Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by PepeqOriginally posted by ArclanOriginally posted by LoktofeitOriginally posted by ReallyNow10Have we "lost the sparkle"?NOWhat happened was years ago we were served "succulent prime rib" and loved it, and ever since only got "tough-as-shoe-leather-sirloin." We complained for years we wanted the former, and again and again only got the latter, while being told we had "lost our taste for steak".This is what's going on in the MMO world. But... things are changing. EQ Next and Black Desert are on the way.
Getting a 2014 burger for the price of a 1999 steak? Sounds about right. Great posts, both of you. Thanks for the hamburger link Lok! One could argue we don't want to pay steak prices, so we are offered hamburger. But F2P costs a great many people much more than the price of steak. I would happily pay steak price subscriptions; but not interested in F2P.People say this all the time, but that population is even smaller than the niche market hard core gamers make up.
What game, that exists today, right this very minute, that is released and has a subscription model is worth $30 a month to play? If you can't name one, then the promise of paying more, is moot because no such game exists. We're not talking future here. We're not talking altering an existing title to suit your needs. As-is buddy. As it is this very second.
EVE is worth $30, in fact I pay $45 so I can train and fly 3 pilots, and at times have paid $60 a month.
The problem is this is really subjective. I would not pay $5 a month to play EVE. The base concepts behind the game are great but the actual gameplay is just downright dull. I probably wouldn't play it 10 hours a week if you were paying me $5 a week to play it to be honest. If it were just 100% free I'd probably just keep skilling up and playing it a few hours a week at random.
I have money for gaming. I'm willing to pay $15-50 each month for a great game that I could spend years in. Just because no MMO exists NOW that I would do so does NOT mean I would never again pay a sub.
I do not follow the logic here...
While I support this idea (and have argued for it myself on occasion) I do see the huge risk involved in making a game like this especially in this market. You ask $50 a month for anything you'd better completely hit it out of the park in terms of consistent quality. Many people have been convinced by F2P that hopping from game to game is normal and some of those games actually give a decent experience even to those who don't pay anything. I think maybe a game could do for MMOs what HBO did for cable TV and get away with charging a higher sub than $15 a month but you need a very smooth launch and very high quality to get away with it.
I agree with the loss of the sparkle, in a sense. I will never again feel fear in a game like I did in EQ1 trying to get somewhere as a level 15ish alone. I will never feel the excitement of the first time I got jumped by a shadowblade in DAOC RvR solo. I will never see anything like my first experience with pre-CU SWG again. But the same thing holds true for nearly all games. I can't have my first competitive FPS kill (Rainbow 6 on Mplayer.com in 1999). It all loses luster.
However, the games have also changed with us. The gates to entry have been removed and the need for cooperation have been reduced. The nature of online gaming is no longer new to anyone involved as even the youngest player has been exposed to minecraft servers at a young age. In the end, I don't think it is fair to compare anymore. Just like we no longer compare radio to TV or Pandora. They are different mediums altogether now, serving different audiences for different purposes. Same has become true of mmorpgs, they serve a different purpose than they did 15 years ago.
I'll leave it at: There are still fun games out there and fun people, but it will never be 1997-2004 again.
I have an idea to get that "Fear" back you so badly missed. I am starting a kickstarter. I want to add a USB connection to a shock collar. Anytime you die, you get a healthy jolt.
Are you interested? What do you think?
P.S. The Spakle died when SOE killed SWG with the NGE.
I like it! Seriously though, I understand where people get frustrated with the "back in the day" routine. I really do understand. That's why I wrote the second paragraph. I just don't think gamers can compare anymore. There just is no comparison because times have changed, gamers have changed, etc.
Originally posted by daeandor I agree with the loss of the sparkle, in a sense. I will never again feel fear in a game like I did in EQ1 trying to get somewhere as a level 15ish alone. I will never feel the excitement of the first time I got jumped by a shadowblade in DAOC RvR solo. I will never see anything like my first experience with pre-CU SWG again. But the same thing holds true for nearly all games. I can't have my first competitive FPS kill (Rainbow 6 on Mplayer.com in 1999). It all loses luster.
