Originally posted by SEANMCAD Originally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.
having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)
name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.
It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.
3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by Cephus404The old ones failed for a reason, you know...
Failed at what ?
Failed to keep players, that's why they all changed and people complained about them. The old-school method failed.
I'm not sure whether that is true. SWG was doing fine and its players where not running away. The same is true for EVE. SWG was on par with EQ or DAOC. The mmo-market was rather small back then.
When SWG introduced NGE and pretty much made the game into a themepark, there was a mass exodus.
You have to consider that we are not talking about a one-to-one recreation of SWG or OU with modern graphics, but more of a spiritual successor. And it certainly can't be that kind of super niche PVP-FFA sandbox like Darkfall.
I think the market is there, because the players are starting to get bored with WoW styled themeparks and are looking for something different.
SWG was not doing fine, it was bleeding before the NGE hit. On par with EQ or DAOC? There is a massive difference between those 2. EQ had almost double what DAOC did. SWG's peak might have similar to one of those 2 but it's average was far below and far shorter.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.
having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)
name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.
It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.
3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious?
one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!
the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game
and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.
you have failed miserably at this.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Originally posted by iridescence Originally posted by Cephus404
Yet so many people want the genre to go BACKWARDS. They want to remake games of the past, games that ultimately failed as more people came into the genre from the outside. I agree that the genre has stagnated, but going back to how things used to be, things that changed for a reason because the majority of people playing the games didn't like them, seems rather silly.Most only failed if WoW is the only MMO you define as success. I'd say a failed MMO is one that shuts down after several years (Like Warhammer or Vanguard even though I did like Vanguard) A game that generates enough interest to keep its servers open for 10 or 15 years and make even a small profit isn't a failure.
I don't want people to slavishly copy games of the past. That would be as bad as making yet another WoW clone but developers need to mine these games for the genuinely good ideas they had rather than just write them off as failures. Otherwise it's just trying to invent the wheel over and over again.
Now this I would agree with.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by SEANMCAD Originally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.are you serious?
one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!
the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game
and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.
you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.
Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Why has it come to this? Because companies are out there making mmos just as an investment. No one has any passion for the games they make, and if they do, they still have to play it safe because of their investors, giving us THE SAME old stuff we've been playing, except it's worse, it's a ripoff. The medium of mmo's as has been for the last 10-15 years has been the same, and it's gotten pretty exploited.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious?
one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!
the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game
and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.
you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.
Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.
where is my real life MMO?
where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?
Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?
where is my old west MMO?
where is my spy MMO?
where is my world of darkness MMO?
where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?
where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.
I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
We who have played MMOs for 10-15 years always have fond memories when we played in the "old" days and we are all looking for the next big thing that will take us back to that forgotten era, but when a new MMO comes along, we find faults in it.
I think because most new MMOs are nothing like the ones of old
The old ones failed for a reason, you know...
Failed at what ?
Failed to keep players, that's why they all changed and people complained about them. The old-school method failed.
UO and EQ are still running, even if they changed it doesn't mean that they failed. They are both the games I played and enjoyed the most. They introduced the mass to the mmo genre and paved the way. Both games were really successfull.
Neither one is the same game that people speak lovingly about, both of them changed to attract more players because the majority of their players were leaving to play other games. There are no old-school games still being run publically with unchanged old-school mechanics. None. Not a one.
Originally posted by SEANMCAD Originally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.are you serious?one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy gameand you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.you have failed miserably at this.I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this. you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.
where is my real life MMO?
where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?
Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?
where is my old west MMO?
where is my spy MMO?
where is my world of darkness MMO?
where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?
where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.
I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
You asked me to name 3. I did.
That there are other genre's that have not been touched on does not validate your argument. There is a ton of variety in today's mmorpg games. Yes there is still a lot more they can do, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variety now.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I think as long as people aren't developing their own games they're always gonna be like..."Wouldn't it be cool if such and such was in this game"?
