100% combat oriented online games. Cash shops come standard. Purely developer driven content. Esport is the name of the game for pvp. Socialization has become automatized.
If you were to tell me ten years ago that this is what MMORPGS would be like, I would have never even bothered to get involved.
MMO versions of old console games from a decade ago. Thats what we have right now. The irony is that console games today are actually more open and diverse than these so called mmorpgs.
Its a shame. I have faith in indie devs, as always. But the AAA mmo devs have really led the genre astray as of late. I wonder if it will ever get back on track.
100% combat oriented online games. Cash shops come standard. Purely developer driven content. Esport is the name of the game for pvp. Socialization has become automatized.
If you were to tell me ten years ago that this is what MMORPGS would be like, I would have never even bothered to get involved.
MMO versions of old console games from a decade ago. Thats what we have right now. The irony is that console games today are actually more open and diverse than these so called mmorpgs.
Its a shame. I have faith in indie devs, as always. But the AAA mmo devs have really led the genre astray as of late. I wonder if it will ever get back on track.
No I wouldn't consider WOW a MMO anymore. FPSs comes from your attention to quick and fast game play. Get in quick and get out fast rinse repeat. This type of game play is common place with Online FPSs such as Halo and Black Ops. And I believe it's this crowd that has "influenced" the MMO genre to change to what we have today.
How about Rift, AION, DCUO ...? Even if you don't consider them MMOs .. the market do. You don't get to choose the label. FPS? Action RPG is the same quick & fast gameplay .. why not ARPG instead?
This type of gameplay is also common place far back to Diablo 1. And obviously what works should influence MMOs.
The market as of late is catering to your style of game play that's for sure. The market itself is saturated with these Lobby CO-OP types. But more people then you realize are sick and tired of seeing these abominations and are clamoring for a change of the guard if you will.
Sick of? You realize that D3, which is the epitome of this style of gameplay, sold 10M (8.8M without annual pass) in less than 3 months? I think this style is just great and what the market is clamouring for, is more (and not just this .. also LOL type DOTA gameplay).
D3 sold on its name and past alone. Brought in those that never even played it but who were riding on the Blizzard name. Oh and let us not forget that after launch, the hoards of people leaving it because of... nothing else to do. And let us not forget that D3 ISENT A MMORPG!
"What's old is new again." Ever hear that statement before? Well if GW2 falls on its face like SWTOR did, then your time in this industry is all but over. ( We will sure as hell see within the first 3 months of launch) Were seeing a lot of sandbox types popping up as of late. EOC, AA, Dayz, War Z, The Repop, WoD and the list grows bigger every day.
We shall see. I know where my money goes.
We shall see and yea we all see where your money goes. Right in the trash.
We should not have to change our preference if this was OUR genre to begin with! You guys wanting everything hand fed to you is the reason the market has slipped. Go get a job if you cant pay for P2P. Go play D&D in person.
A MMORPG is suppose to be a virtual world. You say the market has changed, if thats so why does everyone come on these boards and complain about how the genre is dead? Death SHOULD kill your experience, make you walk for hours because YOU DIED. Now you die and theres no consequence.
Walking SHOULD take 20 minutes! It's a virtual world, when you start and for a long while you SHOULD have to walk for long periods of time. It will build a sense of accomplishment when you finally DO get to travel faster.
Microshops and F2P fail. Hard. P2P is the way the MMORPG needs to be. Content comes out, that content isn't made for free. People need to be payed for their work. Seriously go troll another thread, this thread is how MMORPG's are dieing because people like you try to justify the cancer the new MMO's cause.
The whole "forced" argument is a really, really bad one.
Who gets "forced" to play Tic Tac Toe exactly? Who gets "forced" to play a virtual world game with travel in it as opposed to the myriad of games out there both within the mmorpg genre and without it which offer differing gameplay mechanics and styles?
When I want some e-sport pvp I play an e-sport game. When I fancy an open world pvp fest or fancy exploring a game world, I don't still play an e-sport game and moan about the fact that it is "forcing" me to pvp or sit in a lobby.
No one is going around making people play games at gun point, at least not that I am aware of. The idea is that people who want to travel and engage with a virtual world, play such games. If someone would rather have zero travel and is not interested in the mechanics that travel drives, great, go play another game.
