Originally posted by Cerion I clipped apart your post to highlight what I think is rather important. Jon Woods is heading in the right direction when he talks about MMO outsiders, but they can't be completely outside, as they will make the same mistakes and arrive at the same conclusions -- thus eating up development dollars. What is needed, however, are non-programmers designing games. Is an author required to know how to construct a pencil, and make papyrus in order to write a master work? Rhetorical question, obviously. And while there are a one or two filmmakers who can perform all aspects of making a film (from script, to cinematographer, to editing, to sound design), most are storytellers first and join forces with other artists. Hitchcock had script writers he worked with, had cinematographers, had editors. He had the vision, and he guided those he worked with to that vision. Game Design needs the equivelant of a film Director who has a vision, understands game theories, but doesn't necessarily have to know how to program. Of course you will find the rare individual who has brilliant vision, who understands game theory thoroughly, and who can program or design fantastic game levels. But as we see, that individual is rare -- the equivelant is rare in filmmaking as well. What I sense in the MMO industry today are a lot of programmers who are passible at game design and storytelling. It's like a film directed by editors or the sound designer. How does that equate to consistent success? Even with highly skilled and dedicated film directors, success isn't gaurenteed. I have a lot of respect for programmers -- some of them can be incredibly smart -- but that doesn't make them de facto great game designers or visionaries.
It is my understanding that they already do that...well, perhaps minus some of that vision thing. There are game designers in the industry that do no programming.
It's possible that I've missed that, though I tend to follow MMOs pretty closely. My understanding, and research, has shown me that programmers turn into "game designers". Are there actually University degrees that offer nothing but game theory, writing, and perhaps psychology classes? It seems to me that, years ago when I was researching such a thing, game design degrees consisted of a slew of programming courses.
Now I believe that there are game designers now who do no programming -- but are they trained game designers? Or have they garnered the title "Game Designer" after leaving their programming desks?
Genuinely curious.
Weeell, I don't really know. I thought they had an interview on here a couple months back about jobs in the industry and it went over the fact that designers don't necessarily program. I know there are plenty of game designers (in a general sense) that can't program; they work on table-top games. I admit I don't have firm details other than that memory of an interview about the MMO industry....let's see if I can dig it up....
Personally the perfect MMO to me would be one that felt more like a fantasy life-sim. I want combat and adventure, sure, but I also want to do everything else possible in a fantasy world. Let players be creative, rather than having to follow the paths set out by the developers (that includes character advancement paths). The closest thing to that I see on the horizon is FFXIV so I'm just waiting it out...
I think the term you're looking for is called "player agency". It's something UO has/had, and early EQ had to some extent. Not talking 'sandbox' here, either. The way it was described to me is that players are allowed to be innovative with the tools they have. There's no overarching desire by the MMO devs to control every aspect.
For example, early in EQ, there was a certain Boss Mob at the end of a dungeon guarding a treasure (details are lost to me). Everyone followed the obvious SOP -- kill trash MOBS, reach Boss, kill Boss and gain treasure. Well some enterprising, clever Wizard used two spells to bypass all that. One was a Possession spell and another was a "Distant Eyes" spell (I don't know the proper names). The wizard used the Eyes spell on the first trash MOB to gain it's LOS and then possesses it to move it down the dungeon until the next trash MOB. Upon seeing the next trash MOB, the Wizard, safely outside the dungeon, casts his "Eye" spell on this next trash MOB and then Possesses it. So after completing this combo a number of times, the Wizard has LOS and Line of Effect to the Boss MOB through the final trash MOBs and gains control of the Boss without ever entering the Dungeon.
Exploit? Possibly. But it is definitely a great example of player agency -- using the tools the world gives you in new and innovative ways.
Second Life is a 'game' designed around this principle of maximizing player agency. There are a few other MMOs like this that I haven't played. For me, the world of Second Life just wasn't interesting enough -- a science fiction or fantasy world that incorporated these concepts could be compelling I think.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Always amazed at the intelligence of MMORPG.com's forums. In a good way. Compared to many others, I find so many illuminating responses.
Anyway, getting to the point, Jon says, "It seems to me, as an outsider looking in, that it wasn't necessarily the game itself that managed to enrapture its players to the point that no game that came after would measure up. It was, instead, the mystique of something different come to life." I am also an old UO player: I played in the Dread Lord days, which is quite a bit before Trammel, and I agree with Khalathwyr in disagreeing with Jon's statement. Khalathwyr said it best in that UO felt like a world, while WoW feels like a game. I began my time in UO by exploring the world while chopping wood to craft tons of bows so a friend and I could buy a boat in order to do some fishing in the process of which we then sailed around the world. Not everyone's cup of tea, certainly, yet enough people enjoyed it that an entire new genre was spawned... But now something like this is not possible in WoW or most other MMOs out there. Khalathwyr was right when he said that in the majority of MMOs these days, it is ALL about combat. MMOs were different back then, it's not just nostalgia on our side, and it's a little disheartening to see so many think so (and especially a community leader like Jon!). My fellow MMOers, I don't think you've been treated well. (and I agree that the genre needs a reboot).
On a slightly unrelated note, someone asked "Where are the MMOFPSes?" "Where are the MMORTSes?" For MMOFPSes, let me think of a few... Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Hellgate London... oh dear. It appears they have all failed! In this case, I think publishers may be quite right in being wary. Yet: Huxley is still coming, and Fallen Earth (indie-ish) does seem to have some success. Which is good news right?
For MMORTSes, they're, um, out there. There's Evony right? lol... My personal favourite MMO of all time is a RTS: Shattered Galaxy, which you can still play (and for free with only a slight disadvantage!).
But yes. Sadly, I don't think alternative genres have had much luck, which is a shame because many of them (I thoroughly enjoyed Planetside and the above mentioned Shattered Galaxy) are quite fun. Oh well, something good will come around eventually. I just hope another company manages to get theirs out before Blizzard's next MMO smash hit. And I hope that Blizzard makes something entirely new, rather than WoW 2. On one hand, why would they bother altering a successful model? On the other hand, won't they just keep WoW going? And on the third hand, if Blizzard's next MMO fails... that'll be a harsh blow for the MMO genre.
MMORPG.com's Jon Wood sues his column this week to talk about the idea of completely re-imagining the way that MMORPGs are constructed.
Others point at Blizzard's behemoth World of Warcraft as the source of all of the genre's woes, suggesting that because of its success all games that come after it are copies.
I think that GREATLY simplifies the issue, and in doing so gets it entirely wrong.
The impact of WoW's success is not that the followers are clones, but that the scale of its profits has warped the brains of investors in MMO's in a way that retards risk-taking. Leading to a 'market researched', risk managed' approach to MMO development not by the devs, but as dictated by the investors who, despite investing their money, having no real appetite for risk.
So, did you read the article where I go on to explain that? That's the reason we need a reboot... it was the theme of the article. *shrug*
Regardless of whats in the article I was replying to the statement I quoted. I felt that statement, prominent as it is in the opening paragraph was incorrect in its analysis. I commented on it. If you agree with me, amend the statement.
Opening paragraph. That's the key right there. You make thesis statements in the opening paragraph. They aren't analytical and neither are they in depth. They tell you what the author believes and then the author goes on to elaborate on that belief in the body of the article, which Jon did.
So, regardless of what you believe, he wrote it just fine. I have written 5 different papers over the past 2 months and each professor pointed out they wanted their papers written in such manner. Macro-level statement up front and followed by micro-level specifics in the body.
So the micro-level specifics in the body should refute the macro-level statement up front? That's silly. The micro-level specifics should support the marco-level statements. Otherwise, why make them?
LOl, now if you honestly got that out of what I wrote...man...whew...No. They support it. Which is what he did. He made the broad statement that others view WoW's success was a source of the genre's woes. Then, in the body he explained that by that he was saying that those people believe the success of wow has caused the majority of other developers to try to imitate wow's model to try to capture it's retail success. This action has essentially stunted any growth as the folks with the money in the first place to take a risk and have a good shot at pulling it off (and adding variety to the genre) won't do so because they think the wow model is the only way to make the moo-la.
That's what I got out of his article anyway. Sure, he through in some other opinions and conspiracy theories but staying on topic, he made the broad statement in the opening and then further defined it in the body. That's how most papers get written. If they went into analysis in the first paragraph what would be the point of even having the body?
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Completely open world sandbox, quantum computers and an advanced AI. That is; A huge world so there will always be somewhere that you haven't been, a server that is capable of carrying out more calculations per second than the human brain and an AI that can make use of that power to spontaniously create unique content without the need of a development team.
Okay that all sounds like science fiction and at the moment it is just that. It is not however that far down the road. Computers powerful enough to create a unique world complete with ecology already exist, it just needs to be programmed with the correct parameters. You would end up though with a working model of a world and nothing more, a simulation if you like. Quantum computers are about 20 years away and that isn't really that long. Of course it would likely be another 20 on top of that for the costs to become reasonable but there you would have a machine that with an advanced enough AI could bring that world model to life and fill it with everything it needs. By advanced AI incedently we are talking of a machine that can learn which brings up a whole range of moral issues and doomsday scenarios but assuming that whoever builds the thing has enough of a brain to make the damn power plug easy to reach you would have the perfect MMO creator. A machine faster than the human brain could generate content on demand. There would be no need for any two players to be ever given the exact same quest for instance because the machine could create unique ones for everyone, even world changing story arcs etc.
You want to create an entirely new type of MMO then there it is and it's not as science fiction or as far away as many would believe. Finding someone with the money and the nerve to do it when the technology is available however is something else entirely.
