Because they were STOPPED and RELPACED people seem to think historically about THIS STYLE OF PLAY. 

The purpose of those early experiments was to try and find a formula which would sell well in the marketplace.

This all pretty much came to a halt when Blizzard hit the jackpot, then it became a race to build a better EQ/WOW.

Thing with Pantheon is so far I've not seen much to convince me there's a whole lotta innovation but it's still early.

For those looking for a retooled EQ1 it will probably well meet their needs.

delete5230

Kyleran said:

delete5230 said:7

Scot said:

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

Very good point, 
Older mmorpg's were "experiments".  I have a deep admiration for those that made and played them.  However the experiments were STOPPED and REPLACED  !!! 

Because they were STOPPED and RELPACED people seem to think historically about THIS STYLE OF PLAY. 

The purpose of those early experiments was to try and find a formula which would sell well in the marketplace.

This all pretty much came to a halt when Blizzard hit the jackpot, then it became a race to build a better EQ/WOW.

Thing with Pantheon is so far I've not seen much to convince me there's a whole lotta innovation but it's still early.

For those looking for a retooled EQ1 it will probably well meet their needs.

I was trying to keep Pantheon out of this topic only because I was hoping to keep Old school in general as the topic. 

But since its brought up, I hope it's designed to move the experiment that had STOPPED so long ago forward.  Infact NEW all over again (since it was never allowed to blossom).   

Kyleran

delete5230 said:

Kyleran said:

delete5230 said:7

Scot said:

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

Very good point, 
Older mmorpg's were "experiments".  I have a deep admiration for those that made and played them.  However the experiments were STOPPED and REPLACED  !!! 

Because they were STOPPED and RELPACED people seem to think historically about THIS STYLE OF PLAY. 

The purpose of those early experiments was to try and find a formula which would sell well in the marketplace.

This all pretty much came to a halt when Blizzard hit the jackpot, then it became a race to build a better EQ/WOW.

Thing with Pantheon is so far I've not seen much to convince me there's a whole lotta innovation but it's still early.

For those looking for a retooled EQ1 it will probably well meet their needs.

I was trying to keep Pantheon out of this topic only because I was hoping to keep Old school in general as the topic. 

But since its brought up, I hope it's designed to move the experiment that had STOPPED so long ago forward.  Infact NEW all over again (since it was never allowed to blossom).   

Here is the thing, WOW is the evolution of EQ1, Vanguard was an attempt to take EQ1 designs to a new level but was a commercial failure.

As I understand it, Pantheon is likely to be more of a EQ1 version 2.0 rather than Vanguard 2.0.

Legends of Aria is trying to reinvent UO, AO is already trying as did SotA but most agree no real success there.

Other efforts are trying to bring back AC, DOAC's RVR, elements of Shadowbane, (Crowfall) or even build a better ArcheAge. (Ashes) and several attempts at restoring the superhero sub genre.

Crowfall seems to have more nteresting new ideas (to me) than the rest which seem to be focusing a bit too hard on making "classic" versions of their predecessors and we all know Blizzard will be crushing that market.

delete5230

Kyleran said:

delete5230 said:

Kyleran said:

delete5230 said:7

Scot said:

MMOs went from an experiment to a formula, a mixture that we all have to take to play MMOs. We could have had several strands of how to make a MMO playing out from those days. All we got were two, WoW and all the others that did nowhere near so well in terms of the money they made.

Later added to our MMO formula were cash shops and now gambling in MMOs. It is no wonder they are sometimes hard to recognise as MMOs today.

Very good point, 
Older mmorpg's were "experiments".  I have a deep admiration for those that made and played them.  However the experiments were STOPPED and REPLACED  !!! 

Because they were STOPPED and RELPACED people seem to think historically about THIS STYLE OF PLAY. 

The purpose of those early experiments was to try and find a formula which would sell well in the marketplace.

This all pretty much came to a halt when Blizzard hit the jackpot, then it became a race to build a better EQ/WOW.

Thing with Pantheon is so far I've not seen much to convince me there's a whole lotta innovation but it's still early.

For those looking for a retooled EQ1 it will probably well meet their needs.

I was trying to keep Pantheon out of this topic only because I was hoping to keep Old school in general as the topic. 

