I simply don't get it - I look at every other genre and you see the same games coming out every single year with minor little changes. Is MW3 really that different from previous CoD titles? Are all shooters really that different and innovative? What about RTS? I feel like SC2 is the original made more flashy and current. Have fighting games really evolved that much? Isn't it still just mashing a few buttons for combos or moves?
However, when it comes to MMO's, having quests, tab targeting and global cooldowns is automatic "the devs blow they are lazy blah blah". I keep seeing threads where people are not only upset with the current status of MMO's, but feel like they can demand something new (all the while providing zero ideas, but I digress).
So again, I ask, what makes MMO's so special that people feel like the wheel should be reinvented?
First of all. Call of Duty is a fucking SERIES. It's expected to have shared components.
SWTOR isn't called WoW4 is it?
Seeing developers make money for being lazy useless assholes means the genre is being retarded (literal use of the term, not the vulgar slang) by people cutting corners.
Now if you had argued.. "What innovations came about from Modern Warfare 3 in comparison to Unreal Tournament 2003?!" I'd make a list for you.
That list would be longer in contrast to anything MMORPG developers using the WoW mixed back themepark model have thought of.
There's been some quality of life inventions, like dungeon finders and gear scores being easier to read. BUT even most of those seem like ways to escape actually making an engaging and worthwhile massively multiplayer role-playing game.
I'm sorry but the only real difference between MW3 and old school Counter-Strike is the silly killstreak bonuses. Hell, in CS you had to manage your money through rounds and sometimes you couldn't get the ammo you needed. Now you start fully loaded every time - One could easily say it's been dumbed down much like WoW.
Iron sights aiming is a big innovation.
Prone was a big deal for the FPS genre, not giving CoD credit for it alone.
What's a major difference between CoD multiplayer and Counter-Strike in design? Oh you don't know because you're blindly trying to make a point.
Well Call of Duty, even in their WW2 era games, invented a more radial multiplayer map design rather than the liner corridor shooting that was popular in all shooters before hand. That was a big change in tactics and is still one of the main reasons why people buy the series and enjoy it.
I like larger maps like in the Battlefield series myself, and that's also an innovation but mostly because tech has grown.
MMOs have done none of this. If anything quest and growth design has became more liner in the genre and that's why so many of us are calling for innovation.
Because MMOs are dumbing down, when something like a shooter that's biggest mechanic is "pull trigger" have actually grown exponentially.
Advice to you helthros, learn about crap before talking on it. Otherwise someone might mistake you for an idiot.
lol iron sights and prone is what you're going to go with as innovations? Wow you must be really easily impressed. Prone was available in Day of Defeat which was another mod for HL (like CS), so that's hardly new either.
Linear corridor shooting? Did you even play the original counter-strike? Larger maps an innovation - LOL. Really just fishing for an argument there.
MMOs have done none of this? There is no 40 vs 40 battleground in WoW? There aren't battles of hundreds vs hundreds in EVE Online all week? There isn't one seemless map for everyone to play on in Darkfall? Trolls will be trolls.
I doubt you even played the original CounterStrike, at this point I wonder if you could even stand and walk on your own at that time.
My advice to you, drop the 2-bit intellectual smug approach with the misplaced sense of superiority, it's unbecoming.
FPS - a game you play from a first person perspective (and can shoot things, but not only)
MMO - a game with massive ammounts of players online
Ok, then how do u define a genre and what game genres are out there in your opinion.
Genres are game types, not categorized by presentation or specific mechanics (like being real time or round based).
This is also why you will not find a category "FPS" or "RTS" in (online-)stores. You will find "action", or "strategy", or "role playing"
Genres:
Role Playing
Action
Strategy
Adventure
Simulation
etc.
Then explain to me why you'll find websites that are centered around FPS, RTS, MMO, MOBA etc? Times are changing friend, those genres worked in a time when it was all about single player games.
FPS - a game you play from a first person perspective (and can shoot things, but not only)
MMO - a game with massive ammounts of players online
Ok, then how do u define a genre and what game genres are out there in your opinion.