Again no, the fact that travel enables deeper gameplay experiences is far from "irrelevant" for the people who, you know, actually enjoy those experiences. Moreover, trying to take travel/the game world out, as opposed to trying to actually improve the game world. Just to appease a crowd completely and utterly against travel in the first place is just total and utter madness.
I guess that means your argument is "Tic Tac Toe is great, even though only a few pl players like it. I love it!" then there's not much point to trying to explain to you how it's a shallow game (or in the case of travel-heavy MMORPGs, an unavoidable shallow part of a larger game.)
What the hell does e-sport PVP have to do with anything? We're talking about games, and how to make them more engaging, meaningful, and deep by not allowing a shallow part of the game to drag down the experience. What have you got against game depth that you try to defend non-gameplay (travel) so vigorously?
It is irrelevant whether travel enables deeper experiences. Because despite getting those deep experience, you're still locked into this non-interactive, shallow game mechanic.
The simple fix is to make that shallow mechanic deeper. You're arguing the status quo for its own sake, at the cost of player freedom and better gameplay.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Basically the new age MMO's DERAILED the genre. The whole point of MMORPG's is MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER not solo everything. It's so retarded and disheartening to see this genre become derailed from microshops and instances. I use to think WoW was the culprate behind this but as of lately its just the developers greed and misconception on what a MMORPG should be.
FFXI, EQOA, EQ1, DAoC those are MMORPG's. Your new age stuff is garbage. Go play a single player game if you want to solo on a MMORPG. Ah when will we be vindicated? I'm only a gamer but I'm almost certain if I could get investors and a team of developers to do what I say we could turn this genre around finally. No instances, no microshops, no F2P! If you want F2P go read a book, updates aren't free ever.
"derailed"? You mean "changed". MMO should be a fun GAME first .. and i think the developers are getting it. Camping is not fun . Walking 20 min is not fun. Dead time with only entertainment is chatting is not a game.
Camp checks were great places to conversate with your fellow gamer. They even had camp checks in Nusibe in VG. Some of the best times i had gaming was talking with others. The devi room in the clock tower in Ragnarok.
Would sit there for hours with people talking and killing devis for a chance at the hat to drop. Travleing was great aswell. Stoping to help others you may see along the road or harvest. Lots of things happen "On the way"
Your problem is you want these CO-OP features in MMOs and they simpley dont belong. Go back to D3 and stay out of MMOs.
I want to be in a small group co-op dungeon. And I do play other games, like D3. But why shouldn't i be playing MMOs if MMOs are providing that to me?
See above
LOL .. you can turn back progress, and turn back the trend? I will believe it when i see it.
You obviously dont know what TREND means.
No F2P? I bet even WOW will go F2P in 1-2 years.
With over 5 mil people still paying 15 a month? I just dont know about your ilk anymore.
There is no vindication ... only preferences. If yours are not in-line with the market .. will .. supply & demand always works.
Your right here. Its about preference. I prefer not to spend my money on these garbage MMOs. Cant even call them MMOs any more. need to find a new name for them. These CO-OP Lobby RPGs? No thats not right. Theres no RPG in these new "MMOs" How about CFRLG? (Co-Op Face Roll Lobby Game) How does that sound?
Basically the new age MMO's DERAILED the genre. The whole point of MMORPG's is MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER not solo everything. It's so retarded and disheartening to see this genre become derailed from microshops and instances. I use to think WoW was the culprate behind this but as of lately its just the developers greed and misconception on what a MMORPG should be.
FFXI, EQOA, EQ1, DAoC those are MMORPG's. Your new age stuff is garbage. Go play a single player game if you want to solo on a MMORPG. Ah when will we be vindicated? I'm only a gamer but I'm almost certain if I could get investors and a team of developers to do what I say we could turn this genre around finally. No instances, no microshops, no F2P! If you want F2P go read a book, updates aren't free ever.
"derailed"? You mean "changed". MMO should be a fun GAME first .. and i think the developers are getting it. Camping is not fun . Walking 20 min is not fun. Dead time with only entertainment is chatting is not a game.
Camp checks were great places to conversate with your fellow gamer. They even had camp checks in Nusibe in VG. Some of the best times i had gaming was talking with others. The devi room in the clock tower in Ragnarok.
