Haha, so true OP, so true. Just look at PVP design (no world pvp, just minigame grinds for gear) and death penalties (pretty much non existent) for other obvious examples.
100% accurate on the FPS part as well. Youtube "what if doom/quake was done today" for more lolz.
Edit: Also what are these games that have tried and failed? Seems pretty telling your bring up games 10-15 years old. One of which has actually lost subs the more casual it has gotten in WoW. Though its debatable if its just age.
Not games failing .. ideas.
Camping is gone. Staring at a spellbook is gone. FFA pvp is gone. Newer games have LFD, smaller dungeons and other time-saving features.
There doesn't have to be a "significant market." There just has to be enough to support the game. Most modern games don't even top what EQ had and they're F2P. Most games have 100k-500k active users and again they're free to a majority of them. Not like that simply out classes anything from the past.
Is there any evidence that there is "enough" of a market to support whatever you want?
More importantly, can you convince any devs to put in serious money & effort? You can argue that Darkfall is one of those effort. Can you convince anyone to put more money into such an idea?
There doesn't have to be a "significant market." There just has to be enough to support the game. Most modern games don't even top what EQ had and they're F2P. Most games have 100k-500k active users and again they're free to a majority of them. Not like that simply out classes anything from the past.
Is there any evidence that there is "enough" of a market to support whatever you want?
More importantly, can you convince any devs to put in serious money & effort? You can argue that Darkfall is one of those effort. Can you convince anyone to put more money into such an idea?
Darkfall is horrible to most players standards. As a lover of fun as you state shouldn't be the one to accept that nobody is playing nor let along paying for a game that's flawed mechanically?
There is no evidence that it wouldn't be niche. But the whole genre is niche. Logic around here is old school game with prime of 250k = Niche. New school generic themepark with 250k of mostly free players = main stream.
Old School vs. New school. It doesn't matter. None of that stuff touches on the real problem..
The genre right now is limited because of the lack of technology to make games that players dream about. What a player would really want is a game where the server acted like a fantastic dungeon master. So you would need AI where the NPCs would have their own motivations wants and desires. You would need NPCs that could carry out fantasy based conversations. You would need a world that could change based on the needs and wants of the players.
Right now we have minimal AI and a largely static world. The only thing developers are making progress on is combat and graphics. The 'back end' stuff hasn't improved much. When this does - if a top quality game comes along you can expect massive growth in the genre.
MMOs are stuck - but its a technological problem. Different design choices just cause different problems. There is no solution. Make the game sandbox - players who want more direction will be bored. Make the game slow and difficult - you turn off players who want less challenge etc etc. Dreaming about some outdated design choices as being the 'fix' is just not accurate. People don't want to play Pantheon. They want to play games that are like the Matrix - but with a fantasy world.
I have to agree with you there. There is no evidence that a significant market exists for the sort of game I would like to play. Now I believe there is an untapped market out there, but that is just a feeling perhaps simply a hope. But there is not evidence for it at all.
What makes me particularly sad is that I want to spend 20-40 hours a week playing computer games, it is a lot cheaper than buying 40 books a month (if I can find that many that I have not read and would want to read). The other alternatives also suffer from a lack of content or a much higher cost or both.
But the current crop of MMOs leave me cold. I could keep on twiddling with EQ2 or go back to Rift or WoW but this is not exactly entertainment.
There doesn't have to be a "significant market." There just has to be enough to support the game. Most modern games don't even top what EQ had and they're F2P. Most games have 100k-500k active users and again they're free to a majority of them. Not like that simply out classes anything from the past.
LOL, OK but the games out there do not excite me. I kicked in some cash for CU, not because I wanted to play it but because it might encourage others to develop niche games, in the hope that one of those would interest me. Along came Pantheon, looks interesting, so I pledged some more cash. Today with three days to go only 3,000 backers. Even if this project continues without the kickstarter it is still years off.
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
Edit: Also what are these games that have tried and failed? Seems pretty telling your bring up games 10-15 years old. One of which has actually lost subs the more casual it has gotten in WoW. Though its debatable if its just age.
Not games failing .. ideas.
Camping is gone. Staring at a spellbook is gone. FFA pvp is gone. Newer games have LFD, smaller dungeons and other time-saving features.
All these are pointing to what is popular.