Genres are game types, not categorized by presentation or specific mechanics (like being real time or round based).
This is also why you will not find a category "FPS" or "RTS" in (online-)stores. You will find "action", or "strategy", or "role playing"
Genres:
Role Playing
Action
Strategy
Adventure
Simulation
etc.
Then explain to me why you'll find websites that are centered around FPS, RTS, MMO, MOBA etc? Times are changing friend, those genres worked in a time when it was all about single player games.
The same way there are websites dedicated to movies by Ed Wood.
That doesn't make Ed Wood a genre.
FPS doesn't tell me anything about the game, at all, except how its played, from the first person perspective.
Penumbra, System Shock 2, MW3 - all FPS, completely different games (Adventure, RPG, Action)
Do you also go to bookstores and ask for books narrated from the third person?
Or do you rather go "I'd like a political thriller."?
I simply don't get it - I look at every other genre and you see the same games coming out every single year with minor little changes. .....
So again, I ask, what makes MMO's so special that people feel like the wheel should be reinvented?
Perhaps the difference is for those other genre's each new title built on what came before it, largely retaining everything about them and adding to the formula. But remember, those other genre's are for the most part "just games", and rather simplistic in their design.
The early MMORPG's were largely designed to be virtual worlds to the best of the current technology, and we who enjoyed them as they were delivered (niche market that we might be) really thought we'd see some great innovation in the future as computer technology progressed.
But that isn't what happened, Developers decided to figure out what it was about those early MMORPG's that didn't appeal to the "average" player and change the designs to be more appealing to this larger target audience.
So, unlike the other genre's, MMORPG's evolved by becoming easier to play, less complex, and less like virtual worlds. For every feature they added to improve it (and some things are certainly an improvement of course), they discarded 2 other features/game mechanics that we enjoyed in the past.
It certainly worked, broadening their appeal and bringing in a whole host of newer players.
For those of us who enjoyed the MMORPG's (and their Communities) the way they were, this was not an improvement.
So we see MMO's become more "game like" and therefore feel a very real sense of loss, as we not only don't get the features we enjoyed before, but the games didn't evolve as we felt the could/should have.
By the way, all those other genre's you mentioned, I used to play them, but no longer as they did become boring and repetitive and for the life of me I can't understand why people want to play MW3, 4, 5, 22 etc. You'd have to ask them why I suppose.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I simply don't get it - I look at every other genre and you see the same games coming out every single year with minor little changes. Is MW3 really that different from previous CoD titles? Are all shooters really that different and innovative? What about RTS? I feel like SC2 is the original made more flashy and current. Have fighting games really evolved that much? Isn't it still just mashing a few buttons for combos or moves?
However, when it comes to MMO's, having quests, tab targeting and global cooldowns is automatic "the devs blow they are lazy blah blah". I keep seeing threads where people are not only upset with the current status of MMO's, but feel like they can demand something new (all the while providing zero ideas, but I digress).
So again, I ask, what makes MMO's so special that people feel like the wheel should be reinvented?
i dont think i would sub to 1st person games either if they started with it, they wouldt be worth it atm. Stil i play em and have fun but when you start to charge monthly fee i expect alot more from my 1st person games also.
15$ a month is cheap enterainemnt but i sure as hell expect something in return from em, i probably throw 15$ out the window on other stuff but stil when i pay 15$ no matter if its pocket change i expect more then if i had to pay 0$
I think if you get other subscribe genre out and it becomes main stream the same will happen with those.
So for me it comes down to money spent and value earnd.
OP..... in a free society. The indivitual is supreme. They are the source of wealth generation. Consumers can demand what ever they want. Companys(who are in the business of staying in business and making a profit so they can continue to hire and innovate) can choose to pay attention to what the consumer demands...or not.They can interpret in what ever way they want the demands of the consumer.They will be rewarded or punished accordingly....by those with power....the consumer.