Would sit there for hours with people talking and killing devis for a chance at the hat to drop. Travleing was great aswell. Stoping to help others you may see along the road or harvest. Lots of things happen "On the way"
Your problem is you want these CO-OP features in MMOs and they simpley dont belong. Go back to D3 and stay out of MMOs.
I want to be in a small group co-op dungeon. And I do play other games, like D3. But why shouldn't i be playing MMOs if MMOs are providing that to me?
See above
LOL .. you can turn back progress, and turn back the trend? I will believe it when i see it.
You obviously dont know what TREND means.
No F2P? I bet even WOW will go F2P in 1-2 years.
With over 5 mil people still paying 15 a month? I just dont know about your ilk anymore.
There is no vindication ... only preferences. If yours are not in-line with the market .. will .. supply & demand always works.
Your right here. Its about preference. I prefer not to spend my money on these garbage MMOs. Cant even call them MMOs any more. need to find a new name for them. These CO-OP Lobby RPGs? No thats not right. Theres no RPG in these new "MMOs" How about CFRLG? (Co-Op Face Roll Lobby Game) How does that sound?
Great minds think alike. You hit the nail on the head.
We should not have to change our preference if this was OUR genre to begin with! You guys wanting everything hand fed to you is the reason the market has slipped. Go get a job if you cant pay for P2P. Go play D&D in person.
A MMORPG is suppose to be a virtual world. You say the market has changed, if thats so why does everyone come on these boards and complain about how the genre is dead? Death SHOULD kill your experience, make you walk for hours because YOU DIED. Now you die and theres no consequence.
Walking SHOULD take 20 minutes! It's a virtual world, when you start and for a long while you SHOULD have to walk for long periods of time. It will build a sense of accomplishment when you finally DO get to travel faster.
Microshops and F2P fail. Hard. P2P is the way the MMORPG needs to be. Content comes out, that content isn't made for free. People need to be payed for their work. Seriously go troll another thread, this thread is how MMORPG's are dieing because people like you try to justify the cancer the new MMO's cause.
understand where your coming from. The problem is no one is making this game for us. They jumped on the Blizzard fast track to making money idea and failed horribly. Look at the list of games that have tried to follow the WoW business model and just died 1-3 mouths into its launch.
Now that the market is encompassed with these types of MMOs, people are getting tired of it. And sooner or later someone with make a real MMO and the numbers will justify it being part of the MMO market again. And that's when you'll start to see these current MMOs fall from grace. Hell there already falling from grace.
"OMG AC is going to be god's give to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG WAR is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG SWTOR is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG RIFT is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG Aion is going to god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
Originally posted by nariusseldon There is none. I started with UO (quite around end of beta .. not a good game), EQ (quit in a year .. too much camping), AC (quit soon), .. LOTRO/DDO/DCUO (good that F2P .. play once in a while).
WOW is the only one i played more than a year .. and i never play only ONE game. Too boring.
Well if thats true, then you started playing a genre that you didn't like or really understand and now it has changed into something you've wanted all along: MMO versions of console action/adventure games.
Originally posted by laokoko I like turn based mmorpg. But no game company makes turn based mmorpg.They keep catering to the wow clone or even the sandbox people. There are 10 times more sandbox games than turn based mmorpg.Do I complain all day on the forum? NO! Get a life. Go play Eve.
this isnt about sandbox. its about choice of playstyles. you want turn based combat? thats cool. this isnt a thread about having one or the other, its about the more the better. not sure why you're ranting when we're on the same side heh
FFXI, EQOA, EQ1, DAoC those are MMORPG's. Your new age stuff is garbage. Go play a single player game if you want to solo on a MMORPG. Ah when will we be vindicated? I'm only a gamer but I'm almost certain if I could get investors and a team of developers to do what I say we could turn this genre around finally. No instances, no microshops, no F2P! If you want F2P go read a book, updates aren't free ever.
I hear you completely and I agree with much of what you wrote. Nevertheless, I do not share your sentiments about F2P. F2P, to my mind, is actually what is going to save this genre.
The reason the WoW generation single-player games online took over the industry was because the pay to play model values the casual gamer above the hardcore gamer. Everything became oriented around "casuals" and that is why the genre has become console-gamish. When you have subscription based games, it doesn't matter if you login twice a week or whether you play 15 hours a day, both players are paying the same amount. However, there are a lot more players who will only play part-time than there are full-timers, so these games naturally become oriented toward keeping those players over the hardcore types.
