99% of people reach a point in their lives where they say 'remember when....' and look with great affection at some time in the past. They forget the problems during that time. Maybe because they were young and didn't realize the problems around them, or they weren't yet in a position to be affected by events. In this same vain, most people reach a point where they stop trying to 'keep up' with technology. The old Razor phone was great. What do I need with a smart phone?
This is a rather belabored point of asking the same question regarding MMOs.
At what point do we seem to reach the same place in our evolution. The fault doesn't rest with the MMOs themselves. They are always evolving and giving what the current population is looking for. Otherwise they would go broke. I know some young'uns who have only recently started playing their MMOs, and they are having a great time. No 'This is so much worse than XXXXXXXXX' .. 'Back then, MMOs were better because XXXXXXX'. No, they enjoy the games and have a great time, which is the point of the whole thing (I think). In terms of MMO time, we are like dogs. for every 1 year in the real world seems to be like 7 - 10 in the MMO world. People who have been playing for 3 or 4 years, seem to get caught up in the stagnation.
My questions are simple (Why do we becomse stuck in our ways quicker than the average, as it seems to me. For a technologically inclined group, why do we stagnate so simply?? After careful reflection, when did you begin to notice the 'back when XXXX' phenom was happening?
I'm really tired, so I apologize ahead for a somewhat grim bent.
I'll have to disagree with you, and I'm probably on the older end of the spectrum here. For the record I personally don't hold all players responsible for developers taking the easy and risk free way out by not taking any chances on actual creativity, MMO forums have been bursting at the seams denouncing the lack of evolution we experienced when devs shoveled out fast easy rehashed crap for 7 years. That so many of those games did not reach their intended potential, went free to play or closed down entirely is simply more evidence that the players clearly *didn't* want what was easiest for the developers to crap out.
Any serious careful comparison of MMOs throughout the ages will clearly show one thing to the unbiased, the games of recent years are a lot less varied than MMO eras in the past. We've just spent 7 years enduring clone after clone for the most part, and watching developers from all over scramble to try and snatch a piece of WoW pie. Now that the smarter companies realise that the ceilings been reached, we're seeing some actual evolution in MMOs about to be released.
I have some very fond memories of things I enjoyed about the MMO pioneers, but those fantastic elements that I'd love to see revived are stored in my memory right beside the crap that they'd have been better off without. I fondly remember long nights with friends clearing open world dungeons or pushing on in PoF till the sun came up, but I also remember the soundtrack to those sessions was as often as not discussions like: 'If only they'd do *this*' or 'WHY did they decide *blank* was a good feature? Are they idiots?'.
There were elements of EQ, UO, AC, Shadowbane & DAoC that I truly loved and still enjoy in some other games to this day, however that doesn't mean that everyone looking back fondly is blind to the flaws as seems to be the armchair philosophers go to criticism of anyone that strongly enjoyed elements of past games. For the record, there were other games released around the same time that I don't look back fondly on whatsoever, so the defining factor isn't simply a games age.
I was looking back fondly on original EQ 6 years after release, now WoW, which I also played, is beyond 6 years old and I'm not looking back fondly whatsoever on that, nor with EQ2 - I think it's time many people accept that it's not rose colored glasses after all but an absolute preference for one set of systems over another.
I'm still to this day finding games I love, games that fail to evoke any emotion whatsoever, and games that are so poorly made and conceived that they disgust me. Unfortunately as MMOs are just now easing out of the desolate years of the clone wars many of those aren't MMOs. I'm all about remembering 'the good old days', and I'm very pleased I got to experience those games in their prime AND experienece what's coming along today, 12-15 years later. That doesn't mean I can only enjoy games that were made during a certain time period.
I'm not going to ever stop saying 'Remember when...' because I know there are still great periods to come that I'll some day look back on fondly, and crappy ones that will make the former stand out even more.
Some people sound like seeing a Chocolate bar for the first time in their lives.
But they didn't always expect the same candy bar, forever unchanged, to be a satisfying meal, night after night, for the rest of their natural lives. If you grow downright sick of the taste of chocolate, when you never eat anything else, it's the chocolate maker's fault.
Its the only activity humans expect completely unlimited entertainment from. Even sex we make fewer unrealistic demands of.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Some people sound like seeing a Chocolate bar for the first time in their lives.
But they didn't always expect the same candy bar, forever unchanged, to be a satisfying meal, night after night, for the rest of their natural lives. If you grow downright sick of the taste of chocolate, when you never eat anything else, it's the chocolate maker's fault.
Its the only activity humans expect completely unlimited entertainment from. Even sex we make fewer unrealistic demands of.
Hehehe, true true
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
We have never grown stagnant. MMO's is whats become stagnant. Developers have learned that they can make a streamlined P.O.S game cheeply and feed it to the MMO playerbase, knowing that it will not last longer than 90 days, and knowing that it doesnt have to to make a profit. Just look at the games in the past, with the most recent being TOR that game released in december which was about 4 months ago, and they are just despritaly throwing out free game time. Game will probably be f2p in another 4 months. Nothing on the horizion is going to change the trend anytime soon. TSW will just be another shallow mmo good for a couple months, GWII wont be anything special either. When developers go back to making worlds with some depth then that will be some fresh water in the stagnant MMO pool.
Sorry, but no. I mean yes to the first half chunk, but no to your last sentence.
Old games were not amazing worlds with great depth that were super amazing. They were boring pieces of crap with nothing in it except other people.
It's YOUR fault you enjoyed the game, not the game's fault, just as it's MMO players today who are to blaem for enjoying their own games.
Look, I'm fine with the basic precepts that mmorpgs are fatally flawed, I just don't subscribe to this rosy cheeked opinion that they were ever anything but fatally flawed.
However, i do think there are nuggets of information to be learned from the past:
*Exploring is actually important (this being the opposite of hand holding, or on-rails games)
*Players will appreciate even a horrible gameplay system if it allows them to feel dependant on one another.