People also dislike some of the things they create even if they don't know they're causing and effect.
But when people talk about old school games I'm sure people are pining to look behind a spell book.
There is no evidence that it wouldn't be niche. But the whole genre is niche. Logic around here is old school game with prime of 250k = Niche. New school generic themepark with 250k of mostly free players = main stream.
The whole genre is niche? WOW still has millions of players. GW2 sold millions. Last time i check, there are like 45M MMO players in the US.
There is no evidence that it wouldn't be niche. But the whole genre is niche. Logic around here is old school game with prime of 250k = Niche. New school generic themepark with 250k of mostly free players = main stream.
The whole genre is niche? WOW still has millions of players. GW2 sold millions. Last time i check, there are like 45M MMO players in the US.
Is LoL niche? Is WoT niche?
If you break down individual games, yes majority of the games are niche in the genre. How many North American MMORPG's are in the millions in subs/players? Like 3 or 4? Majority are around 250k range and have been that way since the late 90's.
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
It's called...burn out.
After a while folks start to see the MMORPGs are too familiar and find a MMORPG to settle in, and where the rest are but a diversion to try.
And after checking these newer MMOs claimed to be out of beta, yeah, try is about as much as they'll dabble in it. -_-
This is probably why LoL became as popular as it's a quick action game, a diversion similar to Minecraft (which people play within the MMOs, especially while waiting on queues and events to start).
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
It's called...burn out.
After a while folks start to see the MMORPGs are too familiar and find a MMORPG to settle in, and where the rest are but a diversion to try.
And after checking these newer MMOs claimed to be out of beta, yeah, try is about as much as they'll dabble in it. -_-
This is probably why LoL became as popular as it's a quick action game, a diversion similar to Minecraft (which people play within the MMOs, especially while waiting on queues and events to start).
People do not exist in a state of complete and utter invisibility. People who collect fountain pens have groups on the internet and on Facebook. You can gauge interest in fountain pens with some Google searches. People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well. Things that people like or talk about show up on Twitter. Look at trending topic on Twitter, filter it out to video games and you can see what people are interested in. You can do the same with Tumblr. People who share interests find each other on the internet, and they discuss that shared interest.
Where are the clues that there is some large audience of players who share an interest in older style games? Burn out or not, these people are not going to sit in their houses, disconnected from the internet not talking about what they want. Where are these people?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well.
No you can't. Because most just play the games, they don't bother signing up to donate blood to it.
It's like saying a game is popular or great by the forum traffic (or hype spam). -_-
If you break down individual games, yes majority of the games are niche in the genre. How many North American MMORPG's are in the millions in subs/players? Like 3 or 4? Majority are around 250k range and have been that way since the late 90's.
Millions in subs? Not even 3 or 4. Exactly one. Players, including the free ones, that *might* make it up to three or four.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
It's called...burn out.
After a while folks start to see the MMORPGs are too familiar and find a MMORPG to settle in, and where the rest are but a diversion to try.
And after checking these newer MMOs claimed to be out of beta, yeah, try is about as much as they'll dabble in it. -_-
This is probably why LoL became as popular as it's a quick action game, a diversion similar to Minecraft (which people play within the MMOs, especially while waiting on queues and events to start).
People do not exist in a state of complete and utter invisibility. People who collect fountain pens have groups on the internet and on Facebook. You can gauge interest in fountain pens with some Google searches. People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well. Things that people like or talk about show up on Twitter. Look at trending topic on Twitter, filter it out to video games and you can see what people are interested in. You can do the same with Tumblr. People who share interests find each other on the internet, and they discuss that shared interest.
Where are the clues that there is some large audience of players who share an interest in older style games? Burn out or not, these people are not going to sit in their houses, disconnected from the internet not talking about what they want. Where are these people?
Playing GTA with the rest of Humanity. A lot of ex COD players are there:)
The virtual world is all that was desired. You think we're lying?
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
It's called...burn out.
After a while folks start to see the MMORPGs are too familiar and find a MMORPG to settle in, and where the rest are but a diversion to try.
And after checking these newer MMOs claimed to be out of beta, yeah, try is about as much as they'll dabble in it. -_-
This is probably why LoL became as popular as it's a quick action game, a diversion similar to Minecraft (which people play within the MMOs, especially while waiting on queues and events to start).