With F2P the duality companies worry about ceases to primarily be between casual and hardcore, but instead becomes between players playing for free, and players who are buying stuff. The free players are just there to give the game life, but the important players are the ones who actually buy stuff -- as far as the company is concerned. And which players buy stuff? The players who are jumping from game to game? No. It is the players who are in love with the game and who invest a lot of their time and energy into it. That doesn't necessarily mean hardcore types, but it certainly is a step in that direction.
You see, with subscription models, companies cater to players who just play a bit now and then, because those are precisely the types of players who won't hurry to endgame disappointment and who will not finish content before new content is released. So everything is about the quick fix, not the epic adventure, because casuals don't have time for epic. Friendships and bonds aren't well established because no one sticks around long enough or logs in at the same times, the community because more impersonal and meanspirited.
In otherwords, subscription models cause developers to prioritize players who only feel lukewarm about the game to begin with. If the players you are primarily listening to are the one's who are already a bit bored, is it any wonder that these games seem a bit boring to the rest of us? We are being pulled into "casuals" players' reality.
But with free2play, companies cater to players who are most interested in the game, players who love the game enough to pay. The percentage of players who actually pay is going to be quite small. Casuals just come and go, they feel no real incentive to pay, they already get their fix without doing so. That means there is a fundamental shift away from people who just feel lukewarm about the game toward players who love it. This is precisely why I expect free2play to result in an explosion of much more interesting games. The niche player becomes all important under the F2P era, no longer the casual, which means a lot of games going after something special, not every game trying to be the next WoW.
The F2P era -- which replaces the WoW era in my opinion -- is really only beginning. Though F2P games have been around for awhile, it usually was an admission of a games failure rather than representing the status quo of the industry. But that is changing, and pay2play is rapidly becoming the minority position, and indeed may even become extinct soon. The brilliance behind free2play is it actually uses the very thing that has been eroding the genre and flips the whole thing on its head. Free2play is fundamentally a result of the "casuals" takeover of the industry, but the result is casuals rapidly decline in importance and more dedicated players return to being the center of the industries attention.
I guess that means your argument is "Tic Tac Toe is great, even though only a few pl players like it. I love it!" then there's not much point to trying to explain to you how it's a shallow game (or in the case of travel-heavy MMORPGs, an unavoidable shallow part of a larger game.)
What the hell does e-sport PVP have to do with anything? We're talking about games, and how to make them more engaging, meaningful, and deep by not allowing a shallow part of the game to drag down the experience. What have you got against game depth that you try to defend non-gameplay (travel) so vigorously?
It is irrelevant whether travel enables deeper experiences. Because despite getting those deep experience, you're still locked into this non-interactive, shallow game mechanic.
The simple fix is to make that shallow mechanic deeper. You're arguing the status quo for its own sake, at the cost of player freedom and better gameplay.
No, what that means is merely that your argument about "forcing" is inherently wrong. Which is also "what the hell" e-sport was mentioned for.
What have I got against depth? That's rather an odd thing to say, given this entire time you have been going on about the fact that the deep mechanics travel through a game world can provide "don't count", "don't matter". I actually think depth matters, what you seem to think matters is to be permanently mashing buttons.
"it is irrelevant whether travel enables a deeper experience". No it is not irrelevant at all. It is also really rather funny to call it shallow gameplay:
"What are you doing fella?"
"Well i'm walking over to that keep there, some friends are meeting me on the way"
"What walking?!!! You mean you are not bouncing up and down on your head whilst juggling balls?"
"Er no, i'd rather just walk over there thanks"
"Wow thats shallow crap, go watch tv".
As to why am I "defending" travel. Well given I have pointed out it can drive depth and interlinks with mechanics and can't simply be replaced. Given the fact I have pointed out some people enjoy it (however few). Given the fact that I feel it is a complete and utter joke to think it has to be made into some form of minigame and given the fact that I have pointed out that by improving the game world is what is really needed. Then I think it should be pretty obvious why I am "defending" travel through an open, virtual world.