Sometimes you have to learn to settle for what is available, or what meets most of your desired features, unless you go and develop your own game with your few extra elements.
It's magnitudes easier to criticize someone elses work than it is to create quality work of your own.
I don't think that this is the problem. Look at ESO for example. It is a very polished an well made game with a huge budget. It does well what it does. The problem is that the same stuff has been done a hundred times before, so all the effort was wasted.
Imagine all the afford and money had gone into a more sandboxy game that was true to the feel of the Elder Scrolls franchise. The money is there.
How do you know that? Certainly there is plenty of money there for more SP Elder Scrolls games, every one that comes out is more successful than the one that came before. For an MMO though? I don't think so, in fact, I always thought ESO was a big mistake because the franchise isn't geared toward multiplayer. I think it's absurd that MMOs try to make EVERYONE the hero. That's what SP games do. It just makes no sense in a multi-player game.
In reality, ESO is just a standard themepark game with "Elder Scrolls" slapped on it. It isn't Elder Scrolls at all.
I think it is twisting words to call the people who demand innovation jaded. The mmo-genre has stagnated for the last decade and we only want it to live up to its potential. I'm not asking for a recreation of SWG but for a spiritual successor.
The mmo genre has gone trough a bottleneck with the advent of WoW. Maybe it is time look at old ideas again that haven't been tried for a very long time and to do something new with it.
I still have great hopes for EQN, although we need to wait and see what kind of game they are planning to release and if they are going to release anything at all.
Yet so many people want the genre to go BACKWARDS. They want to remake games of the past, games that ultimately failed as more people came into the genre from the outside. I agree that the genre has stagnated, but going back to how things used to be, things that changed for a reason because the majority of people playing the games didn't like them, seems rather silly.
It think what you said about ESO can be said about every post-WoW themepark mmo. This storyline where everybody saves the world exists is pretty much all recent titles.
Well it hasn't been tried so nobody can be sure, but I think there are good arguments that a sandbox that has more mass appeal (EQN) could be a hit. The central selling point of the Elder Scrolls games always was that they are sandboxes. Thus everybody assumed that ESO would have the same sandboxy feel to it. I think that the game would have been more successful with more sandbox features. Well, and the payment model is another problem of couse. P2P apparently still works for WoW but not for newcomer titles.
That is true. I don't think that these people really want a one-to-one recreation of those old titles. Those early games of course had their flaws. People sometimes put them on a pedestrial and forget that despite they good features they could be quite clunky.
Other people want 1999 Everquest to be recreated, that would end the same way, even thou it is a themepark game.
I assume that a modern sandbox would be just as polished as other recent games. What we need is a game that relates to UO and SWG like GW2 relates to classic Everquest.
It seems to me the direction the mmo genre is going right now is not forward either. I see switching to a sandbox approach not as going backwards but as changing lanes.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious?one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy gameand you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.
where is my real life MMO?
where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?
Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?
where is my old west MMO?
where is my spy MMO?
where is my world of darkness MMO?
where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?
where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.
I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
You asked me to name 3. I did.
That there are other genre's that have not been touched on does not validate your argument. There is a ton of variety in today's mmorpg games. Yes there is still a lot more they can do, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variety now.
like I said, you prooved me wrong but not you right at the same time.
I am sorry I am having a hard time conveying what I am trying to say the sample list above SHOULD provide smart people with an insight into what I am trying to say. You seem to think there is large variety I am trying to help you understand my examples as to how that is not accurate. are you able to understand them?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Yet so many people want the genre to go BACKWARDS. They want to remake games of the past, games that ultimately failed as more people came into the genre from the outside. I agree that the genre has stagnated, but going back to how things used to be, things that changed for a reason because the majority of people playing the games didn't like them, seems rather silly.
Most only failed if WoW is the only MMO you define as success. I'd say a failed MMO is one that shuts down after several years (Like Warhammer or Vanguard even though I did like Vanguard) A game that generates enough interest to keep its servers open for 10 or 15 years and make even a small profit isn't a failure.