Always amazed at the intelligence of MMORPG.com's forums. In a good way. Compared to many others, I find so many illuminating responses.
Anyway, getting to the point, Jon says, "It seems to me, as an outsider looking in, that it wasn't necessarily the game itself that managed to enrapture its players to the point that no game that came after would measure up. It was, instead, the mystique of something different come to life." I am also an old UO player: I played in the Dread Lord days, which is quite a bit before Trammel, and I agree with Khalathwyr in disagreeing with Jon's statement. Khalathwyr said it best in that UO felt like a world, while WoW feels like a game. I began my time in UO by exploring the world while chopping wood to craft tons of bows so a friend and I could buy a boat in order to do some fishing in the process of which we then sailed around the world. Not everyone's cup of tea, certainly, yet enough people enjoyed it that an entire new genre was spawned... But now something like this is not possible in WoW or most other MMOs out there. Khalathwyr was right when he said that in the majority of MMOs these days, it is ALL about combat. MMOs were different back then, it's not just nostalgia on our side, and it's a little disheartening to see so many think so (and especially a community leader like Jon!). My fellow MMOers, I don't think you've been treated well. (and I agree that the genre needs a reboot).
On a slightly unrelated note, someone asked "Where are the MMOFPSes?" "Where are the MMORTSes?" For MMOFPSes, let me think of a few... Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Hellgate London... oh dear. It appears they have all failed! In this case, I think publishers may be quite right in being wary. Yet: Huxley is still coming, and Fallen Earth (indie-ish) does seem to have some success. Which is good news right? For MMORTSes, they're, um, out there. There's Evony right? lol... My personal favourite MMO of all time is a RTS: Shattered Galaxy, which you can still play (and for free with only a slight disadvantage!). But yes. Sadly, I don't think alternative genres have had much luck, which is a shame because many of them (I thoroughly enjoyed Planetside and the above mentioned Shattered Galaxy) are quite fun. Oh well, something good will come around eventually. I just hope another company manages to get theirs out before Blizzard's next MMO smash hit. And I hope that Blizzard makes something entirely new, rather than WoW 2. On one hand, why would they bother altering a successful model? On the other hand, won't they just keep WoW going? And on the third hand, if Blizzard's next MMO fails... that'll be a harsh blow for the MMO genre.
Reads this while listening to Starship. I may be pulling a chicken little but the impact of this statement hit me like a ton of bricks. Is "Rock and Roll" going to be enough? What if their next MMO is a flop. The financial standard bearer of the genre takes a big hit? Their success, many will argue, made these investors want to cash in on this gaming genre. Does a WoW flop cause a MMO recession?
Water cooler material for sure.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
A blizzard flop would like be the very blow that breaks the chains of the genre.
No more investors telling designers: "But WoW does this ... so you do it too."
It'll be: "WoW did that and it blew up in their face. What can we do to grab those 11mil people?"
Investors aren't idiots, but a proven money making method is almost universally embraced over the long shot gamble. It makes financial sense ... but crushes creativity beneath it's gold plated jackboots.
Finally, and I think that this is both the most important and the most improbable requirement on this list, we would have to find qualified, competent developers who had never played an MMO, and had their own set of ideas about how best to handle the idea of taking the core of a role playing game, either the electronic version or the pen and paper version, and create an online world that will allow thousands of players to exist and interact within. Just take a minute and consider the possibilities that this might open up. How, for example, would someone who had never head of the concept of instancing decide to tackle their content? How would people unfamiliar with raiding and gear grinding handle the concept of an endgame? The possibilities are endless.
Id like to draw a parallel between this quote and evolutionary convergence. In nature, evolution often finds the same solution to the same problem, and it does this independantly. The common ancestor of the human and the octopus was blind. Men and octopuses evolved seperately for millions of years. Yet, in both cases, eyes were developed, and not only that, but nature built them from the same material, crystalline I believe. So, to answer what would come out of a mmo if it was developed by people with zero knowledge about how mmos work? chances are we would see something very similar to what we already have today. If they didnt have the concept of instancing, Im almost sure that they would come up with it again. Somethings would be different, sure, but I think the end result would be something we would all recognize. My 2 cents.
Eyes were devoleped before that. Go back far enough every living thing is related. Jump forward a bit the first makings of eyes started to appare, not like we have now, but they were a start. Now every single living thing that has eyes now comes from that single source. All releated. So no, Humans and Octopus didn't just coincidently both devolope eyes, we come from the same ancestor where eyes first started!
Its funny that people keep talking about MMORPG's being rebooted when in reality it needs to have the RISK vs REWARD and sting of loss factor back in it.
Most MMO"s post WoW lack these, that and the fact that every MMO that has some type of questing system in it are either fairly lax or stupidly redundant.
MMORPG's need to go back to their roots, aka making character progression CHALLENGING to attain again, make it sting when you die or fail and put time sinks in for goodness sakes. People hate them but lets face it if its harder to progress in an MMO you value your rewards more.
What made both the original UO and Everquest so addicting was several things. The fact that it felt good to achieve something because it was both challenging and tedious, the world in those games was fairly large so exploration was fun, plus it sucked when you either DIED or LOST. Also sense of community has somewhat died in MMO's if any of you ever played Everquest in the old days then you can remember Commonlands tunnels for buying and trading goods. I just don't see that in games anymore ( unless you play EvE or Darkfall ).
Face it, MMO's now have more ease in travel, more accessibility etc etc, but in the process it dumbed down the genre and also made the game world much smaller.
MMO companies need to ask themselves now, are they in it for the mass profit or do they truly want to make a game . If its profit they seek then make another WOW clone, if they want to make a game with a dynamic world and make it truly epic then look back to what made UO and Everquest so epic.
Like several have said on here, the current market makes FUNDING the major problem. Plenty of people have creative ideas. Plenty of people in game companies have creative ideas. Plenty of indie developers have creative ideas. The problem is, they can't get money to fund the production of an MMO using those creative ideas because people keep shooting for WoW-like success or are so cautious they are only willing to pay for a WoW-like game. Slowly we are getting some major companies to branch out. SW: TOR and FFXIV look like they'll diverge a decent bit from the standard model. It is/was only a matter of time. After a certain number of failures investors are going to start trying other tactics. Looks like for now things are going to proceed in baby steps, but maybe we'll get something REALLY different in 5 years or so after some of the "good bit different" games come out and do well. Edit: Doesn't help that the consumers seem happy to buy crappy games and pay a monthly fee while they are fixed. Depends on how broken they are but it does seem like we should have a bit more backbone on this front. Stupid human psychology...
"Then, we'd have to find an audience either open minded enough or ignorant enough of the current crop of MMORPGs that something completely outside the box wouldn't be a deterrent to enjoyment. We would need players who were willing to put aside concepts and conventions that they know are fun and look at something new as a whole. We'd need a media that was willing to do the same. This would be tough, because both of these groups consider themselves to be experts in the current product and old habits and perceptions are tough to break." - Jon Wood
I think the dyed in the wool MMO players are the people that a "new" and "innovative" game will most interest.
The problem is that lately, every new and innovative game that is hyped as such falls flat. So of course, all the old dogs are a bit jaded. We still WANT that bone, but every time someone throws garbage at us, our hackles rise a bit more.
Don't mistake this for a complete lack of interest. We ARE interested. That wonder and awe all of us felt as beginners in noobieville (for me it was my free month of UO) is what really hooked us. We were playing our single player games but in a multiplayer format. It added this element of pure chaos (other players) that simply put was addicting as hell, and was exciting to behold for the first years.
Now, the problem is that the games aren't being made anymore. They have already BEEN made, and convincing any investors that the REAL cash cow is giving players something new AND identifiable (in other words, a familiar IP, but with a drastically different game dynamic than we are used to) is the real issue.
Games simply cost TOO MUCH to make. The substantial investment of funds demands a return on that investment. Forget "the object being to make money." Game companies aren't just looking to make money. In the MMO world, they are, bottom line, attempting to stay afloat.
I agree with the above poster though in that INDIE games are really the one thing that might be able to revive this genre in a lasting way.
I have loads of ideas on how to solve common problems that are recurring in ALL current MMOs. Staleness and repativeness of quests, gold farmers and account stealing, a lack of story, a lack of dynamic content, a linear and pointless level progression...
A lack of any lasting effect on the game world. A true sense of pointlessness that is just barely able to be ignored due to going out and having fun being more expensive over the course of a month....
The problem with all these problems isn't that any of them are unsolvable. Hundreds of people have had hundreds of fantastic ideas that WILL work to fix ALL of those problems. The thing is, no investor or bean counter really wants to change the game TOO MUCH and risk not hitting that all encompassing demographic that includes the entire WoW playerbase. No one wants to risk innovation because innovation ISN'T what they think WoW made it's bucks on, and for some stupid and short sighted reason, companies that wish to stay afloat think the WoW model is the ONLY substantiated model.
This is simply untrue, but most investors and most higher company decision makers aren't interested in the entire MMO history. About where it came from, what the initial steps were for those pioneer game companies, what the games have come from and what they have become. Not enough of them are interested in the fact that in terms of maturation, we are not taking baby steps anymore, but we ARE a 15 year old stuck in a high chair.
And that's the pity. The customer base for a new and innovative project is HERE. It's always been here. But as of late, we've been playing single player games and getting out to get tans more.
Let the almighty dollar speak volumes I suppose. In time, if things pan out the way they usually do, the genre will either pull itself out of the crapper in a spasdic bout of self preservation... or it will crash and burn, and we will all be speaking fondly of those days when we could sling fireballs at each other without seeing coke adds on our elven billboards, or Hanna Montanna billboards on the side of our magic airships.