People do not exist in a state of complete and utter invisibility. People who collect fountain pens have groups on the internet and on Facebook. You can gauge interest in fountain pens with some Google searches. People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well. Things that people like or talk about show up on Twitter. Look at trending topic on Twitter, filter it out to video games and you can see what people are interested in. You can do the same with Tumblr. People who share interests find each other on the internet, and they discuss that shared interest.
Where are the clues that there is some large audience of players who share an interest in older style games? Burn out or not, these people are not going to sit in their houses, disconnected from the internet not talking about what they want. Where are these people?
Social media is becoming flooded with marketing gimmicks. Tell so many of your friends and we will enter you into a draw or in MMO terms let you into a supposedly closed beta. Most recently in the MMORPGs I recall SOE was using twitter to give future access to landmark and sure it's a gauge of some sort of interest but it's intentionally inflated and manipulated. I don't see social media as a better standard than forums such as these and we know the extremes people go to when supporting and tearing down games.
If you break down individual games, yes majority of the games are niche in the genre. How many North American MMORPG's are in the millions in subs/players? Like 3 or 4? Majority are around 250k range and have been that way since the late 90's.
Millions in subs? Not even 3 or 4. Exactly one. Players, including the free ones, that *might* make it up to three or four.
Only one is needed, as it holds most who even plays the other MMOs!
Can't escape WoW, either you're playing it or someone you know does.
EQ still exists does it not? That example dungeon is from EQ. The solution is to play EQ. In reality, people like the thread starter just want to complain.
EQ live is nothing like what EQ once was.
Guess what, I am still playing EQ live despite all the mutations that changed to a crappy game through all these expansions released ever since Shadows of Luclin.
For argument's sake let's say you are right, and you are not, isn't EQ 15 years old? Can't we have more new games with dungeons like EQ? Wouldn't it be FAIR for us to want a new game? No? Not fair? you're just angry I think. Every fan of ANYTHING in life wants new of the same. Whether it's a game or music or whatever. YOU want US to stick to a 15 years old game forever? That's just retarded.
I agree with OP we need more new games that cater to more complex dungeons than the retarded McDungeon philosophy going down. Now people like the GuyClinch should NOT despair, for your McDungeon is still saturating the market so cheer up!! Enjoy!
Nice thread OP. Too bad I don't have the time to read all of the 20 pages. Anyway, today's challenge could described as how to realistically save a dungeon. If that were possible, then long and hard dungeons would certainly be more feasible for a larger portion of the player base.
For example, you have your guild do one of these "mega" dungeons and during one evening they get to point A. They save their progress and return the other night to continue from there. And then finally after X nights they complete the dungeon. For guilds this is not that far fetched. They could also have a cooldown of a month or two.
What happens to solo players? My opinion is simply that it's not feasible and the "mega" dungeons should be left to guilds. Could serve to promote the guilds and their integrities quite a bit too. Sound bad? Ok? There might be ways to tie them to pvp too.
The problem is that the "minorities" would like to see if their style of gaming is really minority because nobody wants it to play or simply nobody makes them anymore. What reason for the post-WoW majority clamor for something they've never tried? The genre virtually begs for something different that's not underfunded. The genre has rehashed for the last 10 years pretty much.
Well, they were tried and failed before. EQ has large dungeons. WoW vanilla has large dungeons. You don't think WoW changed their dungeons just because? The two comparisons aren't even remotely similar, other then being underground.. One is a public open world zone, the other is a private instance designed for a start finish formula..
Why should failed ideas need to be tried and tried again? If you are a devs, would you risk your career & resources on something that has failed before? Explain to us how EQ dungeons like Upper and Lower Guk are fail?
No the genre has not been rehashing .. there are plenty of new things. More solo-able games. MOBAs. Instanced pvp games. More like ARPGs. In fact, the genre is moving away from tried and failed old ideas like camping, and open ffa pvp. In your opinion ..
WoW doesn't count because the game was designed to cater to those that had issue with EQ, namely the casual player vice hard core gurus that played 40+ hours a week. They may have seemed huge but when compared to PnP games they aren't. pretty much.. WoW was designed for solo play and for hard core esport raiders.. Everyone in between was pretty much left out.. I don't mind that WoW went with more solo play, because that was a huge issue with some of EQ's classes like the Warrior that couldn't solo a bunny..