We have never grown stagnant. MMO's is whats become stagnant. Developers have learned that they can make a streamlined P.O.S game cheeply and feed it to the MMO playerbase, knowing that it will not last longer than 90 days, and knowing that it doesnt have to to make a profit. Just look at the games in the past, with the most recent being TOR that game released in december which was about 4 months ago, and they are just despritaly throwing out free game time. Game will probably be f2p in another 4 months. Nothing on the horizion is going to change the trend anytime soon. TSW will just be another shallow mmo good for a couple months, GWII wont be anything special either. When developers go back to making worlds with some depth then that will be some fresh water in the stagnant MMO pool.
Sorry, but no. I mean yes to the first half chunk, but no to your last sentence.
Old games were not amazing worlds with great depth that were super amazing. They were boring pieces of crap with nothing in it except other people.
It's YOUR fault you enjoyed the game, not the game's fault, just as it's MMO players today who are to blaem for enjoying their own games.
Look, I'm fine with the basic precepts that mmorpgs are fatally flawed, I just don't subscribe to this rosy cheeked opinion that they were ever anything but fatally flawed.
However, i do think there are nuggets of information to be learned from the past:
*Exploring is actually important (this being the opposite of hand holding, or on-rails games)
*Players will appreciate even a horrible gameplay system if it allows them to feel dependant on one another.
I am sorry, but I have a problem with your statements. So maybe we need clarifications.
Which MMO are you refering to when you say that "boring pieces of crap"? This statement could be true for some of the older MMO's and most of the Newer MMO'sm but we still need to be precise here.
If you are comparing Old Themeparks to newer Themeparks then I would agree with you, newer themeparks can be more fun compared to old full of tedium themeparks, but even this opinion comes from someone who appreciates Sandbox games, I know people who started with older Themeparks and they prefer that instead of the newer.
On the other hand, if you are to compare Sandoxes to newer Themeparks then, I am sorry these newer ones are mundane in comparison.
But even then, I would be willing to accept your own opinion of them, for you, because maybe you just have not experienced older Sandboxes and you do not knwo what their Gameplay is, and how entering a world that is filled with other player can be rich and stimulating and fun, for more than 90 days.
Or, maybe you are a type of MMO player that has fun within one type of MMO, I do not like to generalise personally but we could safelly use Bartle's personalities as a common point of reference. Maybe you are an Achiever type of player and as such you would only have fun in a game that hands you rewards for every bit of the path that it lays down to you. And you would have more of a hard time getting fun from what it may seem to you the more abstract reward that comes from Interaction with other players within the Game's World. Maybe you need to have rides to guide you. And a World where there are none and you have to come up with your own is not fun to you.
So there is that aspect too to consider. This is why the assertion that we become "Stagnant" is false and not true. No one becomes stangnat except what is being offered as MMO. From many peopel's PoV, the MMO's have become stagnant, because essentially they are all the same game with a different dress.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Which MMO are you refering to when you say that "boring pieces of crap"? This statement could be true for some of the older MMO's and most of the Newer MMO'sm but we still need to be precise here.
Aside from EvE, what older sandbox are you referring to?
I was referring to the core games of the day. UO, EQ, AC, AO. None of which were more complex than WoW if you consider the full range of systems that the games offer, and all of which had very static moment to moment game play (although UO and AC did have more dynamic long-term gameplay).
As far as the Bartle's goes, I don't really consider myself to be a specific type, but I would rate myself as explore first, achiever second, and then killer and socializer only when it fits the gameplay. I will admit that older games were much better for exploration, but that's more because newer games are trying too hard to make sure everyone can see every bit of content (and thus extend gameplay time), not because they are putting too little effort into the world.
Sandboxes are for socializers. Themeparks are for achievers. Killers and Explorers are agnostic, and either type can be made for them.
Sorry, but no. I mean yes to the first half chunk, but no to your last sentence.
Old games were not amazing worlds with great depth that were super amazing. They were boring pieces of crap with nothing in it except other people.
It's YOUR fault you enjoyed the game, not the game's fault, just as it's MMO players today who are to blaem for enjoying their own games.
Look, I'm fine with the basic precepts that mmorpgs are fatally flawed, I just don't subscribe to this rosy cheeked opinion that they were ever anything but fatally flawed.
However, i do think there are nuggets of information to be learned from the past:
*Exploring is actually important (this being the opposite of hand holding, or on-rails games)
*Players will appreciate even a horrible gameplay system if it allows them to feel dependant on one another.
If you are looking back on these games from today's perspective they probably aren't very immersive. At the time they were for the most part inovative, sometimes just graphically but also in other aspects. Going from single player rpg's or shooters to coop lan parties to full online mmo's was quite an exciting time for gaming. True the graphics and mechanics have moved on but people weren't looking at them back then as boring and pieces of crap. We didn't have the multitude of choice that's available now and you are right that we played them, blame us if you like but because we played them the genre grew. If we hadn't played them because as you say they were pieces of crap, then the genre would have died. Even so, playing the original Diablo for instance, I still dreaded going into the second floor of the dungeon where the butcher hung out! That's immersion, call it old fashioned if you will that's ok. I am glad games have moved on graphically and mechanically. It's enhanced the immersion a LOT! I agree with you that exploring is important, and am not a huge fan of themepark games or games on rails. I don't agree with you so much on player dependency. I am not sure how that's supposed to make a horrible gameplay system less horrible.
Which MMO are you refering to when you say that "boring pieces of crap"? This statement could be true for some of the older MMO's and most of the Newer MMO'sm but we still need to be precise here.
Aside from EvE, what older sandbox are you referring to?
I was referring to the core games of the day. UO, EQ, AC, AO. None of which were more complex than WoW if you consider the full range of systems that the games offer, and all of which had very static moment to moment game play (although UO and AC did have more dynamic long-term gameplay).