Or INDIE companies will manage to market their software and make great games without the constricting influence of having to stick to the WoW demographic, and we will all experience a golden age of MMO releases...
I'm not holding my breath of course.
[Begin Sarcasm]
Girls don't use the internet unless theres a webcam involved....its a physical impossibility.
They also don't play them thar vidya gaymes, mmorpg = most men online role play girls...even in ventrillo.
I believe it is in HUGE decline.The reason is cost alone.Some of the flaws i eluded to in AION have shown to be directly related to cost.VG a brilliant effort shunned because of lack of money.
How many BIG games have actually come out over the last 5 years?4-5?that is pretty sad to say the least,instead we have seen a bazillion horrible lack of content or plain cheap looking F2P games.
We have AOC,obviously rushed for a lack of content in some areas.LOTRO,i heard was a rather smallish game,but has tons of ideas.Warhammer again looks like AION a 2 faction PVP game,and the fact it watered down crafting ,told me again a rushed out the door game.Aion the newest,again 2 factions,linear start areas ,only 2,no water physics ,super cheap cost to develop,so money must have been a factor after they lost their shirt on TR.
I cannot think of any other big games to come out??This tells me that not too many are interested in putting the huge investment into a grand game,the ones that are doing it,are doing it with things like SPEEDTREE or generated worlds,and almost no content,just dot the NPC's add some boring ass quests,allow PVP and cya later.
I would not consider Fallen Earth to be a big game,because it is full of empty space,and again has literally no content,just boring quests and the ability to PVP.Sure it has crafting but that is done VERY cheap [automated].
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I am glad to see that those who work in the MMO industry realise that there is stagnation. For years I have had the impression they have been sticking their heads in the sand and it is business as usual.
The whole concept of a new direction is a very tall order, but at least this article points out that we are in a hamster cage, treading the same old quests, classes, levels and races.
As I have commented before the move to better business models and a more corporate savvy MMO industry has given rise to more AAA failures, not less. Lots of non creative staff are being paid to ensure that new MMO’s are a success, and all the software house has to show for it is pretty histograms and pie charts when the MMO fails. Back to basics guys, you won’t make a MMO that will capture the imagination of players by employing lots of accountants and executive types.
Id like to draw a parallel between this quote and evolutionary convergence....
Eyes were devoleped before that...
Octopus and mamals branched off long before they developed eyes. It was indeed a parallel evolution.
You can see that in the design of the eyes, they are very similar, but have some very clear differences. The octopus optic nerve is on the outside of the eye, while the optic nerve of mammal eyes goes through the retina. They are different designs from ground up, with different advantages and disadvantages.
Id like to draw a parallel between this quote and evolutionary convergence....
Eyes were devoleped before that...
Octopus and mamals branched off long before they developed eyes. It was indeed a parallel evolution.
You can see that in the design of the eyes, they are very similar, but have some very clear differences. The octopus optic nerve is on the outside of the eye, while the optic nerve of mammal eyes goes through the retina. They are different designs from ground up, with different advantages and disadvantages.
Eyes have been developed a lot of different times ( think the figure is well over 6 times that we know of). Flight has also developed several times (at least 4 times)*. Not that I think an evolutionary analogy really works that well for MMOs. Convergence would require basically the same evolutionary environment at the very least, but in a post-WoW world that environment is a lot different than pre-WoW. The game is also supposed to be adapted for our enjoyment, but humans enjoy a LOT of different stuff even in computer games, so the idea only one specific model fits seems pretty silly. (Then you'd need fairly stable gene pools with relatively low mutation rates and that's just not how design or funding works...it's much more chaotic; though this is a much more arguable point I suppose)....*continues to ramble on*
*Dinosaurs (pterodactyls), birds (which is actually separate), bats, insects.
Its funny that people keep talking about MMORPG's being rebooted when in reality it needs to have the RISK vs REWARD and sting of loss factor back in it. Most MMO"s post WoW lack these, that and the fact that every MMO that has some type of questing system in it are either fairly lax or stupidly redundant. MMORPG's need to go back to their roots, aka making character progression CHALLENGING to attain again, make it sting when you die or fail and put time sinks in for goodness sakes. People hate them but lets face it if its harder to progress in an MMO you value your rewards more. What made both the original UO and Everquest so addicting was several things. The fact that it felt good to achieve something because it was both challenging and tedious, the world in those games was fairly large so exploration was fun, plus it sucked when you either DIED or LOST. Also sense of community has somewhat died in MMO's if any of you ever played Everquest in the old days then you can remember Commonlands tunnels for buying and trading goods. I just don't see that in games anymore ( unless you play EvE or Darkfall ). Face it, MMO's now have more ease in travel, more accessibility etc etc, but in the process it dumbed down the genre and also made the game world much smaller. MMO companies need to ask themselves now, are they in it for the mass profit or do they truly want to make a game . If its profit they seek then make another WOW clone, if they want to make a game with a dynamic world and make it truly epic then look back to what made UO and Everquest so epic.
Honestly, I think how WoW has gone lately is in the right direction.* Make it so that players can make things more challenging in they want and then give them more rewards for doing the more challenging content. That let's everyone get things done, but also gives people who do stuff on hard more prestige and cool stuff.
FFXIV looks like it is taking this to the next level, where you can basically increase the difficulty of a quest in a number of ways when you pick it up. At least that's how I understand the Guildleve system.
You might grouse that this still means "everyone" (e.g. anyone who gets a bit organized, plays enough, and wants to, which actually isn't everyone at all) gets to see all the content, but you are just going to have to live with that (it ain't changing). The big benefit though is that it means MMOs can have more of an emphasis on player skill instead of dumbing down the combat system so skill is a relatively small factor. Highly skilled players and low skilled players do the same quests, but the high skilled players up the difficulty and get better rewards (and they also get to enjoy a challenge). Lower skill players still get to enjoy a challenge and complete content. Everyone wins.
I think things are headed this way...slowly.
As for death penalties, I think they are always a bit tricky to do right. I think older games had too harsh penalties myself. I think it is better to do what some games have done and reward staying alive (so if you die you lose that reward which might just be some sort of buff...I think Spellborne has that system). That should make everyone more happy about things.
*I am not saying they have the best implementation, because the problem with WoW is the combat system isn't particularly suited for high skilled play (it's too simplistic, overall, little depth). Definitely the right idea though.
Ok, before WoW how many people were playing MMOs in, say, the US. OK, 5 years later how many people are playing MMOs?
Right, the genre has gone downhill because of WoW and the 50x or whatever additional players is just an illusion. EQ was a behemoth with 300k subs and barely touched the mass media. Now we have WoW themed ads on network TV.
And, you know, I betcha most people (the sane ones) actually are playing so long as they enjoy it at whatever level, and not one second longer.
So we have an enormously expanded fan base, scores more companies at least trying to build new games, and somehow we are at the bottom of some ill defined horrible pit with the genre?
Get over yourselves, people. Looking at the forest, I think it looks like a golden age that keeps expanding. Sure its fine to keep looking for new ideas. But sheesh. Looks like a growth industry to me. And if the most popular stuff doesn't fit your personal idea of the perfect game experience? I don't think you start by trashing stuff that, by all measures, is the most successful genre creation in history.
And all you (insert derogatory moniker) that throw EVE out as an innovative, great product. Bleeeehh. Totally free for all cut throat world. Visited it, don't want to go there no more.
Its the successful games that stifle the genre! What nonsense. If we had solely UNSUCCESSFUL games in the genre, all our problems would be solved!!! Whoo Hooo!!!
"The MMO genre is stale because of WoW." Ok, before WoW how many people were playing MMOs in, say, the US. OK, 5 years later how many people are playing MMOs? Right, the genre has gone downhill because of WoW and the 50x or whatever additional players is just an illusion. EQ was a behemoth with 300k subs and barely touched the mass media. Now we have WoW themed ads on network TV. And, you know, I betcha most people (the sane ones) actually are playing so long as they enjoy it at whatever level, and not one second longer. So we have an enormously expanded fan base, scores more companies at least trying to build new games, and somehow we are at the bottom of some ill defined horrible pit with the genre? Get over yourselves, people. Looking at the forest, I think it looks like a golden age that keeps expanding. Sure its fine to keep looking for new ideas. But sheesh. Looks like a growth industry to me. And if the most popular stuff doesn't fit your personal idea of the perfect game experience? I don't think you start by trashing stuff that, by all measures, is the most successful genre creation in history. And all you (insert derogatory moniker) that throw EVE out as an innovative, great product. Bleeeehh. Totally free for all cut throat world. Visited it, don't want to go there no more. Its the successful games that stifle the genre! What nonsense. If we had solely UNSUCCESSFUL games in the genre, all our problems would be solved!!! Whoo Hooo!!!
Yep (well successful game, not games). Though if you don't get why, I doubt any further clarification would do you any good. However, for everyone else out there: when a single product dominates a market so that no other product can get a toehold in... yes that does stifle the market.