I don't want people to slavishly copy games of the past. That would be as bad as making yet another WoW clone but developers need to mine these games for the genuinely good ideas they had rather than just write them off as failures. Otherwise it's just trying to invent the wheel over and over again.
Certainly the developers didn't agree with you or they wouldn't have introduced new mechanics aimed at attracting new players. For all intents and purposes, all old games are gone because the mechanics they currently have in place are not the ones that people talk about as old school games. That goes for EQ, UO, SWG (even though it's now gone), etc. These games are not running in their original form on official servers. In their original form, they all failed.
Originally posted by SEANMCAD Originally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoarOriginally posted by SEANMCADOriginally posted by VengeSunsoar If the only games you look at are the fantasy clad based quest based games no wonder ask games look the same to you. There is more variety in types of games than ever before. More themepark more sandbox queasy based non quest based... than at any other time.
in the MMO world this is incorrect.having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.are you serious?one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy gameand you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.you have failed miserably at this.I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this. you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.where is my real life MMO?where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?where is my old west MMO?where is my spy MMO?where is my world of darkness MMO?where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.You asked me to name 3. I did.That there are other genre's that have not been touched on does not validate your argument. There is a ton of variety in today's mmorpg games. Yes there is still a lot more they can do, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variety now. like I said, you prooved me wrong but not you right at the same time.
I am sorry I am having a hard time conveying what I am trying to say the sample list above SHOULD provide smart people with an insight into what I am trying to say. You seem to think there is large variety I am trying to help you understand my examples as to how that is not accurate. are you able to understand them?
I understand you, I don't agree with you. There are a great many titles out there that are different the mainstream titles. There is a lot of variety out there.
Your sample list is just a list of other things they can do. That makes more variety, it does not indicate that there is significant lack of variety now, it only means there are other things they can still do.
Do you understand that the lack of the titles in your list does not indicate a lack of variety in the MMORPG scene? That it only indicates that there could be even more variety?
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
We who have played MMOs for 10-15 years always have fond memories when we played in the "old" days and we are all looking for the next big thing that will take us back to that forgotten era, but when a new MMO comes along, we find faults in it.
I think because most new MMOs are nothing like the ones of old
The old ones failed for a reason, you know...
Failed at what ?
Failed to keep players, that's why they all changed and people complained about them. The old-school method failed.
UO and EQ are still running, even if they changed it doesn't mean that they failed. They are both the games I played and enjoyed the most. They introduced the mass to the mmo genre and paved the way. Both games were really successfull.
Neither one is the same game that people speak lovingly about, both of them changed to attract more players because the majority of their players were leaving to play other games. There are no old-school games still being run publically with unchanged old-school mechanics. None. Not a one.
And they still loose people after they changed, it's not like you need to keep the same playerbase for 10 years to be called a success. Every game changes, and I expect most of them to shut down after a couple years. It's simply business at that point. It's not that there is not a market for it, it's just that there is a bigger one somewhere else. Everyday there are business that shuts down, not because they don't make a profit, but because there is a bigger one to be made somewhere else.
I don't pretend that old school EQ remade with today technology would please most people, it would be a niche game. But that is the kind of game I am looking for. And the simple fact that there is an EQ emulator still running proves that there are people interested by that game.
How do you quantify success btw ? Which game succeeded in your eyes ?
Yet so many people want the genre to go BACKWARDS. They want to remake games of the past, games that ultimately failed as more people came into the genre from the outside. I agree that the genre has stagnated, but going back to how things used to be, things that changed for a reason because the majority of people playing the games didn't like them, seems rather silly.
Most only failed if WoW is the only MMO you define as success. I'd say a failed MMO is one that shuts down after several years (Like Warhammer or Vanguard even though I did like Vanguard) A game that generates enough interest to keep its servers open for 10 or 15 years and make even a small profit isn't a failure.