As far as the Bartle's goes, I don't really consider myself to be a specific type, but I would rate myself as explore first, achiever second, and then killer and socializer only when it fits the gameplay. I will admit that older games were much better for exploration, but that's more because newer games are trying too hard to make sure everyone can see every bit of content (and thus extend gameplay time), not because they are putting too little effort into the world.
Sandboxes are for socializers. Themeparks are for achievers. Killers and Explorers are agnostic, and either type can be made for them.
Mainly to UO and AC, and as an Explorer Socialiser these appeal more to me. I expected you would have achiever in one of the two Dominant characteristics, I agree with you as Players we are never one single one, I tend to see it as all four with a Dominant Pair and a secondary pair.
But see, we have dominant pairs which cause us to appreciate more one type than the other and form our perception of them.
Now apart from EVE there have not been any worthy Sandbox MMO's to come around except SWG untill that got shot down. I would still be playing it if it were not for NGE.
But in any case that provides enough clarification, thank you, I understand better with whom I am debating with now
My only questions remaining would be, did you play UO and EQ or AC, how old were you when you did and for how long? No need to answer if you feel its too personal, or answer the ones you feel comfortable with.
That being said, on to the other assertion that you made, about it being our fault that we have enjoyed the game. I disagree completelly. You cannot blame people for liking or disliking something. I agree with Emwyn here, these were the games that were made by the industry and these were the games we discovered and made our first MMO steps in to. Comming from Single player, and Multiplay over a 28k or 56k modem, to many of us these early games left an eternal impression.
They were magical to us, on top of being something new to experience, and we thrived in them without expectations. We touk what was there and made something greater out of it, we found ways to go around some issues and deal with some of the problems, but most importantly, we did it together as an in game community, this is for many of any type the biggest difference from MMO's today, an MMO back in these days was about playing With other people in whatever the setting it provided, and not just amongst other people.
As a result the experience was as organic as people are. Todays MMO's are about you and the Environment independently of other people and as a result the experience is as mechanic as the systems coded in the game.
And that, is not our fault, because it is not our decision, that is the how the games are made today, so surelly you cannot blame us for not liking them and surelly we have the right to blame the Industry for not being able to make games as appealing to many of us, as the ones that came before, introduced us and made us fall in love with the genre.
And mind you as Emwyn said too, there is WoW today because we embraced the games of the Past. I we had not enjoyed them as you are trying to make us feel guilty of, WoW and all others would not have existed today.
Remebering the past is not being stangant. If it was the case lets us also forget our Human history while we at it, let us repeat the attrocieties and wars that plagued us 70 year ago..why remember the past it is being stangnat...and we should not be stangant...common that is innexperienced and close minded even ignorant mentality, and I think, you know it too.
Just because something is older it does not automatically mean that it is not good and should be forgotten and discarted, because our Human race evolved by specifically having the capacity to transfer old knowledge and the lesson it contains from generation to generation.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
My only questions remaining would be, did you play UO and EQ or AC, how old were you when you did and for how long? No need to answer if you feel its too personal, or answer the ones you feel comfortable with.
I've played pretty much every major MMO at release, including UO, EQ and AC. My experiences rarely lasted more than a month or two, because they became stale quickly. I think I played AC the longest because I enjoyed the changing world and the open ended character creation system. And figuring out how to get to the top of buildings in my Japanese themed town (forgot what the name of that race was).
I played them all when they came out, so I would have been 17 for EQ.
That being said, on to the other assertion that you made, about it being our fault that we have enjoyed the game. I disagree completelly. You cannot blame people for liking or disliking something.
That wasn't really my point. My point is it's not the game's fault you enjoyed it, it is your own fault. You made the game fun, nothing inherently superior about the design itself (although there are things that are better, I still agree). You explain as much in your following paragraph.
They were magical to us, on top of being something new to experience, and we thrived in them without expectations. We touk what was there and made something greater out of it, we found ways to go around some issues and deal with some of the problems, but most importantly, we did it together as an in game community, this is for many of any type the biggest difference from MMO's today, an MMO back in these days was about playing With other people in whatever the setting it provided, and not just amongst other people.
As a result the experience was as organic as people are. Todays MMO's are about you and the Environment independently of other people and as a result the experience is as mechanic as the systems coded in the game.
Which is arguably caused by a change in the player base rather than the game itself, although there are some exceptions. Truly I think the reason so many of these games of the past seemed like social utopias to you is because there simply wasn't anything else to do. As someone said previously in this thread, they were glorified chat rooms (and that person was actually proud of that idea).
Just because something is older it does not automatically mean that it is not good and should be forgotten and discarted, because our Human race evolved by specifically having the capacity to transfer old knowledge and the lesson it contains from generation to generation.
Forgotten?no. Slavishly adored? no as well. Strive to be like the past? No.
Also I want you to consider that Bartle's MUD player base study was done on limited group of people. Ever find it odd that there is no room in that chart for people who simply want to enjoy the experience, or roleplay without socializing (which is totally doable, btw)?
I would consider myself both of those more than anything Bartle classified gamers as.
we didn't grow stagnent, the younger crowd will settle for anything. Just my opinion.
This is so true.
Once upon a time the only people making games were the purists. Now any idiot with an engine license and a copy of 3DS Max can make a game that sucks. They don't give a crap about what they make, as long as it makes money. In the end the entire business model revolves around "user input" which means none of the purists are involved and the 99% get to decide that the game should be dumbed down to their level.
Dumbing down is what's making the games unplayable after a couple of months...
I can't even login to WoW anymore, the entire view of that project since vanilla has turned into a 5 second fap to get instant gratification in every part of the game.
The people trying to make sandboxes have very little clue about what they are doing it seems - EVE being the exception to that presently.
Everything else is an instant gratification-fest which dies out after a few months because instant gratification isn't something you can build upon.
There's no more making your bones, or it being a big deal because you got to a particular point in the game.