Besides, I doubt a game that had massive, dangerous dungeons that took days to fully explore would keep many players. I would love to see it, but doubt it would survive.
Massive dungeons shouldn't be any different then any other open world progression zone, it just takes place underground.. Imagine a dungeon when you enter you are 20th level, and 27th level when you finish adventuring it..
There are fewer people discussing those old school games than there are people discussing fountain pens. What are the best selling single player games? Older style games, or newer style games? Older or newer style RPGs? Shooters? There's a reason that "older style" games are only made by indie developers.
There's also a reason GOG exists, and that indie developers are actually "developing" instead of "sending out resumes."
It's hard to talk about sales honestly without at least considering the effect of exposure, though. When EA publishes a game, it gets press. When Illwinter publishes a game, almost nobody even hears about it.
If there was a great deal of interest in such a game, there would be indicators somewhere. If there were one million people, all of whom wanted a AAA MMORPG, a form of online game, they would be discussing it someplace. Probably online. There would be some sort of indicator. There's not.
I'm curious - what are we doing right now?
I mean sure, we're not 'one million people' (though site lists 2.5 million members.) But I can look at the forums of any game with real numbers and see fewer unique names, so that doesn't tell me much on it's own.
Either the market doesn't exist, or it's so hidden that it may as well not exist. But even if it did, again, it's fractured into factions that do not agree on what an "older style" game even is, much less agree on what kind of "older style" game should be made. UO sandbox? EQ theme park? SWG sand park? Pre-NGE or Post-NGE? Minecraft as an MMO?
Y'know what's funny? I've seen people calling EQ a sandbox lately.
But it's interesting that SOE actually is (more or less) making "minecraft as an MMO" as we speak. I'm presuming you picked that example on purpose?
Edit: Also what are these games that have tried and failed? Seems pretty telling your bring up games 10-15 years old. One of which has actually lost subs the more casual it has gotten in WoW. Though its debatable if its just age.
Not games failing .. ideas.
Camping is gone. No it's not.. Camping lives in every game, in one form or another.. I used to camp in WoW, Rift and SWTOR all the time.. The biggest reason why people don't camp anymore isn't because of camping, it's because questing gives MORE exp and loot.. Remove ALL the rewards from doing quest and dailies and SEE how many people run around the map blindly.. Staring at a spellbook is gone. No debate there, that was an "IFFY" mechanic, similar to languages (which I liked, but it was done wrong) FFA pvp is gone. NO IT'S NOT.. go play on a PvP server in most games.. Newer games have LFD, smaller dungeons and other time-saving features. And many of use HATE instancing, because it's too similar to playing a linear single player theme park..
All these are pointing to what is popular.
Yep, some of it is popular (So is McDonalds) and sometimes there just isn't any alternatives.. And from where I sit and eat.. McDonald's isn't in my TOP 5 list of favorite fast food chains, but it's the biggest in the world.. Does that make me WRONG? hmmmm
People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well.
No you can't. Because most just play the games, they don't bother signing up to donate blood to it.
It's like saying a game is popular or great by the forum traffic (or hype spam). -_-
You can. It's the only reason Twitter has any market value. It's one of the reasons Google is the dominant player in online advertising. It's not enough to have channels to advertise, they know who to advertise to, and what advertising will work. Why do you think Google+ even exists? It is to gather that information.
Your yourself are on the internet, talking about "older style" games. You are not sitting in your house, silent, disconnected from the internet, hiding your thoughts on "older style" games. Why do you assume that the rest of the people who share your point of view are behaving differently from you?
The people who are interested in "older style" games are on the internet, and they are talking about it. With some effort, a marketing agency or a game publisher could find out how large that market is. If they did, they would find out two things. One, it's small. So small that it's currently almost invisible. Two, it's divided into even smaller markets based on the game styles. The "older style" games market cannot agree on what constitutes the proper "older style" game.
That is the heart of this whole thread. Why are dungeons the way they are? Because more people prefer them the way they are, or more people prefer them to move away from what they were, even if they don't care for what they are. Why? It doesn't matter. It's just a preference. The "newer style" is the prefered style over the "older style". The market for the "older style" is smaller.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
Haha, so true OP, so true. Just look at PVP design (no world pvp, just minigame grinds for gear) and death penalties (pretty much non existent) for other obvious examples.