I don't want people to slavishly copy games of the past. That would be as bad as making yet another WoW clone but developers need to mine these games for the genuinely good ideas they had rather than just write them off as failures. Otherwise it's just trying to invent the wheel over and over again.
Certainly the developers didn't agree with you or they wouldn't have introduced new mechanics aimed at attracting new players. For all intents and purposes, all old games are gone because the mechanics they currently have in place are not the ones that people talk about as old school games. That goes for EQ, UO, SWG (even though it's now gone), etc. These games are not running in their original form on official servers. In their original form, they all failed.
WoW also changed from it's original form, it must also have failed..
I finaly found one i enjoyed more then any mmo's for the last 8 years ! Archeage ! it took awhile for me to find one i could play longer then 4 weeks before uninstalling it but after many time spend on Russian server and Alpha / Beta i still cant get enough of it.
Warhammer / Aion / SWTOR / GW2 / ESO / Wildstar / and tons of other mmo's dint even last me longer then a few weeks so go figure -_-
Archeage for me has the crafting / pvp i have been looking for since a long time. Altough many mmorpg players find it a asian grinder or whatever it offers much more then that. And looking at the big pvp guilds that i played against in all those mmo's i see they are all spreading their wings on 1 server to duke it out.
Cant say i am looking forward to anything else other then perhaps Black Desert.
I understand you, I don't agree with you. There are a great many titles out there that are different the mainstream titles. There is a lot of variety out there.
Your sample list is just a list of other things they can do. That makes more variety, it does not indicate that there is significant lack of variety now, it only means there are other things they can still do.
Do you understand that the lack of the titles in your list does not indicate a lack of variety in the MMORPG scene? That it only indicates that there could be even more variety?
1. a list of three examples of non-combat MMOS but do contain the same other factors that I mentioned as over done (like fantasy genre) is hardly an example of 'a lot'
2. different genre is part of the variety picture. 2 factions instead of 3 factions in a fantasy based game with combat, quests and leveling is an example of a tweak.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Good thing that isn't what those games contain. The only similarity between those is fantasy and crafting.
Second those are not the entirety of different games in the mmo genre.
Third there are dozens and dozens of other games out there that are different from the class based quest based games.
Fourth you said nothing about fantasy. You said class based level based or even combat focused.
Fifth. Just because they are fantasy does not make them the same or similar.
Lastly. There is more variety today than at any other point. Yes there can be even more variety but more variety does not mean there isn't a lot of variety today. It just isn't among the mainstream.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Good thing that isn't what those games contain. The only similarity between those is fantasy and crafting. Second those are not the entirety of different games in the mmo genre. Third there are dozens and dozens of other games out there that are different from the class based quest based games. Fourth you said nothing about fantasy. You said class based level based or even combat focused. Fifth. Just because they are fantasy does not make them the same or similar. Lastly. There is more variety today than at any other point. Yes there can be even more variety but more variety does not mean there isn't a lot of variety today. It just isn't among the mainstream.
If I didnt say fantasy I can assure to you that I did mean to add that. My issue with the gaming industry is its clear and painfully obvious lack of diversity. I think pretty much the entire world is on board with what I mean when I say that except it appears you.
different genres is VERY MUCH part of the diversity picture. MORE SO than class based vs skill based and FAR MORE than 4 factions instead of 3.
the vast majority of you guys on the topic are debating over things like combat mechanics...what the ACTUAL fuck??!!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I would say must of the world agrees with me and finds the wider variety of different mmorpg games very nice. What they do wish is that the ones that are different from mainstream were higher quality which is a very understandable desire.
And yes they do want more variety. I want more. That doesn't mean we don't have a lot now.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I would say must of the world agrees with me and finds the wider variety of different mmorpg games very nice. What they do wish is that the ones that are different from mainstream were higher quality which is a very understandable desire.
And yes they do want more variety. I want more. That doesn't mean we don't have a lot now.
I agree, there are tons of games with different genres out there. The fact that not everyone likes them the same as,say, the top ten mmo's with regards to players playing them, doesn't negate the fact that they exist and are available to play.