Making the game world more dynamic, more interesting, more alive. With the landscape subtly altering, with player cities springing up, with unique and dynamic encounters. People having to pick through the terrain, take cover, look for the next safe route. That is what makes travel through it fun, not "hurr play a quick game of Tetris to increase movement speed to warp factor six".
I'm not seeking the status quo at all, I believe that the base mechanics or travel should be kept simple, what should be improved is the game world you travel through and your interactions within it. Not minigames to move.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I gotta disagree with the OP. its not dead, it has hit a painful Speedbumb but with a genre still in its infancy it cant be dead.
people keep saying that MMOs are in their infancy. but by those terms, 3d/3rd person games are still toddlers, and video games as a whole are just hitting puberty.
Originally posted by nariusseldon There is none. I started with UO (quite around end of beta .. not a good game), EQ (quit in a year .. too much camping), AC (quit soon), .. LOTRO/DDO/DCUO (good that F2P .. play once in a while).
WOW is the only one i played more than a year .. and i never play only ONE game. Too boring.
Well if thats true, then you started playing a genre that you didn't like or really understand and now it has changed into something you've wanted all along: MMO versions of console action/adventure games.
I can definitely see your pov on this topic now.
I would not say i didn't understand it .. but what i want are:
- interesting combat mechanics with multiple classes
- co-op small group gameplay
These two are basically non-existance before MMOs. Diablo (the first one) has some of it. If more games are like D3 (and yes, i know about TL2 & POE .. which i will at least try out), i would NOT be playing MMOs. However, at the same time, if there are MMOs that offer the kind of gameplay i like, even if they are not the traditional kind of MMOs, i don't see why i should not play/pay.
Take a look around. People quit, look for a new game, play, quit, etc.
The way it should run like it has previously... Find game, play for years.
Nah .. if people like to experience varieties and new games, nothing is wrong with that.
Quality >>> duration. I would much rather have a very fun 2 weeks, than a so-so year. I don't have this obsession of playing a game for years and years. Surely i did that for WOW .. just because it is fun. When it gets a bit boring, i will stop and quit. (which i did, until they put in LFR)
Originally posted by nariusseldon There is none. I started with UO (quite around end of beta .. not a good game), EQ (quit in a year .. too much camping), AC (quit soon), .. LOTRO/DDO/DCUO (good that F2P .. play once in a while).
WOW is the only one i played more than a year .. and i never play only ONE game. Too boring.
Well if thats true, then you started playing a genre that you didn't like or really understand and now it has changed into something you've wanted all along: MMO versions of console action/adventure games.
I can definitely see your pov on this topic now.
I would not say i didn't understand it .. but what i want are:
- interesting combat mechanics with multiple classes
- co-op small group gameplay
These two are basically non-existance before MMOs. Diablo (the first one) has some of it. If more games are like D3 (and yes, i know about TL2 & POE .. which i will at least try out), i would NOT be playing MMOs. However, at the same time, if there are MMOs that offer the kind of gameplay i like, even if they are not the traditional kind of MMOs, i don't see why i should not play/pay.
what i would like to see is more games like Skyrim, but with co-op servers. no more than a small group of people and many adventures tailored for that kind of combat dynamic. I would also like to see less 'tab-targeting'.
yes. i prefer small groups, and with how mmo's work these days, i dont see a point in paying a sub just so i can play with thousands of people that i will never talk to, because they are more like lobby games anyway. the problem is the lack of games that offer this. so people like me are stuck trying new mmo's, playing through the content and ending at 'endgame'.
only playing one game is not for me. even in my hardcore WoW days i didnt only play one game. i play what seems fun at the time.
Take a look around. People quit, look for a new game, play, quit, etc.
The way it should run like it has previously... Find game, play for years.
Nah .. if people like to experience varieties and new games, nothing is wrong with that.
Quality >>> duration. I would much rather have a very fun 2 weeks, than a so-so year. I don't have this obsession of playing a game for years and years. Surely i did that for WOW .. just because it is fun. When it gets a bit boring, i will stop and quit. (which i did, until they put in LFR)
lfr is okay, but nothing beats the transmog. best feature they added in years. if only they would give me some decent housing, i'd resub for more than one month a year lol
what i would like to see is more games like Skyrim, but with co-op servers. no more than a small group of people and many adventures tailored for that kind of combat dynamic. I would also like to see less 'tab-targeting'.
yes. i prefer small groups, and with how mmo's work these days, i dont see a point in paying a sub just so i can play with thousands of people that i will never talk to, because they are more like lobby games anyway. the problem is the lack of games that offer this. so people like me are stuck trying new mmo's, playing through the content and ending at 'endgame'.
only playing one game is not for me. even in my hardcore WoW days i didnt only play one game. i play what seems fun at the time.