Allow me a parallel example, which I admit utilizes hyperbole to make it quite clear how I mean. You have a shampoo which is THE BEST. I'm going to call it Herbal Essences because, honestly, that is the BEST. Most people used to not use shampoo at all, I mean who needs more than just some water and a comb, right? But then Herbal Essences appeared and it had some sexy commercials with women shampooing their hair and moaning in delight. I mean, werd dawg, I'm sold. The shampoos before Herbal Essences really never marketed it that way and thus weren't very popular. Honestly, shampoo users before then were thought a bit strange, a bit nerdy in their pursuit of clean hair. But with moaning women, man! Suddenly, everyone was using shampoo. It was a revolution in hair care! Now the secret of this new Herbal Essence was its STRAWBERRY SCENT. For five years everyone smelled like Strawberries and it was wonderful. But then what's this, a new inventor comes along and I'm going to call her Mrs. DOVE, and she wants to use a vanilla scent!! AMAZING! Such variety, such a wonderful idea! She takes it to the investors so she can build a factory. They say WE LOVE SHAMPOO -- but what do you mean it won't have a strawberry scent?! DO YOU SEE HOW MUCH MONEY HERBAL ESSENCES IS MAKING. IT MUST HAVE A STRAWBERRY SCENT, HOW ABOUT NINE TENTHS STRAWBERRY AND ONE TENTH VANILLA? So the inventor, who cannot build factories with her bare hands, must say okay. Parallel example end.
Does this mean that WoW / Herbal Essences is any less of a product? No it doesn't. Does it mean that it is nevertheless stifling the market? Yes it does.
Reboot was such a great animated TV series back in the day. What if they made an MMO out of that show ? Dohh wrong segment ,this isnt Dana's what if article. Realy did enjoy the reboot series tho.
My guess...the next great MMO will come from...you guessed it....those trolls at Blizzard. Does anyone else have the wherewithal to even try anything but a clone? Oh yeah, I would love to see the next new genre coming out of a garage. (sigh)
EVE online did not come from any trolls are any ppl that had done things exactly like all the others. They evolved their game with very nailed down features that they thought woud make a great game. And it was a TOTALLY new epxerince when it came to the MMO genre. What other MMO game is beeing played on one server with 50-100 K ppl playing simutaniously ? None.
And another thing about EVE that is also very special when it comes to this genre. I talked about this yesterday and I will do so again today. They actually evolve their game based on SUB money. NOT on payed for expansions. And this has imropved the ENTIRE game of EVE - from starting experience - up to the top corps. And this happens with every single expansion. Right now games like AOC are talking about their payed for expansion that will in no way change the first 20 levels of the game - and just change the next 50 in minor ways.
Payed for expansions in this case actually PREVENT the games to really evolve over time. Thats why game like WOW is still stuck with the same starting quests as day one - even tho totally new CONTINENTS have been discovered in the past 5 years. And all because the developers were busy making EXTRA money with new expansions. Instead of focusing on improving the content they had. In fact - you can argue that Blizzard has infact REDUCED the value of that content since most dungeons and almost all raids from both vanilla and TBC are now pointless. New players that are coming to the games today can not enjoy the challenges of that content because the developer isn't updating the game along with the expansions they are throwing out - Just because they are focusing on getting extra money.
Shoudln't subs be enough to maintain a crew to at least evolve the old content of these games ? How can EVE do it while other games can't ?
I know this is long, but please take the time to read it.
While I totally agree with you on the originality and innovation of EVE, there are some pretty obvious reasons why some things are "easier" for CCP with EVE as opposed to another developer with an entirely different game. EVE is a niche game. And it's a very good one for people who like THAT niche!
First of all...at this time, EVE has no "characters," other than an avatar image. There are no character animations to deal with, no HUGE differences in how one zone to the next looks, artistically...it's all outer space, so they're dealing with minimalistic graphic needs in comparison to other games....at least until ambulation becomes part of the picture, and even then...they have said it's not (yet) going to be for much other than social interactions. The ship animations, even during battles, just simply don't have the graphic complexity of other more "traditional" world battles. Just the amount of bandwidth it requires to run a game like EVE, I would imagine to be greatly less than what it takes to run a more traditional MMO. If we could examine the packets delivered and received in this process....I think we'd see that rather clearly.
EVE is complex in ways that other MMOs are NOT. It is complex in it's in game economics design. It is complex in it's in game "political" design. But it is NOT as complex in it's graphic design and world spaces (no pun intended). It is lovely and sleek and sharp and focused...like a finely honed spacecraft....which makes complete sense. It's clear, sleek design FITS with the IP. It is part of what people that play the game LOVE about it. But it is also a very specifically focused niche. And...I might add....not a LOT of women play EVE. There were only a few of us really, just a year ago. We were a definitively small group.
Many women mmorpg players have been playing since the days of MUDs and certainly since the days of UO and EQ. So there is a reason that EVE has far fewer female players, and it's not a dislike of PvP...it's something much more than that.
Now this is my opinion only, but.....I think EVE caters to people who are more "left brain dominant." It is a culmination of logic, simplicity (while being underneath....very complex), mathematics, and science...as an example of the "vibe" of the game and those to which it appeals. Take WoW, for example, as the polar OPPOSITE (because it is the best example of completely opposite). WoW caters to the "right brain dominant." It is very very colorful, or "cartoony." That vivid color and whimsical nature is something that would appeal to more "right brain dominant" people. It's childlike, in a sense, and playful in it's presentation....EVE, is not. EVE presents itself much more seriously, because it caters to people who are more logic-centric and not so "artsy," for lack of a better word. These are, at their simple base, just two different personality types and ways of thinking, imagining, and processing information and images.
I could go on and on about the left brain /right brain analysis of this, but suffice it to say....while being very complex under the hood with it's game mechanics....EVE presents itself in a very clean, crisp and minimalistic graphic form. There is just less graphic complexity to it in it's present state. The more graphically heavy a game gets, the more bandwidth to communicate all those pixels. And that is only ONE reason that "EVE can do it, and others can't." The base concept allows EVE to stay this way, and actually, if it were to deviate TOO MUCH from that crisp, clean, outwardly uncomplicated appearance, while maintaining it's rich complex CORE....it's present player base would not like it much, I am betting.
Eve is a great example of why it's technology that drives the next big thing in gaming. Eve is strongly based on Elite an open ended single player space trading game en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_(video_game). At the time there was neither the computing power to drive servers or anyone with high enough bandwidth for an online version to be possible it would take 20 years and CCP for that to happen. www.gamasutra.com/features/20050923/rossignol_01.shtml
As I posted earlier maybe it's touch screen or persistent avatars you can carry from game to game that's the next big thing, but whatever it is technology will be the driving force, not a reboot.
This is definately one of the better articles I have seen from mmorpg.com. I agree with what it is suggesting. Its a sad trend throughout human history though that fresh new ideas often face heavy opposition from the ignorant masses. People are sheep and they like to follow the flock and most people simply dont have the imagination to perceive something they havent already experienced. Trying to sell these narrow minded creatures something new can be very challenging. All they want and expect are games which have keywords like dungeons, raids, endgame, loot, levels, quests etc.......basicly all the things they have seen before.
Monkey see, monkey do.
The forum poster Metalhead recently started an interesting thread in which he suggests the notion of an mmo that doesnt have levels, exp points or skill points. You create a character and then play the game to achieve goals that influence the gameworld and the other players, NOT to constantly make yourself more powerful which really doesnt serve any purpose at all. Afterall everyone is going to be max level eventually so why not just ditch the levelling process and let us get on with playing a real mmo where players interact with each other? Why do we always have to go through this single player co-op process to get there? In most of these games the players are ignoring each other as they are too busy playing against the computer in their selfish need to level up..... for what? So they can all be on a level playing field at the end. What a waste of the internets potential!
One of the things many players hate is having to grind their way through repetitive content as they follow a levelling treadmill. Many players in fact rush through this rather dull levelling process (which is the meat of the game oddly enough) as fast as they can so that they can reach the endgame content and finally be free (ahh the relief to finally be free!) to do whatever they like without having to chase the next level. Some people even pay money to have people level up for them because the process is so boring. Unfortunately even then in most mmos the endgame doesnt offer much other than a bunch of dungeons to be run through over and over again.......and then they find themselves on yet another treadmill......a gear chasing treadmill. Thats what happens when single player games are dumped on the internet and have co-op features added.......because thats all most mmos are. Single player games. We have all leveled up in single player rpgs and it seems that the brainless masses cant stop doing it in what are supposed to be multiplayer games as well.
Monkey see, monkey do.
The majority of the responses to Metalheads post have been extremely narrow minded. The common one is that people believe that all rpgs MUST have character progression. Allegedly if it doesnt have levels, exp points or skill points then its not a roleplaying game. What a load of ignorant narrow minded shit! This is EXACTLY what the article is referring to. People have had an idea stamped into their brains over a period of many years and they are incapable of thinking beyond it. Rpgs must have character progression. They MUST have it. There is NO other way. Anything else will FAIL. It can NOT be done. We MUST be rewarded. Rpgs MUST have carrots in them. Give us carrots or we wont play. We dont care if the game is fun. We dont care if we can actually roleplay a character. We dont care if there are goals to be achieved in a virtual world. We dont care about interacting with others to achieve things that matter. Just give us "individual character progression" so we feel like our efforts are worthwhile.....because it isnt worthwhile unless I can see my character change right?
Monkey see, monkey do.
The other common dumb arse response is that any game which doesnt have character progression is.......a first person shooter? WTF?! How stupid can people be! So when you reach max level in an mmo and can no longer follow any form of character progression does the game suddenly become an FPS? No of course it doesnt.
Remove the character progression and all the shitty boring level grinding that comes with it. Instead focus on making a REAL multiplayer rpg where ALL players can freely interact with each other and all of the content (because there are no levels to seperate everyone) and give us stuff to do that involves influencing each other and the virtual world we inhabit. Let us be what we want to be, do what we want to do and stop forcing us to WORK to get to parts of the game we want to play. People keep crying about wanting an open online world to play in with other people and yet when they get that they dont want the other players to be able to effect them because it "interferes with their game". Insanity.