It think what you said about ESO can be said about every post-WoW themepark mmo. This storyline where everybody saves the world exists is pretty much all recent titles.
We were talking specifically about Elder Scrolls though so I'm going to limit myself to just that. I do agree with you, but a lot of that is just being stolen wholesale from SP games that are much, much more successful than MMOs across the board. Skyrim sold 3.5 million copies in the first 48 hours, MMOs would kill for anything remotely close to that. With total sales of over 20 million units to date, we shouldn't be surprised that the online version is trying to use all of the things that make the SP game successful.
Well it hasn't been tried so nobody can be sure, but I think there are good arguments that a sandbox that has more mass appeal (EQN) could be a hit. The central selling point of the Elder Scrolls games always was that they are sandboxes. Thus everybody assumed that ESO would have the same sandboxy feel to it. I think that the game would have been more successful with more sandbox features. Well, and the payment model is another problem of couse. P2P apparently still works for WoW but not for newcomer titles.
EQN will never be able to compete with Skyrim in terms of sales. While Elder Scrolls SP games have been relatively open-world sandboxes, those just are not the norm for MMOs. I understand why they're not, Skyrim, for instance, would never work as a sandbox MMO. Skyrim isn't really a pure sandbox anyhow, you still have to do the quests, you still have to follow the storyline, you can't just opt out of it all and go off and farm beets and leave all the Dragonborn stuff to someone else, that's not how the game is written. You're not as much on rails as other SP games but you're still on rails, even if they aren't that visible. With the cost of ESO, I'm sure Zenimax was hoping to bring over current MMO players to play their game instead of trying to convert SP players to the MMO model. And honestly, with WoW losing tons of players, I don't think they're going to last as a primarily P2P game for much longer. They already made it F2P up to level 20.
That is true. I don't think that these people really want a one-to-one recreation of those old titles. Those early games of course had their flaws. People sometimes put them on a pedestrial and forget that despite they good features they could be quite clunky.
There are a lot of people who say that's what they want, with the possible exception of graphics which I'm sure they want updated, although there are people out there who want a 2.5D format back too. I don't get that, but to each their own. You might as well be playing old arcade games where you're a blue dot running away from a red dot. Unfortunately, I think we've learned a lot from the old games and made vastly superior games thereafter. Lots of people have rose-colored nostalgia glasses, they remember how great it was, back when these were the only games that there were and it was fun and new and exciting, they don't remember how much of a time-sink these games were, how frustrating they were, etc. I think some people are just being stubborn, they want the good old days to come back and will simply refuse to admit just how bad they really were.
I assume that a modern sandbox would be just as polished as other recent games. What we need is a game that relates to UO and SWG like GW2 relates to classic Everquest.
But I really don't see those being good sellers. Before GW2 came out, everyone was running around like it was the WoW killer, it was going to be the best game ever and would save the MMO world. It wasn't. As soon as it came out, lots of people hated it and moved on. That's the MMO cycle, people carry future games around like the second coming and then when they come out, because they're not exactly like EQ or UO, they say they suck and start looking toward the next game coming down the pike. That's happening right now with EQN and ArcheAge and Star Citizen and The Repopulation. When they actually come out, when they go live for people to play, everyone will hate them and start looking at something coming out years down the road. Dealing with the reality of actual games is much more difficult than dealing with the fantasy people have in their heads of upcoming games.
It seems to me the direction the mmo genre is going right now is not forward either. I see switching to a sandbox approach not as going backwards but as changing lanes.
I agree, it isn't moving forward, it is stagnant, but going backwards is never the answer and old-school fans don't want it to move forward, they want to go back and live in 1999. That's gone and it's never coming back. People need to figure that out and deal with it. The MMO genre isn't going to change to a sandbox approach until it's proven that sandboxes make as much, if not more money than theme parks. So far, the data doesn't support that.