I don't like Skyrim combat. But in principle, i would also like to see more co-op RPGs.
I agree .. that is why after my annual pass, i will stop playing sub-based MMOs. I have already played quite a few F2P ones. All are good for jumping in fast and have a mission or two of fun.
Yeah ... i played MMOs, action RPGs, FPS ... i managed to finish Spec Ops (very underrated game) in the midst of Inferno Diablo 3.
Take a look around. People quit, look for a new game, play, quit, etc.
The way it should run like it has previously... Find game, play for years.
Nah .. if people like to experience varieties and new games, nothing is wrong with that.
Quality >>> duration. I would much rather have a very fun 2 weeks, than a so-so year. I don't have this obsession of playing a game for years and years. Surely i did that for WOW .. just because it is fun. When it gets a bit boring, i will stop and quit. (which i did, until they put in LFR)
lfr is okay, but nothing beats the transmog. best feature they added in years. if only they would give me some decent housing, i'd resub for more than one month a year lol
Transmorg wasn't bad .. in fact, it makes running old raids/dungeons fun again. There are regular transmorg runs on my server. It is also fun trying to 2 or 3 man L70 raids to get transmorg gear.
However, WOW is getting *really* old. I highly doubt i will be playing much longer after i "finish" MOP.
Comments
I agree.
Damn nice post OP.
We should not have to change our preference if this was OUR genre to begin with! You guys wanting everything hand fed to you is the reason the market has slipped. Go get a job if you cant pay for P2P. Go play D&D in person.
A MMORPG is suppose to be a virtual world. You say the market has changed, if thats so why does everyone come on these boards and complain about how the genre is dead? Death SHOULD kill your experience, make you walk for hours because YOU DIED. Now you die and theres no consequence.
Walking SHOULD take 20 minutes! It's a virtual world, when you start and for a long while you SHOULD have to walk for long periods of time. It will build a sense of accomplishment when you finally DO get to travel faster.
Microshops and F2P fail. Hard. P2P is the way the MMORPG needs to be. Content comes out, that content isn't made for free. People need to be payed for their work. Seriously go troll another thread, this thread is how MMORPG's are dieing because people like you try to justify the cancer the new MMO's cause.
Time to fix this genre.
I guess that means your argument is "Tic Tac Toe is great, even though only a few pl players like it. I love it!" then there's not much point to trying to explain to you how it's a shallow game (or in the case of travel-heavy MMORPGs, an unavoidable shallow part of a larger game.)
What the hell does e-sport PVP have to do with anything? We're talking about games, and how to make them more engaging, meaningful, and deep by not allowing a shallow part of the game to drag down the experience. What have you got against game depth that you try to defend non-gameplay (travel) so vigorously?
It is irrelevant whether travel enables deeper experiences. Because despite getting those deep experience, you're still locked into this non-interactive, shallow game mechanic.
The simple fix is to make that shallow mechanic deeper. You're arguing the status quo for its own sake, at the cost of player freedom and better gameplay.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Camp checks were great places to conversate with your fellow gamer. They even had camp checks in Nusibe in VG. Some of the best times i had gaming was talking with others. The devi room in the clock tower in Ragnarok.
Would sit there for hours with people talking and killing devis for a chance at the hat to drop. Travleing was great aswell. Stoping to help others you may see along the road or harvest. Lots of things happen "On the way"
Your problem is you want these CO-OP features in MMOs and they simpley dont belong. Go back to D3 and stay out of MMOs.
See above
You obviously dont know what TREND means.
With over 5 mil people still paying 15 a month? I just dont know about your ilk anymore.
Your right here. Its about preference. I prefer not to spend my money on these garbage MMOs. Cant even call them MMOs any more. need to find a new name for them. These CO-OP Lobby RPGs? No thats not right. Theres no RPG in these new "MMOs" How about CFRLG? (Co-Op Face Roll Lobby Game) How does that sound?