100% accurate on the FPS part as well. Youtube "what if doom/quake was done today" for more lolz.
RIP complex gaming. Hello endless COD & WOW clones.
Not games failing .. ideas.
Camping is gone. Staring at a spellbook is gone. FFA pvp is gone. Newer games have LFD, smaller dungeons and other time-saving features.
All these are pointing to what is popular.
Is there any evidence that there is "enough" of a market to support whatever you want?
More importantly, can you convince any devs to put in serious money & effort? You can argue that Darkfall is one of those effort. Can you convince anyone to put more money into such an idea?
Darkfall is horrible to most players standards. As a lover of fun as you state shouldn't be the one to accept that nobody is playing nor let along paying for a game that's flawed mechanically?
There is no evidence that it wouldn't be niche. But the whole genre is niche. Logic around here is old school game with prime of 250k = Niche. New school generic themepark with 250k of mostly free players = main stream.
Old School vs. New school. It doesn't matter. None of that stuff touches on the real problem..
The genre right now is limited because of the lack of technology to make games that players dream about. What a player would really want is a game where the server acted like a fantastic dungeon master. So you would need AI where the NPCs would have their own motivations wants and desires. You would need NPCs that could carry out fantasy based conversations. You would need a world that could change based on the needs and wants of the players.
Right now we have minimal AI and a largely static world. The only thing developers are making progress on is combat and graphics. The 'back end' stuff hasn't improved much. When this does - if a top quality game comes along you can expect massive growth in the genre.
MMOs are stuck - but its a technological problem. Different design choices just cause different problems. There is no solution. Make the game sandbox - players who want more direction will be bored. Make the game slow and difficult - you turn off players who want less challenge etc etc. Dreaming about some outdated design choices as being the 'fix' is just not accurate. People don't want to play Pantheon. They want to play games that are like the Matrix - but with a fantasy world.
LOL, OK but the games out there do not excite me. I kicked in some cash for CU, not because I wanted to play it but because it might encourage others to develop niche games, in the hope that one of those would interest me. Along came Pantheon, looks interesting, so I pledged some more cash. Today with three days to go only 3,000 backers. Even if this project continues without the kickstarter it is still years off.
So if there is "enough to support the game" where are they? .... and where are the games?
I very much agree with this.
People also dislike some of the things they create even if they don't know they're causing and effect.
But when people talk about old school games I'm sure people are pining to look behind a spell book.
The whole genre is niche? WOW still has millions of players. GW2 sold millions. Last time i check, there are like 45M MMO players in the US.
Is LoL niche? Is WoT niche?
If you break down individual games, yes majority of the games are niche in the genre. How many North American MMORPG's are in the millions in subs/players? Like 3 or 4? Majority are around 250k range and have been that way since the late 90's.
LoL isn't a MMORPG.
It's called...burn out.
After a while folks start to see the MMORPGs are too familiar and find a MMORPG to settle in, and where the rest are but a diversion to try.
And after checking these newer MMOs claimed to be out of beta, yeah, try is about as much as they'll dabble in it. -_-
This is probably why LoL became as popular as it's a quick action game, a diversion similar to Minecraft (which people play within the MMOs, especially while waiting on queues and events to start).
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
Currently playing: Eldevin Online as a Deadly Assassin
People do not exist in a state of complete and utter invisibility. People who collect fountain pens have groups on the internet and on Facebook. You can gauge interest in fountain pens with some Google searches. People who like specific games have user groups they join on the internet, and they talk about those games. You can gauge interest in particular games using Google as well. Things that people like or talk about show up on Twitter. Look at trending topic on Twitter, filter it out to video games and you can see what people are interested in. You can do the same with Tumblr. People who share interests find each other on the internet, and they discuss that shared interest.
Where are the clues that there is some large audience of players who share an interest in older style games? Burn out or not, these people are not going to sit in their houses, disconnected from the internet not talking about what they want. Where are these people?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
No you can't. Because most just play the games, they don't bother signing up to donate blood to it.