Comments
having said that I do play Eve and Wurm (wurm being a non-combat focused non-quest focused MMO)
name us 3 MMOs that are not quest focused or class focused or best of all..not combat focused.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world.
It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games.
3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
SWG was not doing fine, it was bleeding before the NGE hit. On par with EQ or DAOC? There is a massive difference between those 2. EQ had almost double what DAOC did. SWG's peak might have similar to one of those 2 but it's average was far below and far shorter.
are you serious?
one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!
the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game
and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.
you have failed miserably at this.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Most only failed if WoW is the only MMO you define as success. I'd say a failed MMO is one that shuts down after several years (Like Warhammer or Vanguard even though I did like Vanguard) A game that generates enough interest to keep its servers open for 10 or 15 years and make even a small profit isn't a failure.
I don't want people to slavishly copy games of the past. That would be as bad as making yet another WoW clone but developers need to mine these games for the genuinely good ideas they had rather than just write them off as failures. Otherwise it's just trying to invent the wheel over and over again.
Now this I would agree with.
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world. It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games. 3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious?
one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game!
the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game
and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game.
you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3.
Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.
where is my real life MMO?
where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?
Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?
where is my old west MMO?
where is my spy MMO?
where is my world of darkness MMO?
where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?
where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.
I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Neither one is the same game that people speak lovingly about, both of them changed to attract more players because the majority of their players were leaving to play other games. There are no old-school games still being run publically with unchanged old-school mechanics. None. Not a one.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world. It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games. 3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious? one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game! the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game. you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3. Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong.
where is my real life MMO?
where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO?
Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO?
where is my old west MMO?
where is my spy MMO?
where is my world of darkness MMO?
where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck?
where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame.
I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
You asked me to name 3. I did.
That there are other genre's that have not been touched on does not validate your argument. There is a ton of variety in today's mmorpg games. Yes there is still a lot more they can do, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variety now.
I think as long as people aren't developing their own games they're always gonna be like..."Wouldn't it be cool if such and such was in this game"?
Sometimes you have to learn to settle for what is available, or what meets most of your desired features, unless you go and develop your own game with your few extra elements.
It's magnitudes easier to criticize someone elses work than it is to create quality work of your own.
It think what you said about ESO can be said about every post-WoW themepark mmo. This storyline where everybody saves the world exists is pretty much all recent titles.
Well it hasn't been tried so nobody can be sure, but I think there are good arguments that a sandbox that has more mass appeal (EQN) could be a hit. The central selling point of the Elder Scrolls games always was that they are sandboxes. Thus everybody assumed that ESO would have the same sandboxy feel to it. I think that the game would have been more successful with more sandbox features. Well, and the payment model is another problem of couse. P2P apparently still works for WoW but not for newcomer titles.
That is true. I don't think that these people really want a one-to-one recreation of those old titles. Those early games of course had their flaws. People sometimes put them on a pedestrial and forget that despite they good features they could be quite clunky.
Other people want 1999 Everquest to be recreated, that would end the same way, even thou it is a themepark game.
I assume that a modern sandbox would be just as polished as other recent games. What we need is a game that relates to UO and SWG like GW2 relates to classic Everquest.
It seems to me the direction the mmo genre is going right now is not forward either. I see switching to a sandbox approach not as going backwards but as changing lanes.
like I said, you prooved me wrong but not you right at the same time.
I am sorry I am having a hard time conveying what I am trying to say the sample list above SHOULD provide smart people with an insight into what I am trying to say. You seem to think there is large variety I am trying to help you understand my examples as to how that is not accurate. are you able to understand them?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Certainly the developers didn't agree with you or they wouldn't have introduced new mechanics aimed at attracting new players. For all intents and purposes, all old games are gone because the mechanics they currently have in place are not the ones that people talk about as old school games. That goes for EQ, UO, SWG (even though it's now gone), etc. These games are not running in their original form on official servers. In their original form, they all failed.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
You could just not read it. Maybe you didn't think of that?