If everyone has access to everything, then nothing means anything - then it makes achievements pointless.
A lot of those sandbox games are now just getting by with forum censorship to delete the posts of the multitude of angry subscribers.
As said before, too many mmorpgs are too similar to each other =/= new experiences/allow new experiences while playing with enough frequency. Interesting parallel:
lots of people complaining about how mmorpgs suck nowadays (i agree)
but i bet you guys preorder the next big thing whether it be gw2, swtor, tera etc etc.
you need to vote with your wallets and stop getting caught in the hype. dont buy games which you havent play tested (im looking at you gw2)
dont sign up for extended subs until you have played at least 1 month. dont be fooled.
A starving man doesn't pass up a tortilla in the hopes that he'll find a pot roast down the line.
I really dislike the term "vote with your wallets" because this presents such a shallow view of the way things work. The industry is the way it is because greedy companies dont want to take risks. Removing money from the genre only makes the genre as a whole appear riskier. Publishers would simply look for a smaller risk in which to invest their money rather than taking an even bigger risk and trying something new.
we didn't grow stagnent, the younger crowd will settle for anything. Just my opinion.
This is so true.
Once upon a time the only people making games were the purists. Now any idiot with an engine license and a copy of 3DS Max can make a game that sucks. They don't give a crap about what they make, as long as it makes money. In the end the entire business model revolves around "user input" which means none of the purists are involved and the 99% get to decide that the game should be dumbed down to their level.
Dumbing down is what's making the games unplayable after a couple of months...
I can't even login to WoW anymore, the entire view of that project since vanilla has turned into a 5 second fap to get instant gratification in every part of the game.
The people trying to make sandboxes have very little clue about what they are doing it seems - EVE being the exception to that presently.
Everything else is an instant gratification-fest which dies out after a few months because instant gratification isn't something you can build upon.
There's no more making your bones, or it being a big deal because you got to a particular point in the game.
If everyone has access to everything, then nothing means anything - then it makes achievements pointless.
A lot of those sandbox games are now just getting by with forum censorship to delete the posts of the multitude of angry subscribers.
Ah so you found the 'good old days' fun then? Killing hundreds/thousands of mobs for that one drop? perhaps waiting 12 hours for something to spawn?
Most people play MMOs for fun, not to kill the same mob 50,000 times without story, lore, or entertainment. Killing them with friends doesn't make it better. I like the fact that modern MMOs have less of the 'Mission Impossible: Mega Grind' endgame quests associated with Vanilla WoW/EQ/AC because all the hardcore 'I need to occupy 12 hours a day with gaming' people will quit.
obviously you can still launch with too little content, see: TOR, and probably GW2.
As said before, too many mmorpgs are too similar to each other =/= new experiences/allow new experiences while playing with enough frequency. Interesting parallel:
And the article touches indirectly on the "new and shiny" effect as far as video games go. Why is it that only First Games (call it early games if you feel compelled to object with an anecdote) has that Gosh WoW built into it, making every game the follows somewhat disappointing?
It seems to be that there just aren't many truly new experiences to be had in this genre, despite innovation that should (in theory anyway) make the experience feel special again. First Games were a vacation, and they were unique experiences. At the same time, there really isn't any game fifteen years later that can feel the same, no matter how "innovative" it seems to be.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
we didn't grow stagnent, the younger crowd will settle for anything. Just my opinion.
This is so true.
Once upon a time the only people making games were the purists. Now any idiot with an engine license and a copy of 3DS Max can make a game that sucks. They don't give a crap about what they make, as long as it makes money. In the end the entire business model revolves around "user input" which means none of the purists are involved and the 99% get to decide that the game should be dumbed down to their level.
Dumbing down is what's making the games unplayable after a couple of months...
I can't even login to WoW anymore, the entire view of that project since vanilla has turned into a 5 second fap to get instant gratification in every part of the game.
The people trying to make sandboxes have very little clue about what they are doing it seems - EVE being the exception to that presently.
Everything else is an instant gratification-fest which dies out after a few months because instant gratification isn't something you can build upon.
There's no more making your bones, or it being a big deal because you got to a particular point in the game.
If everyone has access to everything, then nothing means anything - then it makes achievements pointless.
A lot of those sandbox games are now just getting by with forum censorship to delete the posts of the multitude of angry subscribers.
Ah so you found the 'good old days' fun then? Killing hundreds/thousands of mobs for that one drop? perhaps waiting 12 hours for something to spawn?
Most people play MMOs for fun, not to kill the same mob 50,000 times without story, lore, or entertainment. Killing them with friends doesn't make it better. I like the fact that modern MMOs have less of the 'Mission Impossible: Mega Grind' endgame quests associated with Vanilla WoW/EQ/AC because all the hardcore 'I need to occupy 12 hours a day with gaming' people will quit.
obviously you can still launch with too little content, see: TOR, and probably GW2.
Again, this is what I mean when I say this generation can't seem to fathom people liking something that they dont like.
Try not to dictate to people what is or is not fun. Some people do enjoy the sense of accomplishment that comes with putting in time and effort to achieve something. This is why you hear a lot of people complain about "instant gratification" in today's MMOS. Many people dont want this. Its not fun to them to win without trying, or to make it to the top in a matter of a week or two.
Its like beating up a toddler. Some people may get some sick thrill out of it, but to others there's no fun in winning a fight when your enemy doesn't stand a chance.
Also, dont confuse spending a year or more to reach max level with spending 12+ hours a day to do it. Just because some people did (and some people still do) didn't mean you had to give up your life in order for older games to be a lasting experience.
AFirst Games were a vacation, and they were unique experiences. At the same time, there really isn't any game fifteen years later that can feel the same, no matter how "innovative" it seems to be.
The same...probably not.
I still think the industry can do better than it's been doing, though.
I still think the industry can do better than it's been doing, though.