Great minds think alike. You hit the nail on the head.
Time to fix this genre.
understand where your coming from. The problem is no one is making this game for us. They jumped on the Blizzard fast track to making money idea and failed horribly. Look at the list of games that have tried to follow the WoW business model and just died 1-3 mouths into its launch.
Now that the market is encompassed with these types of MMOs, people are getting tired of it. And sooner or later someone with make a real MMO and the numbers will justify it being part of the MMO market again. And that's when you'll start to see these current MMOs fall from grace. Hell there already falling from grace.
"OMG AC is going to be god's give to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG WAR is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG SWTOR is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG RIFT is going to be god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
"OMG Aion is going to god's gift to MMOs" No it wasn't
Any other games come to mind that i left out?
I like turn based mmorpg. But no game company makes turn based mmorpg.
They keep catering to the wow clone or even the sandbox people. There are 10 times more sandbox games than turn based mmorpg.
Do I complain all day on the forum? NO! Get a life. Go play Eve.
Well if thats true, then you started playing a genre that you didn't like or really understand and now it has changed into something you've wanted all along: MMO versions of console action/adventure games.
I can definitely see your pov on this topic now.
this isnt about sandbox. its about choice of playstyles. you want turn based combat? thats cool. this isnt a thread about having one or the other, its about the more the better. not sure why you're ranting when we're on the same side heh
I hear you completely and I agree with much of what you wrote. Nevertheless, I do not share your sentiments about F2P. F2P, to my mind, is actually what is going to save this genre.
The reason the WoW generation single-player games online took over the industry was because the pay to play model values the casual gamer above the hardcore gamer. Everything became oriented around "casuals" and that is why the genre has become console-gamish. When you have subscription based games, it doesn't matter if you login twice a week or whether you play 15 hours a day, both players are paying the same amount. However, there are a lot more players who will only play part-time than there are full-timers, so these games naturally become oriented toward keeping those players over the hardcore types.
With F2P the duality companies worry about ceases to primarily be between casual and hardcore, but instead becomes between players playing for free, and players who are buying stuff. The free players are just there to give the game life, but the important players are the ones who actually buy stuff -- as far as the company is concerned. And which players buy stuff? The players who are jumping from game to game? No. It is the players who are in love with the game and who invest a lot of their time and energy into it. That doesn't necessarily mean hardcore types, but it certainly is a step in that direction.
You see, with subscription models, companies cater to players who just play a bit now and then, because those are precisely the types of players who won't hurry to endgame disappointment and who will not finish content before new content is released. So everything is about the quick fix, not the epic adventure, because casuals don't have time for epic. Friendships and bonds aren't well established because no one sticks around long enough or logs in at the same times, the community because more impersonal and meanspirited.
In otherwords, subscription models cause developers to prioritize players who only feel lukewarm about the game to begin with. If the players you are primarily listening to are the one's who are already a bit bored, is it any wonder that these games seem a bit boring to the rest of us? We are being pulled into "casuals" players' reality.
But with free2play, companies cater to players who are most interested in the game, players who love the game enough to pay. The percentage of players who actually pay is going to be quite small. Casuals just come and go, they feel no real incentive to pay, they already get their fix without doing so. That means there is a fundamental shift away from people who just feel lukewarm about the game toward players who love it. This is precisely why I expect free2play to result in an explosion of much more interesting games. The niche player becomes all important under the F2P era, no longer the casual, which means a lot of games going after something special, not every game trying to be the next WoW.
The F2P era -- which replaces the WoW era in my opinion -- is really only beginning. Though F2P games have been around for awhile, it usually was an admission of a games failure rather than representing the status quo of the industry. But that is changing, and pay2play is rapidly becoming the minority position, and indeed may even become extinct soon. The brilliance behind free2play is it actually uses the very thing that has been eroding the genre and flips the whole thing on its head. Free2play is fundamentally a result of the "casuals" takeover of the industry, but the result is casuals rapidly decline in importance and more dedicated players return to being the center of the industries attention.
10X more sandbox mmos then theamparks? Do tell.
EDIT: Wait a sec. turn based MMORPGs...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn-based_MMORPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multiplayer_browser_games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_role-playing_game
This?
Theres more sandbox games then these types? ROFL!!!!!!