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
It is absolutely correct in the MMO world. In the MMORPG world there is more variety and more types of games than ever before in the history of the MMORPG world. It is true that most/all of the big AAA games are similar, however they are not the entire market. There are hundreds and hundreds of games out there. There are dozens of sandbox games and several dozen plus themepark games. 3 games that are not combat focused: Istaria, ATITD, Mabinogi. One doesn't have combat at all. The other 2 do, but they are not combat focused.
are you serious? one is..,..yet ....another...fuclking...fantasy genre game! the other one is ...yet...another...fucking...anima fantasy game and you didnt even mention Wurm which is a good example of a non-combat focused game. you have failed miserably at this.
I didn't need to mention wurm. You already did. I also did not say those were the only 3. Just because they are fantasy does not mean they are similar, they are very very different. That is a ridiculous comparison. You failed miserably at this.
you managed to proove you can name 3 MMOs as I request and yet at the same time not proof that I am wrong. where is my real life MMO? where is my Kerbal Space Program meets Space Engineer MMO? Where is my Farm Simulator meets Eurotruck simulatior MMO? where is my old west MMO? where is my spy MMO? where is my world of darkness MMO? where is my Sim City MMO that doesnt suck? where is my ...just open up your TV guide and see the variety of shows, it kind of puts us to shame. I am not talking about a tweak here and a tweak there and a 'oh I mentioned 3 thus I am right' no I am looking for something that makes my balls hurt its so right.
You asked me to name 3. I did. That there are other genre's that have not been touched on does not validate your argument. There is a ton of variety in today's mmorpg games. Yes there is still a lot more they can do, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of variety now.
like I said, you prooved me wrong but not you right at the same time.
I am sorry I am having a hard time conveying what I am trying to say the sample list above SHOULD provide smart people with an insight into what I am trying to say. You seem to think there is large variety I am trying to help you understand my examples as to how that is not accurate. are you able to understand them?
I understand you, I don't agree with you. There are a great many titles out there that are different the mainstream titles. There is a lot of variety out there.
Your sample list is just a list of other things they can do. That makes more variety, it does not indicate that there is significant lack of variety now, it only means there are other things they can still do.
Do you understand that the lack of the titles in your list does not indicate a lack of variety in the MMORPG scene? That it only indicates that there could be even more variety?
And they still loose people after they changed, it's not like you need to keep the same playerbase for 10 years to be called a success. Every game changes, and I expect most of them to shut down after a couple years. It's simply business at that point. It's not that there is not a market for it, it's just that there is a bigger one somewhere else. Everyday there are business that shuts down, not because they don't make a profit, but because there is a bigger one to be made somewhere else.
I don't pretend that old school EQ remade with today technology would please most people, it would be a niche game. But that is the kind of game I am looking for. And the simple fact that there is an EQ emulator still running proves that there are people interested by that game.
How do you quantify success btw ? Which game succeeded in your eyes ?
WoW also changed from it's original form, it must also have failed..
Hang on a min.....
LOLWUT?!
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I finaly found one i enjoyed more then any mmo's for the last 8 years !
Archeage !
it took awhile for me to find one i could play longer then 4 weeks before uninstalling it but after many time spend on Russian server and Alpha / Beta i still cant get enough of it.
Warhammer / Aion / SWTOR / GW2 / ESO / Wildstar / and tons of other mmo's dint even last me longer then a few weeks so go figure -_-
Archeage for me has the crafting / pvp i have been looking for since a long time.
Altough many mmorpg players find it a asian grinder or whatever it offers much more then that.
And looking at the big pvp guilds that i played against in all those mmo's i see they are all spreading their wings on 1 server to duke it out.
Cant say i am looking forward to anything else other then perhaps Black Desert.
1. a list of three examples of non-combat MMOS but do contain the same other factors that I mentioned as over done (like fantasy genre) is hardly an example of 'a lot'
2. different genre is part of the variety picture. 2 factions instead of 3 factions in a fantasy based game with combat, quests and leveling is an example of a tweak.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Second those are not the entirety of different games in the mmo genre.