Always. But the Dooooooom! crew needs to take a break once in a while.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
AFirst Games were a vacation, and they were unique experiences. At the same time, there really isn't any game fifteen years later that can feel the same, no matter how "innovative" it seems to be.
The same...probably not.
I still think the industry can do better than it's been doing, though.
Of course it can. Agree 100% Otherwise why would we still be here? Why would any of us stick around all these years through the genre? Even though everyone can't see it, it's nice to know some people can.
Ah so you found the 'good old days' fun then? Killing hundreds/thousands of mobs for that one drop? perhaps waiting 12 hours for something to spawn?
Most people play MMOs for fun, not to kill the same mob 50,000 times without story, lore, or entertainment. Killing them with friends doesn't make it better. I like the fact that modern MMOs have less of the 'Mission Impossible: Mega Grind' endgame quests associated with Vanilla WoW/EQ/AC because all the hardcore 'I need to occupy 12 hours a day with gaming' people will quit.
obviously you can still launch with too little content, see: TOR, and probably GW2.
As opposed to what? Today's Instance/Daily grind games that have a story that hardly anyone reads because its too time consuming and they have a pointer that shows you exactly how to complete a quest? Sure Raids could happen at any time because of no instances, but that also meant you werent raiding constantly and had a reason to log in outside of raiding.
I prefered the heavily social games, they didn't feel like a grind to me, they felt like i was hanging out with friends, nowadays people don't even bother to get to know the players outside of their small circle (many players don't even know their own guildmates). To contrast i still keep in touch with more players from UO/EQ than i ever did from the games afterwards.
Which is arguably caused by a change in the player base rather than the game itself, although there are some exceptions. Truly I think the reason so many of these games of the past seemed like social utopias to you is because there simply wasn't anything else to do. As someone said previously in this thread, they were glorified chat rooms (and that person was actually proud of that idea).
Also I want you to consider that Bartle's MUD player base study was done on limited group of people. Ever find it odd that there is no room in that chart for people who simply want to enjoy the experience, or roleplay without socializing (which is totally doable, btw)?
I would consider myself both of those more than anything Bartle classified gamers as.
For the rest of the points I can't but say I respect your perspective, opinion and perception you have formed of MMOs, I may not agree but even if I disagree it is still your perception of it and I simply respect it, I ask just to better understand you as a player.
The one point I would like to discuss however is this one in Red here. I used to think a few years back, the same, that somehow players have changed. But Recently I realised that players have not changed, what has changed is us. You were 17 at the time of EQ you are much older now, you like I have changed due to life experience our outlook of things has changed modified over the years in many cases our preferences and tastes may have changed too.
But if you observe closelly, 17 year olds today are no different than when you were 17, what most players of that age like today and how most player of that age play gmes today is the same as players of equal age 15 years ago when the early MMO's were around.
therefore, why aren;t we seeing same bhaviors or undertakings happening in the games of today, it is because the games of today have changed, and they simply do not offer the same opportunities as the games of old.
And that is why I disagree with the assertion that games of today have not changed and only got refined but somehow the player based has changed and thus we cannot experience the same gameplay that we had back then.
What was possible to undertake in a game such as UO is simply not possible to do in WoW.
Yes WoW has things to do too, just not the same things as UO, and that change, is what influences all of the rest. In my view, observation, opinion and experience with MMO's and the people playing them.
Once a Sanbox with teh Scope of UO comes allong we will be able to test our Hypothesis, untill then, we will have to just share eachother's opinions about it discuss it and agree to disagree.
About bartle I agree basically it is not as accurate as more professional Personality tests such as Briggs-Mayers or Multiple Intelligences tests and I only refer to it because it was made specifically for MMO's and because it could be a nice frame of reference within a discussion about MMOs, yet it is not something definitive to describe a person nor written in stone.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
While MMO's have improved in many areas, there's no denying that they also removed alot of the features and mechanics that some of us favored because the greater masses didn't care for them.
Doesn't mean we're stagnant at all, if we're going to use analogies it would be better to imagine what would it be like if smart phones didn't actually make phone calls anymore because more people prefer to text/facebook/twitter instead.
Modern MMO's are more like that example, lots of flash and style, but a bit short on depth and features.
THIS.
------------------
It is not that we're too old to be happy about new things. No.
Modern mmorpg's just THROWN OUT many features. Yes they not only thrown out inconveniences , they also thrown out features along with them.
Besides "your inconvenicence might be someone else game".
As opposed to what? Today's Instance/Daily grind games that have a story that hardly anyone reads because its too time consuming and they have a pointer that shows you exactly how to complete a quest? Sure Raids could happen at any time because of no instances, but that also meant you werent raiding constantly and had a reason to log in outside of raiding.
I prefered the heavily social games, they didn't feel like a grind to me, they felt like i was hanging out with friends, nowadays people don't even bother to get to know the players outside of their small circle (many players don't even know their own guildmates). To contrast i still keep in touch with more players from UO/EQ than i ever did from the games afterwards.
And i prefer a hack-n-slash combat game. I don't play games to make friends. Sure, i got to know some people from EQ, and WOW, but they are not real friends, just good play partners.
Plus, why do anyone has to *read*? Do you have a thing called VOICE OVER? TOR has it, DC Universe has it .. WOW should have more of it.
If I do not have to read in SKYRIM or Deus Ex, i do not see a good reason why i have to in a MMO.
As opposed to what? Today's Instance/Daily grind games that have a story that hardly anyone reads because its too time consuming and they have a pointer that shows you exactly how to complete a quest? Sure Raids could happen at any time because of no instances, but that also meant you werent raiding constantly and had a reason to log in outside of raiding.
I prefered the heavily social games, they didn't feel like a grind to me, they felt like i was hanging out with friends, nowadays people don't even bother to get to know the players outside of their small circle (many players don't even know their own guildmates). To contrast i still keep in touch with more players from UO/EQ than i ever did from the games afterwards.