No, what that means is merely that your argument about "forcing" is inherently wrong. Which is also "what the hell" e-sport was mentioned for.
What have I got against depth? That's rather an odd thing to say, given this entire time you have been going on about the fact that the deep mechanics travel through a game world can provide "don't count", "don't matter". I actually think depth matters, what you seem to think matters is to be permanently mashing buttons.
"it is irrelevant whether travel enables a deeper experience". No it is not irrelevant at all. It is also really rather funny to call it shallow gameplay:
"What are you doing fella?"
"Well i'm walking over to that keep there, some friends are meeting me on the way"
"What walking?!!! You mean you are not bouncing up and down on your head whilst juggling balls?"
"Er no, i'd rather just walk over there thanks"
"Wow thats shallow crap, go watch tv".
As to why am I "defending" travel. Well given I have pointed out it can drive depth and interlinks with mechanics and can't simply be replaced. Given the fact I have pointed out some people enjoy it (however few). Given the fact that I feel it is a complete and utter joke to think it has to be made into some form of minigame and given the fact that I have pointed out that by improving the game world is what is really needed. Then I think it should be pretty obvious why I am "defending" travel through an open, virtual world.
Making the game world more dynamic, more interesting, more alive. With the landscape subtly altering, with player cities springing up, with unique and dynamic encounters. People having to pick through the terrain, take cover, look for the next safe route. That is what makes travel through it fun, not "hurr play a quick game of Tetris to increase movement speed to warp factor six".
I'm not seeking the status quo at all, I believe that the base mechanics or travel should be kept simple, what should be improved is the game world you travel through and your interactions within it. Not minigames to move.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Take a look around. People quit, look for a new game, play, quit, etc.
The way it should run like it has previously... Find game, play for years.
Time to fix this genre.
people keep saying that MMOs are in their infancy. but by those terms, 3d/3rd person games are still toddlers, and video games as a whole are just hitting puberty.
I would not say i didn't understand it .. but what i want are:
- interesting combat mechanics with multiple classes
- co-op small group gameplay
These two are basically non-existance before MMOs. Diablo (the first one) has some of it. If more games are like D3 (and yes, i know about TL2 & POE .. which i will at least try out), i would NOT be playing MMOs. However, at the same time, if there are MMOs that offer the kind of gameplay i like, even if they are not the traditional kind of MMOs, i don't see why i should not play/pay.
Maybe because there's like 3 games back then. We don't have a choice
Those games also suffer the problem when new games are released, their population drop suddenly. Or it coule be because of bad patch.
Nah .. if people like to experience varieties and new games, nothing is wrong with that.
Quality >>> duration. I would much rather have a very fun 2 weeks, than a so-so year. I don't have this obsession of playing a game for years and years. Surely i did that for WOW .. just because it is fun. When it gets a bit boring, i will stop and quit. (which i did, until they put in LFR)
what i would like to see is more games like Skyrim, but with co-op servers. no more than a small group of people and many adventures tailored for that kind of combat dynamic. I would also like to see less 'tab-targeting'.
yes. i prefer small groups, and with how mmo's work these days, i dont see a point in paying a sub just so i can play with thousands of people that i will never talk to, because they are more like lobby games anyway. the problem is the lack of games that offer this. so people like me are stuck trying new mmo's, playing through the content and ending at 'endgame'.
only playing one game is not for me. even in my hardcore WoW days i didnt only play one game. i play what seems fun at the time.
lfr is okay, but nothing beats the transmog. best feature they added in years. if only they would give me some decent housing, i'd resub for more than one month a year lol
I don't like Skyrim combat. But in principle, i would also like to see more co-op RPGs.
I agree .. that is why after my annual pass, i will stop playing sub-based MMOs. I have already played quite a few F2P ones. All are good for jumping in fast and have a mission or two of fun.
Yeah ... i played MMOs, action RPGs, FPS ... i managed to finish Spec Ops (very underrated game) in the midst of Inferno Diablo 3.
Transmorg wasn't bad .. in fact, it makes running old raids/dungeons fun again. There are regular transmorg runs on my server. It is also fun trying to 2 or 3 man L70 raids to get transmorg gear.
However, WOW is getting *really* old. I highly doubt i will be playing much longer after i "finish" MOP.