But since its brought up, I hope it's designed to move the experiment that had STOPPED so long ago forward.  Infact NEW all over again (since it was never allowed to blossom).   

Here is the thing, WOW is the evolution of EQ1, Vanguard was an attempt to take EQ1 designs to a new level but was a commercial failure.

As I understand it, Pantheon is likely to be more of a EQ1 version 2.0 rather than Vanguard 2.0.

Legends of Aria is trying to reinvent UO, AO is already trying as did SotA but most agree no real success there.

Other efforts are trying to bring back AC, DOAC's RVR, elements of Shadowbane, (Crowfall) or even build a better ArcheAge. (Ashes) and several attempts at restoring the superhero sub genre.

Crowfall seems to have more nteresting new ideas (to me) than the rest which seem to be focusing a bit too hard on making "classic" versions of their predecessors and we all know Blizzard will be crushing that market.

I agree, I'll go along with all of that that.  
All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out.  So the potential WAS their.  

With this, and so much time had passed, a successor has EVEN GREATER potential with the only constraint being a new generation of players have to be enlightened... I don't think this would be hard.  

New people are not dumb as most here believe, all because "Big Business" decided to easy mode all the games, suggesting the majority are. 

Scot

The value classic has is how it can change modern MMOs to create hybrids. It is fraught with difficulty because old and new systems do not always mix well and the expectations of players about what needs to be brought back into MMOs varies greatly.

delete5230

Jean-Luc_Picard said:

delete5230 said:

All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out.  So the potential WAS their. 

If Vanguard really had such a "huge" following, they wouldn't have been forced to shut it down, it would still be running as a commercially very successful game.

As we all know an mmorpg gets only one chance, just one.  

Regardless of a huge bad chain of events, sadly it was doomed.  No chance of recovery without a large windfall of surprise money that no one in their right mind would supply at that point of no return.

ciely

i hate it when that mmorpg that nobody wants back returns back from the dead 4-5 times but when people actually want it back the developers / publishers don't give another chance when it usually dies because of their lack of management and communication..

AlBQuirky

Jean-Luc_Picard said:

delete5230 said:

All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out.  So the potential WAS their. 

If Vanguard really had such a "huge" following, they wouldn't have been forced to shut it down, it would still be running as a commercially very successful game.

"Commercial Success" is another bar that got moved when WoW hit their huge sub numbers (not at release, by the way). No longer is "less then 1 million" players considered a "commercial success."

I did give Vanguard a try when it released and it did not grab me. I know many players (How many? Who knows.) found the game hit their sweet spot just right. I give the devs applause for trying to fix that buggy mess, but it just never recovered.

Back to the topic at hand, I'd love to see the "experimentation phase" return, but realize that MMOs are now a business first, a game last.

Amathe

DMKano said:

But we discussed this same point already. More than once.

Every day, sometimes multiple times a day, for years.

rojoArcueid

Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?

is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.

The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.

ciely

rojoArcueid said:

Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?

is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.

The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.

it's better off devolving if evolution is towards graphically appealing garbage gameplay p2w games and founder pack / buy to play early access nonsense.

gamers would rather play ragnarok over tree of savior despite it being pretty much the evolved version.

i'd rather go back for the community, it was far more positive and players didn't abuse g.i.r.l for free items as much. it wasn't about the end game, it was about the journey, roleplaying and socializing.

people these days ignore the rpg aspect of the game and want the mmorpg to roleplay FOR them, I miss the days where we would imagine our own story and fight our rivals for honor.

my favorate mmo year was 2001~2005 because of ragnarok, talesweaver, trickster, legend of mir series, maplestory open beta.. it blew my mind playing a side scroller mmo for the first time but i was still a die hard fan for isometric mmo.

Panther2103

ciely said:

rojoArcueid said:

Why do we have to go back to old school in order to have the possibility of evolution?

is it because if we try to evolve today we end up de-volving to old times? That's exactly what you want OP, to de-volve to old times.