And i prefer a hack-n-slash combat game. I don't play games to make friends. Sure, i got to know some people from EQ, and WOW, but they are not real friends, just good play partners.
Plus, why do anyone has to *read*? Do you have a thing called VOICE OVER? TOR has it, DC Universe has it .. WOW should have more of it.
If I do not have to read in SKYRIM or Deus Ex, i do not see a good reason why i have to in a MMO.
You mean those voiceovers in TOR that lead up to a repetitive "kill x enemies" anyways. From what i understand most people reach a point they just click spacebar to bypass them anyways. Not listening to them is the same as not reading them.
Plus i can't stand games that only have voice overs, they completely ruin the atmosphere in some games when some of the Characters don't talk the way you would expect. In my mind its fluff that takes away from improving other parts of the game (plus it slows down adding content unless you are content with all the characters sharing about 12 voices in the whole game)
Comments
I'll have to disagree with you, and I'm probably on the older end of the spectrum here. For the record I personally don't hold all players responsible for developers taking the easy and risk free way out by not taking any chances on actual creativity, MMO forums have been bursting at the seams denouncing the lack of evolution we experienced when devs shoveled out fast easy rehashed crap for 7 years. That so many of those games did not reach their intended potential, went free to play or closed down entirely is simply more evidence that the players clearly *didn't* want what was easiest for the developers to crap out.
Any serious careful comparison of MMOs throughout the ages will clearly show one thing to the unbiased, the games of recent years are a lot less varied than MMO eras in the past. We've just spent 7 years enduring clone after clone for the most part, and watching developers from all over scramble to try and snatch a piece of WoW pie. Now that the smarter companies realise that the ceilings been reached, we're seeing some actual evolution in MMOs about to be released.
I have some very fond memories of things I enjoyed about the MMO pioneers, but those fantastic elements that I'd love to see revived are stored in my memory right beside the crap that they'd have been better off without. I fondly remember long nights with friends clearing open world dungeons or pushing on in PoF till the sun came up, but I also remember the soundtrack to those sessions was as often as not discussions like: 'If only they'd do *this*' or 'WHY did they decide *blank* was a good feature? Are they idiots?'.
There were elements of EQ, UO, AC, Shadowbane & DAoC that I truly loved and still enjoy in some other games to this day, however that doesn't mean that everyone looking back fondly is blind to the flaws as seems to be the armchair philosophers go to criticism of anyone that strongly enjoyed elements of past games. For the record, there were other games released around the same time that I don't look back fondly on whatsoever, so the defining factor isn't simply a games age.
I was looking back fondly on original EQ 6 years after release, now WoW, which I also played, is beyond 6 years old and I'm not looking back fondly whatsoever on that, nor with EQ2 - I think it's time many people accept that it's not rose colored glasses after all but an absolute preference for one set of systems over another.
I'm still to this day finding games I love, games that fail to evoke any emotion whatsoever, and games that are so poorly made and conceived that they disgust me. Unfortunately as MMOs are just now easing out of the desolate years of the clone wars many of those aren't MMOs. I'm all about remembering 'the good old days', and I'm very pleased I got to experience those games in their prime AND experienece what's coming along today, 12-15 years later. That doesn't mean I can only enjoy games that were made during a certain time period.
I'm not going to ever stop saying 'Remember when...' because I know there are still great periods to come that I'll some day look back on fondly, and crappy ones that will make the former stand out even more.
But they didn't always expect the same candy bar, forever unchanged, to be a satisfying meal, night after night, for the rest of their natural lives. If you grow downright sick of the taste of chocolate, when you never eat anything else, it's the chocolate maker's fault.
Its the only activity humans expect completely unlimited entertainment from. Even sex we make fewer unrealistic demands of.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Hehehe, true true
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Sorry, but no. I mean yes to the first half chunk, but no to your last sentence.
Old games were not amazing worlds with great depth that were super amazing. They were boring pieces of crap with nothing in it except other people.
It's YOUR fault you enjoyed the game, not the game's fault, just as it's MMO players today who are to blaem for enjoying their own games.
Look, I'm fine with the basic precepts that mmorpgs are fatally flawed, I just don't subscribe to this rosy cheeked opinion that they were ever anything but fatally flawed.
However, i do think there are nuggets of information to be learned from the past:
*Exploring is actually important (this being the opposite of hand holding, or on-rails games)
*Players will appreciate even a horrible gameplay system if it allows them to feel dependant on one another.
I am sorry, but I have a problem with your statements. So maybe we need clarifications.
Which MMO are you refering to when you say that "boring pieces of crap"? This statement could be true for some of the older MMO's and most of the Newer MMO'sm but we still need to be precise here.
If you are comparing Old Themeparks to newer Themeparks then I would agree with you, newer themeparks can be more fun compared to old full of tedium themeparks, but even this opinion comes from someone who appreciates Sandbox games, I know people who started with older Themeparks and they prefer that instead of the newer.
On the other hand, if you are to compare Sandoxes to newer Themeparks then, I am sorry these newer ones are mundane in comparison.
But even then, I would be willing to accept your own opinion of them, for you, because maybe you just have not experienced older Sandboxes and you do not knwo what their Gameplay is, and how entering a world that is filled with other player can be rich and stimulating and fun, for more than 90 days.
Or, maybe you are a type of MMO player that has fun within one type of MMO, I do not like to generalise personally but we could safelly use Bartle's personalities as a common point of reference. Maybe you are an Achiever type of player and as such you would only have fun in a game that hands you rewards for every bit of the path that it lays down to you. And you would have more of a hard time getting fun from what it may seem to you the more abstract reward that comes from Interaction with other players within the Game's World. Maybe you need to have rides to guide you. And a World where there are none and you have to come up with your own is not fun to you.
So there is that aspect too to consider. This is why the assertion that we become "Stagnant" is false and not true. No one becomes stangnat except what is being offered as MMO. From many peopel's PoV, the MMO's have become stagnant, because essentially they are all the same game with a different dress.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Aside from EvE, what older sandbox are you referring to?