Third there are dozens and dozens of other games out there that are different from the class based quest based games.
Fourth you said nothing about fantasy. You said class based level based or even combat focused.
Fifth. Just because they are fantasy does not make them the same or similar.
Lastly. There is more variety today than at any other point. Yes there can be even more variety but more variety does not mean there isn't a lot of variety today. It just isn't among the mainstream.
If I didnt say fantasy I can assure to you that I did mean to add that.
My issue with the gaming industry is its clear and painfully obvious lack of diversity. I think pretty much the entire world is on board with what I mean when I say that except it appears you.
different genres is VERY MUCH part of the diversity picture. MORE SO than class based vs skill based and FAR MORE than 4 factions instead of 3.
the vast majority of you guys on the topic are debating over things like combat mechanics...what the ACTUAL fuck??!!
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
And yes they do want more variety. I want more. That doesn't mean we don't have a lot now.
I agree, there are tons of games with different genres out there. The fact that not everyone likes them the same as,say, the top ten mmo's with regards to players playing them, doesn't negate the fact that they exist and are available to play.
We were talking specifically about Elder Scrolls though so I'm going to limit myself to just that. I do agree with you, but a lot of that is just being stolen wholesale from SP games that are much, much more successful than MMOs across the board. Skyrim sold 3.5 million copies in the first 48 hours, MMOs would kill for anything remotely close to that. With total sales of over 20 million units to date, we shouldn't be surprised that the online version is trying to use all of the things that make the SP game successful.
EQN will never be able to compete with Skyrim in terms of sales. While Elder Scrolls SP games have been relatively open-world sandboxes, those just are not the norm for MMOs. I understand why they're not, Skyrim, for instance, would never work as a sandbox MMO. Skyrim isn't really a pure sandbox anyhow, you still have to do the quests, you still have to follow the storyline, you can't just opt out of it all and go off and farm beets and leave all the Dragonborn stuff to someone else, that's not how the game is written. You're not as much on rails as other SP games but you're still on rails, even if they aren't that visible. With the cost of ESO, I'm sure Zenimax was hoping to bring over current MMO players to play their game instead of trying to convert SP players to the MMO model. And honestly, with WoW losing tons of players, I don't think they're going to last as a primarily P2P game for much longer. They already made it F2P up to level 20.
There are a lot of people who say that's what they want, with the possible exception of graphics which I'm sure they want updated, although there are people out there who want a 2.5D format back too. I don't get that, but to each their own. You might as well be playing old arcade games where you're a blue dot running away from a red dot. Unfortunately, I think we've learned a lot from the old games and made vastly superior games thereafter. Lots of people have rose-colored nostalgia glasses, they remember how great it was, back when these were the only games that there were and it was fun and new and exciting, they don't remember how much of a time-sink these games were, how frustrating they were, etc. I think some people are just being stubborn, they want the good old days to come back and will simply refuse to admit just how bad they really were.
But I really don't see those being good sellers. Before GW2 came out, everyone was running around like it was the WoW killer, it was going to be the best game ever and would save the MMO world. It wasn't. As soon as it came out, lots of people hated it and moved on. That's the MMO cycle, people carry future games around like the second coming and then when they come out, because they're not exactly like EQ or UO, they say they suck and start looking toward the next game coming down the pike. That's happening right now with EQN and ArcheAge and Star Citizen and The Repopulation. When they actually come out, when they go live for people to play, everyone will hate them and start looking at something coming out years down the road. Dealing with the reality of actual games is much more difficult than dealing with the fantasy people have in their heads of upcoming games.
I agree, it isn't moving forward, it is stagnant, but going backwards is never the answer and old-school fans don't want it to move forward, they want to go back and live in 1999. That's gone and it's never coming back. People need to figure that out and deal with it. The MMO genre isn't going to change to a sandbox approach until it's proven that sandboxes make as much, if not more money than theme parks. So far, the data doesn't support that.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None