The only way i see going back to old school actually working successfully is if 95%+ of mmorpgs shut down and we only have a handful to choose from. That is the point you keep missing on every post you make. Back then there were so little options that any little step was a huge improvement.

it's better off devolving if evolution is towards graphically appealing garbage gameplay p2w games and founder pack / buy to play early access nonsense.

gamers would rather play ragnarok over tree of savior despite it being pretty much the evolved version.

i'd rather go back for the community, it was far more positive and players didn't abuse g.i.r.l for free items as much. it wasn't about the end game, it was about the journey, roleplaying and socializing.

people these days ignore the rpg aspect of the game and want the mmorpg to roleplay FOR them, I miss the days where we would imagine our own story and fight our rivals for honor.

my favorate mmo year was 2001~2005 because of ragnarok, talesweaver, trickster, legend of mir series, maplestory open beta.. it blew my mind playing a side scroller mmo for the first time but i was still a die hard fan for isometric mmo.

I don't know if you are joking or what. Back in the day plenty of guys made female characters to get free items. I had friends who would dance in towns as female characters for "tips". 

Gamers wanting to play older versions of newer games has less to do with the newer game being worse or pay to win and more to do with comfort and the community they were used to. People know their MMORPG of choice, if a sequel comes out, and it's any different than what they feel from the original, they jump back. It's why alot of people in Korea still play Lineage 1 over 2. 

Also you mention Maplestory, but complain about P2W. Maplestory was literally pay to win. You didn't have PvP back then but you had gatcha and crazy crap in the cash shop. 

Everything is opinion based. You might really love the older games, but you might also be looking at them with rose tinted glasses like everyone says about nostalgia. I know for one, I definitely wouldn't be caught dead going back to playing some of the crap I used to love like Cabal Online, RF Online, or other random things I got into because they are garbage to me now. 

I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a time where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it. 

Amathe

Panther2103 said:

I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a time where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it. 

Good point.

Kyleran

Amathe said:

Panther2103 said:

I think right now is arguably the best time to be playing an MMORPG. You can go back and play on older games that people still love, or you can play newer games. There is so much variety to choose from right now that you can literally play anything you want. If I want to go play an open world full loot pvp game with faction warefare, I have 3 to choose from. If I want to go play the 1999 version of the original Everquest it's there for me to play. If I want to go play a flashy action MMO with great graphics, I can. I sure as hell don't want to go back to a Ltime where you had 4 games to pick from in the genre just to be able to experience it. 

Good point.

Not really,  even if an older game is still around they play very differently,  either due to changes in mechanics or changes in gamers themselves.  

I've read P1999 is a multi boxer paradise, DAOC has nothing comparable to the red server Mordred, Lineage 1? Only if you speak Korean well.

AC1? No solid servers I'm aware of.  L2, a wasteland these days.  The genre is a pile of "ashes" from my perspective, as all MMORPGs created post 2004 hold zero appeal for me.

Such is the burden for those of us with more discriminating tastes.

NorseGod

I have some projects lined up for the next few weeks. Thinking about jumping into Anarchy Online once things settle down.

Scorchien

NorseGod said:

I have some projects lined up for the next few weeks. Thinking about jumping into Anarchy Online once things settle down.

I jump into AO every year for 2-3 months , just left in August ,still a great game , and the community was much more active than i anticipated this return , all the major hubs had a good pop in and around it ...

  Still hoping we get an AO 2 one day

Theocritus

NorseGod said:

I have some projects lined up for the next few weeks. Thinking about jumping into Anarchy Online once things settle down.

AO is one of my favorite fall back games.

Vynt

I find it funny when people say going back to old school is de-evolving. Most of the newer games only have a fraction of what the old games had.

The games have been cut and watered down, streamlined for moving from 1 location to the next, but because of that, so many little things that added to the world have been lost. Then people don't want to stay long because the game is lacking "something" and they move on. And because people move on so quickly, the companies have to use a free to play, pay 2 win model to milk the player base before they leave.

If anything, the de-evolution is what has happened today. We've gone from worlds to games, and not even good games.

As far as evolving the past, we just needs games with a solid core that has all the "flavor" games use to have like factions that matter, dynamic weather, housing, dependency, alternate skill advancement, many paths to start and play, etc, and then try the new experimental things. Even if they don't quite work out, there is still a solid world to play in.