I was referring to the core games of the day. UO, EQ, AC, AO. None of which were more complex than WoW if you consider the full range of systems that the games offer, and all of which had very static moment to moment game play (although UO and AC did have more dynamic long-term gameplay).
As far as the Bartle's goes, I don't really consider myself to be a specific type, but I would rate myself as explore first, achiever second, and then killer and socializer only when it fits the gameplay. I will admit that older games were much better for exploration, but that's more because newer games are trying too hard to make sure everyone can see every bit of content (and thus extend gameplay time), not because they are putting too little effort into the world.
Sandboxes are for socializers. Themeparks are for achievers. Killers and Explorers are agnostic, and either type can be made for them.
If you are looking back on these games from today's perspective they probably aren't very immersive. At the time they were for the most part inovative, sometimes just graphically but also in other aspects. Going from single player rpg's or shooters to coop lan parties to full online mmo's was quite an exciting time for gaming. True the graphics and mechanics have moved on but people weren't looking at them back then as boring and pieces of crap. We didn't have the multitude of choice that's available now and you are right that we played them, blame us if you like but because we played them the genre grew. If we hadn't played them because as you say they were pieces of crap, then the genre would have died. Even so, playing the original Diablo for instance, I still dreaded going into the second floor of the dungeon where the butcher hung out! That's immersion, call it old fashioned if you will that's ok. I am glad games have moved on graphically and mechanically. It's enhanced the immersion a LOT! I agree with you that exploring is important, and am not a huge fan of themepark games or games on rails. I don't agree with you so much on player dependency. I am not sure how that's supposed to make a horrible gameplay system less horrible.
the poster formerly known as melangel :P
Mainly to UO and AC, and as an Explorer Socialiser these appeal more to me. I expected you would have achiever in one of the two Dominant characteristics, I agree with you as Players we are never one single one, I tend to see it as all four with a Dominant Pair and a secondary pair.
But see, we have dominant pairs which cause us to appreciate more one type than the other and form our perception of them.
Now apart from EVE there have not been any worthy Sandbox MMO's to come around except SWG untill that got shot down. I would still be playing it if it were not for NGE.
But in any case that provides enough clarification, thank you, I understand better with whom I am debating with now
My only questions remaining would be, did you play UO and EQ or AC, how old were you when you did and for how long? No need to answer if you feel its too personal, or answer the ones you feel comfortable with.
That being said, on to the other assertion that you made, about it being our fault that we have enjoyed the game. I disagree completelly. You cannot blame people for liking or disliking something. I agree with Emwyn here, these were the games that were made by the industry and these were the games we discovered and made our first MMO steps in to. Comming from Single player, and Multiplay over a 28k or 56k modem, to many of us these early games left an eternal impression.
They were magical to us, on top of being something new to experience, and we thrived in them without expectations. We touk what was there and made something greater out of it, we found ways to go around some issues and deal with some of the problems, but most importantly, we did it together as an in game community, this is for many of any type the biggest difference from MMO's today, an MMO back in these days was about playing With other people in whatever the setting it provided, and not just amongst other people.
As a result the experience was as organic as people are. Todays MMO's are about you and the Environment independently of other people and as a result the experience is as mechanic as the systems coded in the game.
And that, is not our fault, because it is not our decision, that is the how the games are made today, so surelly you cannot blame us for not liking them and surelly we have the right to blame the Industry for not being able to make games as appealing to many of us, as the ones that came before, introduced us and made us fall in love with the genre.
And mind you as Emwyn said too, there is WoW today because we embraced the games of the Past. I we had not enjoyed them as you are trying to make us feel guilty of, WoW and all others would not have existed today.
Remebering the past is not being stangant. If it was the case lets us also forget our Human history while we at it, let us repeat the attrocieties and wars that plagued us 70 year ago..why remember the past it is being stangnat...and we should not be stangant...common that is innexperienced and close minded even ignorant mentality, and I think, you know it too.
Just because something is older it does not automatically mean that it is not good and should be forgotten and discarted, because our Human race evolved by specifically having the capacity to transfer old knowledge and the lesson it contains from generation to generation.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Also I want you to consider that Bartle's MUD player base study was done on limited group of people. Ever find it odd that there is no room in that chart for people who simply want to enjoy the experience, or roleplay without socializing (which is totally doable, btw)?
I would consider myself both of those more than anything Bartle classified gamers as.
This is so true.
Once upon a time the only people making games were the purists. Now any idiot with an engine license and a copy of 3DS Max can make a game that sucks. They don't give a crap about what they make, as long as it makes money. In the end the entire business model revolves around "user input" which means none of the purists are involved and the 99% get to decide that the game should be dumbed down to their level.
Dumbing down is what's making the games unplayable after a couple of months...
I can't even login to WoW anymore, the entire view of that project since vanilla has turned into a 5 second fap to get instant gratification in every part of the game.
The people trying to make sandboxes have very little clue about what they are doing it seems - EVE being the exception to that presently.
Everything else is an instant gratification-fest which dies out after a few months because instant gratification isn't something you can build upon.
There's no more making your bones, or it being a big deal because you got to a particular point in the game.
If everyone has access to everything, then nothing means anything - then it makes achievements pointless.
A lot of those sandbox games are now just getting by with forum censorship to delete the posts of the multitude of angry subscribers.
My EVE YouTube Channel
As said before, too many mmorpgs are too similar to each other =/= new experiences/allow new experiences while playing with enough frequency. Interesting parallel:
Holiday Paradox Explains Why Time Flies
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
lots of people complaining about how mmorpgs suck nowadays (i agree)
but i bet you guys preorder the next big thing whether it be gw2, swtor, tera etc etc.
you need to vote with your wallets and stop getting caught in the hype. dont buy games which you havent play tested (im looking at you gw2)
dont sign up for extended subs until you have played at least 1 month. dont be fooled.