There are two sources of what an MMORPG could look like that are still fairly untapped - PnP D&D and fantasy movies.
The experience of PnP D&D has yet to be captured. DDO missed the boat, but came closer than many others. Some of the feeling is captured with the advent of voice servers. However, these have become more useful for combat tactical coordination and often have very little to do with roleplaying.
Look at the mechanics of a swordfight in your favorite fantasy or martial arts movie and compare to your most recent raid. The differences are partly what make todays MMORPGs so dull. In the movies, you may notice the lack of floating numbers over anyones' heads. You may also notice that when a little guy gets hit by a big guy, the little guy flies across the room, smacks into the wall, and doesn't get up. When someone is set on fire, they (and their armor) burn. There's not a lot of healing during the fights, but bandaging afterwards is important to stop people from bleeding to death. Explosions kill, instantly, and they don't care if you're friend or foe. Two fighters don't stand there whacking each other with rubber swords - they move, a lot. They attempt to get past the opponent's defenses until one delivers a mortal blow to the other - usually one hit one kill. A ranger has a low percentage chance, but can shoot someone in the eye and kill them.
What I'm getting at is that combat should be a lot more strategic and less about the damage sponge based combat we have today where the big bad mob is forced to suck health from the "tank", the healer(s) refill the tank's health, and the dps take the health from the mob. Who wants to watch a couple of sponges with little numbers over their heads? Why can't we have dynamic combat where the rogue tricks the mob into a vulnerable position, the cleric blinds the mob with a holy light, the druid lowers the defenses of the mob with some nature-ish spell, the mage zaps the mob in a now exposed vulnerable spot, and the warrior finishes it off with a well-place blow to the neck?
As far as I'm concerned, computer games are all pretty much the same thing, so I really don't think innovation is the issue. I mean how different is GTA to WoW to CoD anyway? Think about it. Yes, there are some strategy games and simulators and things like that, but the bulk of the popular games are very similar.
I could come out with a list of 'innovative' requirements as long as your arm for a new MMO, but I can guarantee most of it would have been done in one game or another at some point, just on a different scale or whatever. I feel most innovation is tech-driven, so until we get virtual reality environments to play in, nothings gonna blow your socks right off.
What I think has screwed the last few big MMO releases is lack of polish. That's right, get more polish people making games...
Seriously, investors after a quick buck and devs trying to make a name for themselves are rushing out crap to cash in. Simple as that. That, and people are picking weird-ass IPs to based there games around that no one cares about. I'm betting the setting of that new Star Wars MMO could screw it right over - WTF is that!?! SWTOR... I mean it just rolls of the tongue. Too complication. You want to pull people in, make it accessible like WoW. And yea, WAAA cry the geeks, but without subs the game dies so sometimes you need to give a little to receive.
Aryas
Playing: Ableton Live 8 ~ ragequitcancelsubdeletegamesmashcomputerkillself ~
I think a good portion of the problem is that the scope of MMOs today aren't even in the same ballpark as MMOs of yesterday.
It used to be that MMOs were about creating a functioning virtual world, not only in game mechanics, but in the sense of social and economic components. They were meant to not only serve as a playground for players around the world to play and interact with each other in, but to immerse them within the virtual world they were part of. There was a larger emphasis on community, interacting with that community, relying on, and contributing to that community.
Many features were provided to players to participate within the virtual world to allow them to not only interact on a deeper level, but impact these virtual worlds. Whether it through player housing, complex resource/crafting systems, player vendors, there were methods for players to have a need to participate on a larger level in the virtual environment, even if they didn't quite realize it.
Today however, most MMOs seem to focus on minimizing social interaction. Not only by not providing many of the features that enable social and economic interaction, but outright designing game mechanics to specifically enable players to outright sidestep participating in the larger picture. There is more focus on fighting NPCs MOBs and completing NPC tasks than there is about interacting with other players, most of which are static and unchanging.
So really, I see the stagnation as being an over-emphasis on static non-player content, and an under-emphasis on player created content. This results in the bland and generic MMOs where players feel like the only real thing to do is hack and slash their way through the game.
I suppose what I'm really trying to say is there is too much focus on "themepark" MMOs, and that is why everyone is seeing stagnation, because it is the themepark mentality that is the epitome of static and stagnant content and gameplay.
Comments
It is my understanding that they already do that...well, perhaps minus some of that vision thing. There are game designers in the industry that do no programming.
It's possible that I've missed that, though I tend to follow MMOs pretty closely. My understanding, and research, has shown me that programmers turn into "game designers". Are there actually University degrees that offer nothing but game theory, writing, and perhaps psychology classes? It seems to me that, years ago when I was researching such a thing, game design degrees consisted of a slew of programming courses.
Now I believe that there are game designers now who do no programming -- but are they trained game designers? Or have they garnered the title "Game Designer" after leaving their programming desks?
Genuinely curious.
Weeell, I don't really know. I thought they had an interview on here a couple months back about jobs in the industry and it went over the fact that designers don't necessarily program. I know there are plenty of game designers (in a general sense) that can't program; they work on table-top games. I admit I don't have firm details other than that memory of an interview about the MMO industry....let's see if I can dig it up....
Ahh, here it is:
http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/loadFeature/3712/No-Programming-Required.html
I think the term you're looking for is called "player agency". It's something UO has/had, and early EQ had to some extent. Not talking 'sandbox' here, either. The way it was described to me is that players are allowed to be innovative with the tools they have. There's no overarching desire by the MMO devs to control every aspect.
For example, early in EQ, there was a certain Boss Mob at the end of a dungeon guarding a treasure (details are lost to me). Everyone followed the obvious SOP -- kill trash MOBS, reach Boss, kill Boss and gain treasure. Well some enterprising, clever Wizard used two spells to bypass all that. One was a Possession spell and another was a "Distant Eyes" spell (I don't know the proper names). The wizard used the Eyes spell on the first trash MOB to gain it's LOS and then possesses it to move it down the dungeon until the next trash MOB. Upon seeing the next trash MOB, the Wizard, safely outside the dungeon, casts his "Eye" spell on this next trash MOB and then Possesses it. So after completing this combo a number of times, the Wizard has LOS and Line of Effect to the Boss MOB through the final trash MOBs and gains control of the Boss without ever entering the Dungeon.
Exploit? Possibly. But it is definitely a great example of player agency -- using the tools the world gives you in new and innovative ways.
Second Life is a 'game' designed around this principle of maximizing player agency. There are a few other MMOs like this that I haven't played. For me, the world of Second Life just wasn't interesting enough -- a science fiction or fantasy world that incorporated these concepts could be compelling I think.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
Always amazed at the intelligence of MMORPG.com's forums. In a good way. Compared to many others, I find so many illuminating responses.
Anyway, getting to the point, Jon says, "It seems to me, as an outsider looking in, that it wasn't necessarily the game itself that managed to enrapture its players to the point that no game that came after would measure up. It was, instead, the mystique of something different come to life." I am also an old UO player: I played in the Dread Lord days, which is quite a bit before Trammel, and I agree with Khalathwyr in disagreeing with Jon's statement. Khalathwyr said it best in that UO felt like a world, while WoW feels like a game. I began my time in UO by exploring the world while chopping wood to craft tons of bows so a friend and I could buy a boat in order to do some fishing in the process of which we then sailed around the world. Not everyone's cup of tea, certainly, yet enough people enjoyed it that an entire new genre was spawned... But now something like this is not possible in WoW or most other MMOs out there. Khalathwyr was right when he said that in the majority of MMOs these days, it is ALL about combat. MMOs were different back then, it's not just nostalgia on our side, and it's a little disheartening to see so many think so (and especially a community leader like Jon!). My fellow MMOers, I don't think you've been treated well. (and I agree that the genre needs a reboot).
On a slightly unrelated note, someone asked "Where are the MMOFPSes?" "Where are the MMORTSes?" For MMOFPSes, let me think of a few... Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Hellgate London... oh dear. It appears they have all failed! In this case, I think publishers may be quite right in being wary. Yet: Huxley is still coming, and Fallen Earth (indie-ish) does seem to have some success. Which is good news right?
For MMORTSes, they're, um, out there. There's Evony right? lol... My personal favourite MMO of all time is a RTS: Shattered Galaxy, which you can still play (and for free with only a slight disadvantage!).
But yes. Sadly, I don't think alternative genres have had much luck, which is a shame because many of them (I thoroughly enjoyed Planetside and the above mentioned Shattered Galaxy) are quite fun. Oh well, something good will come around eventually. I just hope another company manages to get theirs out before Blizzard's next MMO smash hit. And I hope that Blizzard makes something entirely new, rather than WoW 2. On one hand, why would they bother altering a successful model? On the other hand, won't they just keep WoW going? And on the third hand, if Blizzard's next MMO fails... that'll be a harsh blow for the MMO genre.
I think that GREATLY simplifies the issue, and in doing so gets it entirely wrong.
The impact of WoW's success is not that the followers are clones, but that the scale of its profits has warped the brains of investors in MMO's in a way that retards risk-taking. Leading to a 'market researched', risk managed' approach to MMO development not by the devs, but as dictated by the investors who, despite investing their money, having no real appetite for risk.
So, did you read the article where I go on to explain that? That's the reason we need a reboot... it was the theme of the article. *shrug*
Regardless of whats in the article I was replying to the statement I quoted. I felt that statement, prominent as it is in the opening paragraph was incorrect in its analysis. I commented on it. If you agree with me, amend the statement.