I wouldn't mind seeing spells utilizing current weather conditions, or spell weaving or creation. Throw in some unique hidden quests that can only be stumbled upon once. There are so many possibilities for innovation, but no one even tries it seems. They just do the  bare minimum to part players from their money. Can't even blame the companies when people keep tossing money at them for it.

Scorchien

Vynt said:

I find it funny when people say going back to old school is de-evolving. Most of the newer games only have a fraction of what the old games had.

The games have been cut and watered down, streamlined for moving from 1 location to the next, but because of that, so many little things that added to the world have been lost. Then people don't want to stay long because the game is lacking "something" and they move on. And because people move on so quickly, the companies have to use a free to play, pay 2 win model to milk the player base before they leave.

If anything, the de-evolution is what has happened today. We've gone from worlds to games, and not even good games.

As far as evolving the past, we just needs games with a solid core that has all the "flavor" games use to have like factions that matter, dynamic weather, housing, dependency, alternate skill advancement, many paths to start and play, etc, and then try the new experimental things. Even if they don't quite work out, there is still a solid world to play in.

I wouldn't mind seeing spells utilizing current weather conditions, or spell weaving or creation. Throw in some unique hidden quests that can only be stumbled upon once. There are so many possibilities for innovation, but no one even tries it seems. They just do the  bare minimum to part players from their money. Can't even blame the companies when people keep tossing money at them for it.

Yup , agree 100% , i really enjoy all the older games much more altho i do play each newer one , to check them out , i Find the first gen of games still much better experience UO ,AO,AC , Eve etc.. each of these games offer a better experience than todays crop ..imo

Thebeasttt

delete5230 said:

AGE OF FIRST GENERATION MMORPG'S 
Ask yourself this question.... Do you refer back to 1999 when you think of Old School ? 
Understand this is 19 years ago !

I bring this point up again, because no one can comprehend the "possibilities of evolution and fresh ideas" that could be invented all because development had stopped permanently of Old School so many years ago.  



I say this because I had played P1999 and its OLD.  Everquest 1 is a great game.  I can't find much fault it I zoomed back 19 years ago. But being a first time player in 2018 it gives the feeling of not being worth it TO A NEW PLAYER and best left to nostalgia players. Only because features are ancient and experimental for it's time.   

Why do you feel this style can't be made fresh and modern ?  
 

If only your posts were as coherent as your clickbait titles.

sausagemix

I just think developers have to become more comfortable with diversity and working with the knowledge that they have close to no chance at all of beating the player loyalty, and cultural familiarity of WoW. This doesnt mean that they shouldnt strive to make the best game they can, just don't make surpassing WoW in some way as your gauge for success.

I think you can add alot of new and more contemporary systems to mmorpgs. For me personally though, I feel as if mmos have forgone world exploration, discovery and self narratives in exchange for appealing to the largest audience possible. It wouldnt be that bad if it were a few but after the success of WoW there was a glut of them. I look at old school mmorpgs knowing I was a teen, with spare time, no job and few responsibilities but this idea "you must make room for my time in all future games cause I work 9 to 5 and knocked someone up and I can only game for 45 minutes a night" creates what theme parks mmos have become. Are theme park mmos great as an option? Sure. But when THAT is all you keep getting its bland AF. Im more confused by HOW the idea of developers revisiting the structures of oldschool mmos threatens anybody.

Octagon7711

delete5230 said:

Jean-Luc_Picard said:

delete5230 said:

All I would like to add is Vanguard had a Huge following regardless of how it turned out.  So the potential WAS their. 

If Vanguard really had such a "huge" following, they wouldn't have been forced to shut it down, it would still be running as a commercially very successful game.

As we all know an mmorpg gets only one chance, just one.  

Regardless of a huge bad chain of events, sadly it was doomed.  No chance of recovery without a large windfall of surprise money that no one in their right mind would supply at that point of no return.

Final fantasy got a second chance and are doing very well.  ESO was terrible at launch and for awhile was a ghost town and has since recovered well.  So I don't know about the just one chance.  Even Secret World evolved into Secret World Legends and to my surprise is still running and both games have not had to shut down. 

Games that adapt best to the majority of players needs survive and continue, games that resist change because in their minds players still want what they offer and discover they don't, come to an end.