It's like saying a game is popular or great by the forum traffic (or hype spam). -_-
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
Millions in subs? Not even 3 or 4. Exactly one. Players, including the free ones, that *might* make it up to three or four.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Playing GTA with the rest of Humanity. A lot of ex COD players are there:)
The virtual world is all that was desired. You think we're lying?
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Social media is becoming flooded with marketing gimmicks. Tell so many of your friends and we will enter you into a draw or in MMO terms let you into a supposedly closed beta. Most recently in the MMORPGs I recall SOE was using twitter to give future access to landmark and sure it's a gauge of some sort of interest but it's intentionally inflated and manipulated. I don't see social media as a better standard than forums such as these and we know the extremes people go to when supporting and tearing down games.
Only one is needed, as it holds most who even plays the other MMOs!
Can't escape WoW, either you're playing it or someone you know does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WFjp-v5GXk
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
EQ live is nothing like what EQ once was.
Guess what, I am still playing EQ live despite all the mutations that changed to a crappy game through all these expansions released ever since Shadows of Luclin.
For argument's sake let's say you are right, and you are not, isn't EQ 15 years old? Can't we have more new games with dungeons like EQ? Wouldn't it be FAIR for us to want a new game? No? Not fair? you're just angry I think. Every fan of ANYTHING in life wants new of the same. Whether it's a game or music or whatever. YOU want US to stick to a 15 years old game forever? That's just retarded.
I agree with OP we need more new games that cater to more complex dungeons than the retarded McDungeon philosophy going down. Now people like the GuyClinch should NOT despair, for your McDungeon is still saturating the market so cheer up!! Enjoy!
OP great post.
I rarely see such insightful posts on this website so I felt like I needed to comment.
And I couldn't agree with you more.
Nice thread OP. Too bad I don't have the time to read all of the 20 pages. Anyway, today's challenge could described as how to realistically save a dungeon. If that were possible, then long and hard dungeons would certainly be more feasible for a larger portion of the player base.
For example, you have your guild do one of these "mega" dungeons and during one evening they get to point A. They save their progress and return the other night to continue from there. And then finally after X nights they complete the dungeon. For guilds this is not that far fetched. They could also have a cooldown of a month or two.
What happens to solo players? My opinion is simply that it's not feasible and the "mega" dungeons should be left to guilds. Could serve to promote the guilds and their integrities quite a bit too. Sound bad? Ok? There might be ways to tie them to pvp too.
Massive dungeons shouldn't be any different then any other open world progression zone, it just takes place underground.. Imagine a dungeon when you enter you are 20th level, and 27th level when you finish adventuring it..
There's also a reason GOG exists, and that indie developers are actually "developing" instead of "sending out resumes."
It's hard to talk about sales honestly without at least considering the effect of exposure, though. When EA publishes a game, it gets press. When Illwinter publishes a game, almost nobody even hears about it.
I'm curious - what are we doing right now?
I mean sure, we're not 'one million people' (though site lists 2.5 million members.) But I can look at the forums of any game with real numbers and see fewer unique names, so that doesn't tell me much on it's own.
Y'know what's funny? I've seen people calling EQ a sandbox lately.
But it's interesting that SOE actually is (more or less) making "minecraft as an MMO" as we speak. I'm presuming you picked that example on purpose?
You can. It's the only reason Twitter has any market value. It's one of the reasons Google is the dominant player in online advertising. It's not enough to have channels to advertise, they know who to advertise to, and what advertising will work. Why do you think Google+ even exists? It is to gather that information.
Your yourself are on the internet, talking about "older style" games. You are not sitting in your house, silent, disconnected from the internet, hiding your thoughts on "older style" games. Why do you assume that the rest of the people who share your point of view are behaving differently from you?
The people who are interested in "older style" games are on the internet, and they are talking about it. With some effort, a marketing agency or a game publisher could find out how large that market is. If they did, they would find out two things. One, it's small. So small that it's currently almost invisible. Two, it's divided into even smaller markets based on the game styles. The "older style" games market cannot agree on what constitutes the proper "older style" game.
That is the heart of this whole thread. Why are dungeons the way they are? Because more people prefer them the way they are, or more people prefer them to move away from what they were, even if they don't care for what they are. Why? It doesn't matter. It's just a preference. The "newer style" is the prefered style over the "older style". The market for the "older style" is smaller.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.