Opening paragraph. That's the key right there. You make thesis statements in the opening paragraph. They aren't analytical and neither are they in depth. They tell you what the author believes and then the author goes on to elaborate on that belief in the body of the article, which Jon did.
So, regardless of what you believe, he wrote it just fine. I have written 5 different papers over the past 2 months and each professor pointed out they wanted their papers written in such manner. Macro-level statement up front and followed by micro-level specifics in the body.
So the micro-level specifics in the body should refute the macro-level statement up front? That's silly. The micro-level specifics should support the marco-level statements. Otherwise, why make them?
LOl, now if you honestly got that out of what I wrote...man...whew...No. They support it. Which is what he did. He made the broad statement that others view WoW's success was a source of the genre's woes. Then, in the body he explained that by that he was saying that those people believe the success of wow has caused the majority of other developers to try to imitate wow's model to try to capture it's retail success. This action has essentially stunted any growth as the folks with the money in the first place to take a risk and have a good shot at pulling it off (and adding variety to the genre) won't do so because they think the wow model is the only way to make the moo-la.
That's what I got out of his article anyway. Sure, he through in some other opinions and conspiracy theories
but staying on topic, he made the broad statement in the opening and then further defined it in the body. That's how most papers get written. If they went into analysis in the first paragraph what would be the point of even having the body?
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Completely open world sandbox, quantum computers and an advanced AI. That is; A huge world so there will always be somewhere that you haven't been, a server that is capable of carrying out more calculations per second than the human brain and an AI that can make use of that power to spontaniously create unique content without the need of a development team.
Okay that all sounds like science fiction and at the moment it is just that. It is not however that far down the road. Computers powerful enough to create a unique world complete with ecology already exist, it just needs to be programmed with the correct parameters. You would end up though with a working model of a world and nothing more, a simulation if you like. Quantum computers are about 20 years away and that isn't really that long. Of course it would likely be another 20 on top of that for the costs to become reasonable but there you would have a machine that with an advanced enough AI could bring that world model to life and fill it with everything it needs. By advanced AI incedently we are talking of a machine that can learn which brings up a whole range of moral issues and doomsday scenarios but assuming that whoever builds the thing has enough of a brain to make the damn power plug easy to reach you would have the perfect MMO creator. A machine faster than the human brain could generate content on demand. There would be no need for any two players to be ever given the exact same quest for instance because the machine could create unique ones for everyone, even world changing story arcs etc.
You want to create an entirely new type of MMO then there it is and it's not as science fiction or as far away as many would believe. Finding someone with the money and the nerve to do it when the technology is available however is something else entirely.
Reads this while listening to Starship. I may be pulling a chicken little but the impact of this statement hit me like a ton of bricks. Is "Rock and Roll" going to be enough? What if their next MMO is a flop. The financial standard bearer of the genre takes a big hit? Their success, many will argue, made these investors want to cash in on this gaming genre. Does a WoW flop cause a MMO recession?
Water cooler material for sure.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
A blizzard flop would like be the very blow that breaks the chains of the genre.
No more investors telling designers: "But WoW does this ... so you do it too."
It'll be: "WoW did that and it blew up in their face. What can we do to grab those 11mil people?"
Investors aren't idiots, but a proven money making method is almost universally embraced over the long shot gamble. It makes financial sense ... but crushes creativity beneath it's gold plated jackboots.
Eyes were devoleped before that. Go back far enough every living thing is related. Jump forward a bit the first makings of eyes started to appare, not like we have now, but they were a start. Now every single living thing that has eyes now comes from that single source. All releated. So no, Humans and Octopus didn't just coincidently both devolope eyes, we come from the same ancestor where eyes first started!
Its funny that people keep talking about MMORPG's being rebooted when in reality it needs to have the RISK vs REWARD and sting of loss factor back in it.
Most MMO"s post WoW lack these, that and the fact that every MMO that has some type of questing system in it are either fairly lax or stupidly redundant.
MMORPG's need to go back to their roots, aka making character progression CHALLENGING to attain again, make it sting when you die or fail and put time sinks in for goodness sakes. People hate them but lets face it if its harder to progress in an MMO you value your rewards more.
What made both the original UO and Everquest so addicting was several things. The fact that it felt good to achieve something because it was both challenging and tedious, the world in those games was fairly large so exploration was fun, plus it sucked when you either DIED or LOST. Also sense of community has somewhat died in MMO's if any of you ever played Everquest in the old days then you can remember Commonlands tunnels for buying and trading goods. I just don't see that in games anymore ( unless you play EvE or Darkfall ).
Face it, MMO's now have more ease in travel, more accessibility etc etc, but in the process it dumbed down the genre and also made the game world much smaller.
MMO companies need to ask themselves now, are they in it for the mass profit or do they truly want to make a game . If its profit they seek then make another WOW clone, if they want to make a game with a dynamic world and make it truly epic then look back to what made UO and Everquest so epic.
QFT
"Then, we'd have to find an audience either open minded enough or ignorant enough of the current crop of MMORPGs that something completely outside the box wouldn't be a deterrent to enjoyment. We would need players who were willing to put aside concepts and conventions that they know are fun and look at something new as a whole. We'd need a media that was willing to do the same. This would be tough, because both of these groups consider themselves to be experts in the current product and old habits and perceptions are tough to break." - Jon Wood
I think the dyed in the wool MMO players are the people that a "new" and "innovative" game will most interest.
The problem is that lately, every new and innovative game that is hyped as such falls flat. So of course, all the old dogs are a bit jaded. We still WANT that bone, but every time someone throws garbage at us, our hackles rise a bit more.
Don't mistake this for a complete lack of interest. We ARE interested. That wonder and awe all of us felt as beginners in noobieville (for me it was my free month of UO) is what really hooked us. We were playing our single player games but in a multiplayer format. It added this element of pure chaos (other players) that simply put was addicting as hell, and was exciting to behold for the first years.
Now, the problem is that the games aren't being made anymore. They have already BEEN made, and convincing any investors that the REAL cash cow is giving players something new AND identifiable (in other words, a familiar IP, but with a drastically different game dynamic than we are used to) is the real issue.
Games simply cost TOO MUCH to make. The substantial investment of funds demands a return on that investment. Forget "the object being to make money." Game companies aren't just looking to make money. In the MMO world, they are, bottom line, attempting to stay afloat.
I agree with the above poster though in that INDIE games are really the one thing that might be able to revive this genre in a lasting way.
I have loads of ideas on how to solve common problems that are recurring in ALL current MMOs. Staleness and repativeness of quests, gold farmers and account stealing, a lack of story, a lack of dynamic content, a linear and pointless level progression...
A lack of any lasting effect on the game world. A true sense of pointlessness that is just barely able to be ignored due to going out and having fun being more expensive over the course of a month....
The problem with all these problems isn't that any of them are unsolvable. Hundreds of people have had hundreds of fantastic ideas that WILL work to fix ALL of those problems. The thing is, no investor or bean counter really wants to change the game TOO MUCH and risk not hitting that all encompassing demographic that includes the entire WoW playerbase. No one wants to risk innovation because innovation ISN'T what they think WoW made it's bucks on, and for some stupid and short sighted reason, companies that wish to stay afloat think the WoW model is the ONLY substantiated model.
This is simply untrue, but most investors and most higher company decision makers aren't interested in the entire MMO history. About where it came from, what the initial steps were for those pioneer game companies, what the games have come from and what they have become. Not enough of them are interested in the fact that in terms of maturation, we are not taking baby steps anymore, but we ARE a 15 year old stuck in a high chair.
And that's the pity. The customer base for a new and innovative project is HERE. It's always been here. But as of late, we've been playing single player games and getting out to get tans more.
Let the almighty dollar speak volumes I suppose. In time, if things pan out the way they usually do, the genre will either pull itself out of the crapper in a spasdic bout of self preservation... or it will crash and burn, and we will all be speaking fondly of those days when we could sling fireballs at each other without seeing coke adds on our elven billboards, or Hanna Montanna billboards on the side of our magic airships.
Or INDIE companies will manage to market their software and make great games without the constricting influence of having to stick to the WoW demographic, and we will all experience a golden age of MMO releases...
I'm not holding my breath of course.
[Begin Sarcasm]
Girls don't use the internet unless theres a webcam involved....its a physical impossibility.
They also don't play them thar vidya gaymes, mmorpg = most men online role play girls...even in ventrillo.
-kyte317
I believe it is in HUGE decline.The reason is cost alone.Some of the flaws i eluded to in AION have shown to be directly related to cost.VG a brilliant effort shunned because of lack of money.
How many BIG games have actually come out over the last 5 years?4-5?that is pretty sad to say the least,instead we have seen a bazillion horrible lack of content or plain cheap looking F2P games.
We have AOC,obviously rushed for a lack of content in some areas.LOTRO,i heard was a rather smallish game,but has tons of ideas.Warhammer again looks like AION a 2 faction PVP game,and the fact it watered down crafting ,told me again a rushed out the door game.Aion the newest,again 2 factions,linear start areas ,only 2,no water physics ,super cheap cost to develop,so money must have been a factor after they lost their shirt on TR.
I cannot think of any other big games to come out??This tells me that not too many are interested in putting the huge investment into a grand game,the ones that are doing it,are doing it with things like SPEEDTREE or generated worlds,and almost no content,just dot the NPC's add some boring ass quests,allow PVP and cya later.
I would not consider Fallen Earth to be a big game,because it is full of empty space,and again has literally no content,just boring quests and the ability to PVP.Sure it has crafting but that is done VERY cheap [automated].