A starving man doesn't pass up a tortilla in the hopes that he'll find a pot roast down the line.
I really dislike the term "vote with your wallets" because this presents such a shallow view of the way things work. The industry is the way it is because greedy companies dont want to take risks. Removing money from the genre only makes the genre as a whole appear riskier. Publishers would simply look for a smaller risk in which to invest their money rather than taking an even bigger risk and trying something new.
Ah so you found the 'good old days' fun then? Killing hundreds/thousands of mobs for that one drop? perhaps waiting 12 hours for something to spawn?
Most people play MMOs for fun, not to kill the same mob 50,000 times without story, lore, or entertainment. Killing them with friends doesn't make it better. I like the fact that modern MMOs have less of the 'Mission Impossible: Mega Grind' endgame quests associated with Vanilla WoW/EQ/AC because all the hardcore 'I need to occupy 12 hours a day with gaming' people will quit.
obviously you can still launch with too little content, see: TOR, and probably GW2.
And the article touches indirectly on the "new and shiny" effect as far as video games go. Why is it that only First Games (call it early games if you feel compelled to object with an anecdote) has that Gosh WoW built into it, making every game the follows somewhat disappointing?
It seems to be that there just aren't many truly new experiences to be had in this genre, despite innovation that should (in theory anyway) make the experience feel special again. First Games were a vacation, and they were unique experiences. At the same time, there really isn't any game fifteen years later that can feel the same, no matter how "innovative" it seems to be.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Again, this is what I mean when I say this generation can't seem to fathom people liking something that they dont like.
Try not to dictate to people what is or is not fun. Some people do enjoy the sense of accomplishment that comes with putting in time and effort to achieve something. This is why you hear a lot of people complain about "instant gratification" in today's MMOS. Many people dont want this. Its not fun to them to win without trying, or to make it to the top in a matter of a week or two.
Its like beating up a toddler. Some people may get some sick thrill out of it, but to others there's no fun in winning a fight when your enemy doesn't stand a chance.
Also, dont confuse spending a year or more to reach max level with spending 12+ hours a day to do it. Just because some people did (and some people still do) didn't mean you had to give up your life in order for older games to be a lasting experience.
The same...probably not.
I still think the industry can do better than it's been doing, though.
Always. But the Dooooooom! crew needs to take a break once in a while.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Of course it can. Agree 100% Otherwise why would we still be here? Why would any of us stick around all these years through the genre? Even though everyone can't see it, it's nice to know some people can.
the poster formerly known as melangel :P
As opposed to what? Today's Instance/Daily grind games that have a story that hardly anyone reads because its too time consuming and they have a pointer that shows you exactly how to complete a quest? Sure Raids could happen at any time because of no instances, but that also meant you werent raiding constantly and had a reason to log in outside of raiding.
I prefered the heavily social games, they didn't feel like a grind to me, they felt like i was hanging out with friends, nowadays people don't even bother to get to know the players outside of their small circle (many players don't even know their own guildmates). To contrast i still keep in touch with more players from UO/EQ than i ever did from the games afterwards.
For the rest of the points I can't but say I respect your perspective, opinion and perception you have formed of MMOs, I may not agree but even if I disagree it is still your perception of it and I simply respect it, I ask just to better understand you as a player.
The one point I would like to discuss however is this one in Red here. I used to think a few years back, the same, that somehow players have changed. But Recently I realised that players have not changed, what has changed is us. You were 17 at the time of EQ you are much older now, you like I have changed due to life experience our outlook of things has changed modified over the years in many cases our preferences and tastes may have changed too.
But if you observe closelly, 17 year olds today are no different than when you were 17, what most players of that age like today and how most player of that age play gmes today is the same as players of equal age 15 years ago when the early MMO's were around.
therefore, why aren;t we seeing same bhaviors or undertakings happening in the games of today, it is because the games of today have changed, and they simply do not offer the same opportunities as the games of old.
And that is why I disagree with the assertion that games of today have not changed and only got refined but somehow the player based has changed and thus we cannot experience the same gameplay that we had back then.
What was possible to undertake in a game such as UO is simply not possible to do in WoW.
Yes WoW has things to do too, just not the same things as UO, and that change, is what influences all of the rest. In my view, observation, opinion and experience with MMO's and the people playing them.
Once a Sanbox with teh Scope of UO comes allong we will be able to test our Hypothesis, untill then, we will have to just share eachother's opinions about it discuss it and agree to disagree.
About bartle I agree basically it is not as accurate as more professional Personality tests such as Briggs-Mayers or Multiple Intelligences tests and I only refer to it because it was made specifically for MMO's and because it could be a nice frame of reference within a discussion about MMOs, yet it is not something definitive to describe a person nor written in stone.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
THIS.
------------------
It is not that we're too old to be happy about new things. No.
Modern mmorpg's just THROWN OUT many features. Yes they not only thrown out inconveniences , they also thrown out features along with them.
Besides "your inconvenicence might be someone else game".
And i prefer a hack-n-slash combat game. I don't play games to make friends. Sure, i got to know some people from EQ, and WOW, but they are not real friends, just good play partners.
Plus, why do anyone has to *read*? Do you have a thing called VOICE OVER? TOR has it, DC Universe has it .. WOW should have more of it.
If I do not have to read in SKYRIM or Deus Ex, i do not see a good reason why i have to in a MMO.
When you stopped switching genres to play different genres, you stopped experiencing different genres.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You mean those voiceovers in TOR that lead up to a repetitive "kill x enemies" anyways. From what i understand most people reach a point they just click spacebar to bypass them anyways. Not listening to them is the same as not reading them.
Plus i can't stand games that only have voice overs, they completely ruin the atmosphere in some games when some of the Characters don't talk the way you would expect. In my mind its fluff that takes away from improving other parts of the game (plus it slows down adding content unless you are content with all the characters sharing about 12 voices in the whole game)