I think u havent spent much time on other genre otherwise u wouldnt talk such nonsense. Lets just compare fighters from 2002 and today and u would see they improved or developed in total different directions then 10 years ago. Imagine comeback mechanics and tutorials 10 years ago hahah.
Comments
lol iron sights and prone is what you're going to go with as innovations? Wow you must be really easily impressed. Prone was available in Day of Defeat which was another mod for HL (like CS), so that's hardly new either.
Linear corridor shooting? Did you even play the original counter-strike? Larger maps an innovation - LOL. Really just fishing for an argument there.
MMOs have done none of this? There is no 40 vs 40 battleground in WoW? There aren't battles of hundreds vs hundreds in EVE Online all week? There isn't one seemless map for everyone to play on in Darkfall? Trolls will be trolls.
I doubt you even played the original CounterStrike, at this point I wonder if you could even stand and walk on your own at that time.
My advice to you, drop the 2-bit intellectual smug approach with the misplaced sense of superiority, it's unbecoming.
Then explain to me why you'll find websites that are centered around FPS, RTS, MMO, MOBA etc? Times are changing friend, those genres worked in a time when it was all about single player games.
The same way there are websites dedicated to movies by Ed Wood.
That doesn't make Ed Wood a genre.
FPS doesn't tell me anything about the game, at all, except how its played, from the first person perspective.
Penumbra, System Shock 2, MW3 - all FPS, completely different games (Adventure, RPG, Action)
Do you also go to bookstores and ask for books narrated from the third person?
Or do you rather go "I'd like a political thriller."?
Lol, this is one of the grimiest threads I've seen in a long time.
So much warmth and happiness, is it xmas or something ?
Perhaps the difference is for those other genre's each new title built on what came before it, largely retaining everything about them and adding to the formula. But remember, those other genre's are for the most part "just games", and rather simplistic in their design.
The early MMORPG's were largely designed to be virtual worlds to the best of the current technology, and we who enjoyed them as they were delivered (niche market that we might be) really thought we'd see some great innovation in the future as computer technology progressed.
But that isn't what happened, Developers decided to figure out what it was about those early MMORPG's that didn't appeal to the "average" player and change the designs to be more appealing to this larger target audience.
So, unlike the other genre's, MMORPG's evolved by becoming easier to play, less complex, and less like virtual worlds. For every feature they added to improve it (and some things are certainly an improvement of course), they discarded 2 other features/game mechanics that we enjoyed in the past.
It certainly worked, broadening their appeal and bringing in a whole host of newer players.
For those of us who enjoyed the MMORPG's (and their Communities) the way they were, this was not an improvement.
So we see MMO's become more "game like" and therefore feel a very real sense of loss, as we not only don't get the features we enjoyed before, but the games didn't evolve as we felt the could/should have.
By the way, all those other genre's you mentioned, I used to play them, but no longer as they did become boring and repetitive and for the life of me I can't understand why people want to play MW3, 4, 5, 22 etc. You'd have to ask them why I suppose.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
i dont think i would sub to 1st person games either if they started with it, they wouldt be worth it atm. Stil i play em and have fun but when you start to charge monthly fee i expect alot more from my 1st person games also.
15$ a month is cheap enterainemnt but i sure as hell expect something in return from em, i probably throw 15$ out the window on other stuff but stil when i pay 15$ no matter if its pocket change i expect more then if i had to pay 0$
I think if you get other subscribe genre out and it becomes main stream the same will happen with those.
So for me it comes down to money spent and value earnd.
OP..... in a free society. The indivitual is supreme. They are the source of wealth generation. Consumers can demand what ever they want. Companys(who are in the business of staying in business and making a profit so they can continue to hire and innovate) can choose to pay attention to what the consumer demands...or not.They can interpret in what ever way they want the demands of the consumer.They will be rewarded or punished accordingly....by those with power....the consumer.
I think u havent spent much time on other genre otherwise u wouldnt talk such nonsense. Lets just compare fighters from 2002 and today and u would see they improved or developed in total different directions then 10 years ago. Imagine comeback mechanics and tutorials 10 years ago hahah.