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I am glad to see that those who work in the MMO industry realise that there is stagnation. For years I have had the impression they have been sticking their heads in the sand and it is business as usual.
The whole concept of a new direction is a very tall order, but at least this article points out that we are in a hamster cage, treading the same old quests, classes, levels and races.
As I have commented before the move to better business models and a more corporate savvy MMO industry has given rise to more AAA failures, not less. Lots of non creative staff are being paid to ensure that new MMO’s are a success, and all the software house has to show for it is pretty histograms and pie charts when the MMO fails. Back to basics guys, you won’t make a MMO that will capture the imagination of players by employing lots of accountants and executive types.
Eyes were devoleped before that...
Octopus and mamals branched off long before they developed eyes. It was indeed a parallel evolution.
You can see that in the design of the eyes, they are very similar, but have some very clear differences. The octopus optic nerve is on the outside of the eye, while the optic nerve of mammal eyes goes through the retina. They are different designs from ground up, with different advantages and disadvantages.
Eyes were devoleped before that...
Octopus and mamals branched off long before they developed eyes. It was indeed a parallel evolution.
You can see that in the design of the eyes, they are very similar, but have some very clear differences. The octopus optic nerve is on the outside of the eye, while the optic nerve of mammal eyes goes through the retina. They are different designs from ground up, with different advantages and disadvantages.
Eyes have been developed a lot of different times ( think the figure is well over 6 times that we know of). Flight has also developed several times (at least 4 times)*. Not that I think an evolutionary analogy really works that well for MMOs. Convergence would require basically the same evolutionary environment at the very least, but in a post-WoW world that environment is a lot different than pre-WoW. The game is also supposed to be adapted for our enjoyment, but humans enjoy a LOT of different stuff even in computer games, so the idea only one specific model fits seems pretty silly. (Then you'd need fairly stable gene pools with relatively low mutation rates and that's just not how design or funding works...it's much more chaotic; though this is a much more arguable point I suppose)....*continues to ramble on*
*Dinosaurs (pterodactyls), birds (which is actually separate), bats, insects.
Honestly, I think how WoW has gone lately is in the right direction.* Make it so that players can make things more challenging in they want and then give them more rewards for doing the more challenging content. That let's everyone get things done, but also gives people who do stuff on hard more prestige and cool stuff.
FFXIV looks like it is taking this to the next level, where you can basically increase the difficulty of a quest in a number of ways when you pick it up. At least that's how I understand the Guildleve system.
You might grouse that this still means "everyone" (e.g. anyone who gets a bit organized, plays enough, and wants to, which actually isn't everyone at all) gets to see all the content, but you are just going to have to live with that (it ain't changing). The big benefit though is that it means MMOs can have more of an emphasis on player skill instead of dumbing down the combat system so skill is a relatively small factor. Highly skilled players and low skilled players do the same quests, but the high skilled players up the difficulty and get better rewards (and they also get to enjoy a challenge). Lower skill players still get to enjoy a challenge and complete content. Everyone wins.
I think things are headed this way...slowly.
As for death penalties, I think they are always a bit tricky to do right. I think older games had too harsh penalties myself. I think it is better to do what some games have done and reward staying alive (so if you die you lose that reward which might just be some sort of buff...I think Spellborne has that system). That should make everyone more happy about things.
*I am not saying they have the best implementation, because the problem with WoW is the combat system isn't particularly suited for high skilled play (it's too simplistic, overall, little depth). Definitely the right idea though.
"The MMO genre is stale because of WoW."
Ok, before WoW how many people were playing MMOs in, say, the US. OK, 5 years later how many people are playing MMOs?
Right, the genre has gone downhill because of WoW and the 50x or whatever additional players is just an illusion. EQ was a behemoth with 300k subs and barely touched the mass media. Now we have WoW themed ads on network TV.
And, you know, I betcha most people (the sane ones) actually are playing so long as they enjoy it at whatever level, and not one second longer.
So we have an enormously expanded fan base, scores more companies at least trying to build new games, and somehow we are at the bottom of some ill defined horrible pit with the genre?
Get over yourselves, people. Looking at the forest, I think it looks like a golden age that keeps expanding. Sure its fine to keep looking for new ideas. But sheesh. Looks like a growth industry to me. And if the most popular stuff doesn't fit your personal idea of the perfect game experience? I don't think you start by trashing stuff that, by all measures, is the most successful genre creation in history.
And all you (insert derogatory moniker) that throw EVE out as an innovative, great product. Bleeeehh. Totally free for all cut throat world. Visited it, don't want to go there no more.
Its the successful games that stifle the genre! What nonsense. If we had solely UNSUCCESSFUL games in the genre, all our problems would be solved!!! Whoo Hooo!!!
---------------------------
Rose-lipped maidens,
Light-foot lads...
Yep (well successful game, not games). Though if you don't get why, I doubt any further clarification would do you any good. However, for everyone else out there: when a single product dominates a market so that no other product can get a toehold in... yes that does stifle the market.
Allow me a parallel example, which I admit utilizes hyperbole to make it quite clear how I mean. You have a shampoo which is THE BEST. I'm going to call it Herbal Essences because, honestly, that is the BEST. Most people used to not use shampoo at all, I mean who needs more than just some water and a comb, right? But then Herbal Essences appeared and it had some sexy commercials with women shampooing their hair and moaning in delight. I mean, werd dawg, I'm sold. The shampoos before Herbal Essences really never marketed it that way and thus weren't very popular. Honestly, shampoo users before then were thought a bit strange, a bit nerdy in their pursuit of clean hair. But with moaning women, man! Suddenly, everyone was using shampoo. It was a revolution in hair care! Now the secret of this new Herbal Essence was its STRAWBERRY SCENT. For five years everyone smelled like Strawberries and it was wonderful. But then what's this, a new inventor comes along and I'm going to call her Mrs. DOVE, and she wants to use a vanilla scent!! AMAZING! Such variety, such a wonderful idea! She takes it to the investors so she can build a factory. They say WE LOVE SHAMPOO -- but what do you mean it won't have a strawberry scent?! DO YOU SEE HOW MUCH MONEY HERBAL ESSENCES IS MAKING. IT MUST HAVE A STRAWBERRY SCENT, HOW ABOUT NINE TENTHS STRAWBERRY AND ONE TENTH VANILLA? So the inventor, who cannot build factories with her bare hands, must say okay. Parallel example end.
Does this mean that WoW / Herbal Essences is any less of a product? No it doesn't. Does it mean that it is nevertheless stifling the market? Yes it does.
Reboot was such a great animated TV series back in the day. What if they made an MMO out of that show ? Dohh wrong segment ,this isnt Dana's what if article. Realy did enjoy the reboot series tho.
Work hard Play Harder
EVE online did not come from any trolls are any ppl that had done things exactly like all the others. They evolved their game with very nailed down features that they thought woud make a great game. And it was a TOTALLY new epxerince when it came to the MMO genre. What other MMO game is beeing played on one server with 50-100 K ppl playing simutaniously ? None.
And another thing about EVE that is also very special when it comes to this genre. I talked about this yesterday and I will do so again today. They actually evolve their game based on SUB money. NOT on payed for expansions. And this has imropved the ENTIRE game of EVE - from starting experience - up to the top corps. And this happens with every single expansion. Right now games like AOC are talking about their payed for expansion that will in no way change the first 20 levels of the game - and just change the next 50 in minor ways.
Payed for expansions in this case actually PREVENT the games to really evolve over time. Thats why game like WOW is still stuck with the same starting quests as day one - even tho totally new CONTINENTS have been discovered in the past 5 years. And all because the developers were busy making EXTRA money with new expansions. Instead of focusing on improving the content they had. In fact - you can argue that Blizzard has infact REDUCED the value of that content since most dungeons and almost all raids from both vanilla and TBC are now pointless. New players that are coming to the games today can not enjoy the challenges of that content because the developer isn't updating the game along with the expansions they are throwing out - Just because they are focusing on getting extra money.
Shoudln't subs be enough to maintain a crew to at least evolve the old content of these games ? How can EVE do it while other games can't ?
I know this is long, but please take the time to read it.
While I totally agree with you on the originality and innovation of EVE, there are some pretty obvious reasons why some things are "easier" for CCP with EVE as opposed to another developer with an entirely different game. EVE is a niche game. And it's a very good one for people who like THAT niche!
First of all...at this time, EVE has no "characters," other than an avatar image. There are no character animations to deal with, no HUGE differences in how one zone to the next looks, artistically...it's all outer space, so they're dealing with minimalistic graphic needs in comparison to other games....at least until ambulation becomes part of the picture, and even then...they have said it's not (yet) going to be for much other than social interactions. The ship animations, even during battles, just simply don't have the graphic complexity of other more "traditional" world battles. Just the amount of bandwidth it requires to run a game like EVE, I would imagine to be greatly less than what it takes to run a more traditional MMO. If we could examine the packets delivered and received in this process....I think we'd see that rather clearly.
EVE is complex in ways that other MMOs are NOT. It is complex in it's in game economics design. It is complex in it's in game "political" design. But it is NOT as complex in it's graphic design and world spaces (no pun intended). It is lovely and sleek and sharp and focused...like a finely honed spacecraft....which makes complete sense. It's clear, sleek design FITS with the IP. It is part of what people that play the game LOVE about it. But it is also a very specifically focused niche. And...I might add....not a LOT of women play EVE. There were only a few of us really, just a year ago. We were a definitively small group.
Many women mmorpg players have been playing since the days of MUDs and certainly since the days of UO and EQ. So there is a reason that EVE has far fewer female players, and it's not a dislike of PvP...it's something much more than that.
Now this is my opinion only, but.....I think EVE caters to people who are more "left brain dominant." It is a culmination of logic, simplicity (while being underneath....very complex), mathematics, and science...as an example of the "vibe" of the game and those to which it appeals. Take WoW, for example, as the polar OPPOSITE (because it is the best example of completely opposite). WoW caters to the "right brain dominant." It is very very colorful, or "cartoony." That vivid color and whimsical nature is something that would appeal to more "right brain dominant" people. It's childlike, in a sense, and playful in it's presentation....EVE, is not. EVE presents itself much more seriously, because it caters to people who are more logic-centric and not so "artsy," for lack of a better word. These are, at their simple base, just two different personality types and ways of thinking, imagining, and processing information and images.
I could go on and on about the left brain /right brain analysis of this, but suffice it to say....while being very complex under the hood with it's game mechanics....EVE presents itself in a very clean, crisp and minimalistic graphic form. There is just less graphic complexity to it in it's present state. The more graphically heavy a game gets, the more bandwidth to communicate all those pixels. And that is only ONE reason that "EVE can do it, and others can't." The base concept allows EVE to stay this way, and actually, if it were to deviate TOO MUCH from that crisp, clean, outwardly uncomplicated appearance, while maintaining it's rich complex CORE....it's present player base would not like it much, I am betting.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Eve is a great example of why it's technology that drives the next big thing in gaming. Eve is strongly based on Elite an open ended single player space trading game en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_(video_game). At the time there was neither the computing power to drive servers or anyone with high enough bandwidth for an online version to be possible it would take 20 years and CCP for that to happen. www.gamasutra.com/features/20050923/rossignol_01.shtml
As I posted earlier maybe it's touch screen or persistent avatars you can carry from game to game that's the next big thing, but whatever it is technology will be the driving force, not a reboot.
This is definately one of the better articles I have seen from mmorpg.com. I agree with what it is suggesting. Its a sad trend throughout human history though that fresh new ideas often face heavy opposition from the ignorant masses. People are sheep and they like to follow the flock and most people simply dont have the imagination to perceive something they havent already experienced. Trying to sell these narrow minded creatures something new can be very challenging. All they want and expect are games which have keywords like dungeons, raids, endgame, loot, levels, quests etc.......basicly all the things they have seen before.
Monkey see, monkey do.
The forum poster Metalhead recently started an interesting thread in which he suggests the notion of an mmo that doesnt have levels, exp points or skill points. You create a character and then play the game to achieve goals that influence the gameworld and the other players, NOT to constantly make yourself more powerful which really doesnt serve any purpose at all. Afterall everyone is going to be max level eventually so why not just ditch the levelling process and let us get on with playing a real mmo where players interact with each other? Why do we always have to go through this single player co-op process to get there? In most of these games the players are ignoring each other as they are too busy playing against the computer in their selfish need to level up..... for what? So they can all be on a level playing field at the end. What a waste of the internets potential!
One of the things many players hate is having to grind their way through repetitive content as they follow a levelling treadmill. Many players in fact rush through this rather dull levelling process (which is the meat of the game oddly enough) as fast as they can so that they can reach the endgame content and finally be free (ahh the relief to finally be free!) to do whatever they like without having to chase the next level. Some people even pay money to have people level up for them because the process is so boring. Unfortunately even then in most mmos the endgame doesnt offer much other than a bunch of dungeons to be run through over and over again.......and then they find themselves on yet another treadmill......a gear chasing treadmill. Thats what happens when single player games are dumped on the internet and have co-op features added.......because thats all most mmos are. Single player games. We have all leveled up in single player rpgs and it seems that the brainless masses cant stop doing it in what are supposed to be multiplayer games as well.
Monkey see, monkey do.
The majority of the responses to Metalheads post have been extremely narrow minded. The common one is that people believe that all rpgs MUST have character progression. Allegedly if it doesnt have levels, exp points or skill points then its not a roleplaying game. What a load of ignorant narrow minded shit! This is EXACTLY what the article is referring to. People have had an idea stamped into their brains over a period of many years and they are incapable of thinking beyond it. Rpgs must have character progression. They MUST have it. There is NO other way. Anything else will FAIL. It can NOT be done. We MUST be rewarded. Rpgs MUST have carrots in them. Give us carrots or we wont play. We dont care if the game is fun. We dont care if we can actually roleplay a character. We dont care if there are goals to be achieved in a virtual world. We dont care about interacting with others to achieve things that matter. Just give us "individual character progression" so we feel like our efforts are worthwhile.....because it isnt worthwhile unless I can see my character change right?
Monkey see, monkey do.
The other common dumb arse response is that any game which doesnt have character progression is.......a first person shooter? WTF?! How stupid can people be! So when you reach max level in an mmo and can no longer follow any form of character progression does the game suddenly become an FPS? No of course it doesnt.
Remove the character progression and all the shitty boring level grinding that comes with it. Instead focus on making a REAL multiplayer rpg where ALL players can freely interact with each other and all of the content (because there are no levels to seperate everyone) and give us stuff to do that involves influencing each other and the virtual world we inhabit. Let us be what we want to be, do what we want to do and stop forcing us to WORK to get to parts of the game we want to play. People keep crying about wanting an open online world to play in with other people and yet when they get that they dont want the other players to be able to effect them because it "interferes with their game". Insanity.
/rant off
There are two sources of what an MMORPG could look like that are still fairly untapped - PnP D&D and fantasy movies.
The experience of PnP D&D has yet to be captured. DDO missed the boat, but came closer than many others. Some of the feeling is captured with the advent of voice servers. However, these have become more useful for combat tactical coordination and often have very little to do with roleplaying.
Look at the mechanics of a swordfight in your favorite fantasy or martial arts movie and compare to your most recent raid. The differences are partly what make todays MMORPGs so dull. In the movies, you may notice the lack of floating numbers over anyones' heads. You may also notice that when a little guy gets hit by a big guy, the little guy flies across the room, smacks into the wall, and doesn't get up. When someone is set on fire, they (and their armor) burn. There's not a lot of healing during the fights, but bandaging afterwards is important to stop people from bleeding to death. Explosions kill, instantly, and they don't care if you're friend or foe. Two fighters don't stand there whacking each other with rubber swords - they move, a lot. They attempt to get past the opponent's defenses until one delivers a mortal blow to the other - usually one hit one kill. A ranger has a low percentage chance, but can shoot someone in the eye and kill them.
What I'm getting at is that combat should be a lot more strategic and less about the damage sponge based combat we have today where the big bad mob is forced to suck health from the "tank", the healer(s) refill the tank's health, and the dps take the health from the mob. Who wants to watch a couple of sponges with little numbers over their heads? Why can't we have dynamic combat where the rogue tricks the mob into a vulnerable position, the cleric blinds the mob with a holy light, the druid lowers the defenses of the mob with some nature-ish spell, the mage zaps the mob in a now exposed vulnerable spot, and the warrior finishes it off with a well-place blow to the neck?
As far as I'm concerned, computer games are all pretty much the same thing, so I really don't think innovation is the issue. I mean how different is GTA to WoW to CoD anyway? Think about it. Yes, there are some strategy games and simulators and things like that, but the bulk of the popular games are very similar.
I could come out with a list of 'innovative' requirements as long as your arm for a new MMO, but I can guarantee most of it would have been done in one game or another at some point, just on a different scale or whatever. I feel most innovation is tech-driven, so until we get virtual reality environments to play in, nothings gonna blow your socks right off.
What I think has screwed the last few big MMO releases is lack of polish. That's right, get more polish people making games...
Seriously, investors after a quick buck and devs trying to make a name for themselves are rushing out crap to cash in. Simple as that. That, and people are picking weird-ass IPs to based there games around that no one cares about. I'm betting the setting of that new Star Wars MMO could screw it right over - WTF is that!?! SWTOR... I mean it just rolls of the tongue. Too complication. You want to pull people in, make it accessible like WoW. And yea, WAAA cry the geeks, but without subs the game dies so sometimes you need to give a little to receive.
Aryas
Playing: Ableton Live 8
~ ragequitcancelsubdeletegamesmashcomputerkillself ~
I think a good portion of the problem is that the scope of MMOs today aren't even in the same ballpark as MMOs of yesterday.
It used to be that MMOs were about creating a functioning virtual world, not only in game mechanics, but in the sense of social and economic components. They were meant to not only serve as a playground for players around the world to play and interact with each other in, but to immerse them within the virtual world they were part of. There was a larger emphasis on community, interacting with that community, relying on, and contributing to that community.
Many features were provided to players to participate within the virtual world to allow them to not only interact on a deeper level, but impact these virtual worlds. Whether it through player housing, complex resource/crafting systems, player vendors, there were methods for players to have a need to participate on a larger level in the virtual environment, even if they didn't quite realize it.
Today however, most MMOs seem to focus on minimizing social interaction. Not only by not providing many of the features that enable social and economic interaction, but outright designing game mechanics to specifically enable players to outright sidestep participating in the larger picture. There is more focus on fighting NPCs MOBs and completing NPC tasks than there is about interacting with other players, most of which are static and unchanging.
So really, I see the stagnation as being an over-emphasis on static non-player content, and an under-emphasis on player created content. This results in the bland and generic MMOs where players feel like the only real thing to do is hack and slash their way through the game.
I suppose what I'm really trying to say is there is too much focus on "themepark" MMOs, and that is why everyone is seeing stagnation, because it is the themepark mentality that is the epitome of static and stagnant content and gameplay.