However, the games have also changed with us. The gates to entry have been removed and the need for cooperation have been reduced. The nature of online gaming is no longer new to anyone involved as even the youngest player has been exposed to minecraft servers at a young age. In the end, I don't think it is fair to compare anymore. Just like we no longer compare radio to TV or Pandora. They are different mediums altogether now, serving different audiences for different purposes. Same has become true of mmorpgs, they serve a different purpose than they did 15 years ago.
I'll leave it at: There are still fun games out there and fun people, but it will never be 1997-2004 again.
Good post and I kinda agree with you; which is unusual since I never agree with the 'first kiss' argument. Who here can say that their first kiss was better than all kisses thereafter. Not I. But I tend to agree with other posters here who feel that current games have indeed lost their sparkle. Like that chic on The Bachelor.
Thanks. I never liked the "first kiss" argument either, but sometimes I feel it applies. I can say this, I watch young kids play minecraft and go into pvp servers and they exhibit the same degree of excitement I did when I started playing online. And although I am of the "old crowd," I don't like to fall into the "back in the beginnings of mmorpgs" routine because it was more than that. It was the "back when people started playing online" and now that is just taken for granted. So just the fact that there are 1000's of other people playing with you is just expected now. Now the game has to be really good to keep you. Those games exist, but they are few between and often very niche. With niche comes loss of the 1000's of people. With loss of 1000's of people comes failure to meet expectations.
Anyhow, I could ramble a while on this like an old man. Now I play games I enjoy and do it with people similar to me. The graphics on the screen really don't matter, but we have fun none-the-less. I hope other people are still out there enjoying some of the games that are out there too as long as I keep wanting to play!
I understand the notion that back then there was the element of being new and fresh which increased the fun, but I do not agree that this solely explains the difficulty of finding satisfactory games today as if the games are just the same in terms of quality.
The games turned into anti social easy mode lobby games which is very different than the games older gamers fondly remember.
There have been some attempts to break this situation (GW2 comes to my mind) but they were not quite there. So, no it is not the fault of older generation gamers.
I'm going to speculate and say that 99% of the people on these forums are playing one MMO or another. They come here to find news on new ones coming out and are the ones new MMO's need to attract because while I am content to play EVE or LotRO or Perpetuum, depending on the mood I am in, I am and most of us here are willing to try out a new title just as quick.
We have expanded beyond that one and only. It did require an injection of jaded, bitter vet so we are the hardest group to please but it's by no means impossible.
If a new MMO came out tomorrow and I had 10,000 good things to say about it? Keeping that discussion on page one is an impossible task. It's far more 'forum friendly' to feed on the negative. Even games I don't really play much, I say good things about but they fall away. It doesn't change what I said, it doesn't stop me from being here.
You read these forums and their point all wrong I think.
Since there are no MMOs out today that many players would NOT pay a sub for, that means these players would NEVER pay a sub for a great MMO?
No. No one says never. But you can't prove the other way either. It does not mean that players WILL pay. It only means that you do not know for sure that they won't.
Given that none exists today, and that people are getting used to sub-free games, i doubt there will be such a "great" MMO that would command expensive subs. But hey, prove me wrong.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky I have money for gaming. I'm willing to pay $15-50 each month for a great game that I could spend years in. Just because no MMO exists NOW that I would do so does NOT mean I would never again pay a sub.I do not follow the logic here...
While I support this idea (and have argued for it myself on occasion) I do see the huge risk involved in making a game like this especially in this market. You ask $50 a month for anything you'd better completely hit it out of the park in terms of consistent quality. Many people have been convinced by F2P that hopping from game to game is normal and some of those games actually give a decent experience even to those who don't pay anything. I think maybe a game could do for MMOs what HBO did for cable TV and get away with charging a higher sub than $15 a month but you need a very smooth launch and very high quality to get away with it.
Oh, I agree! A game, in order to get my $50/month would have to be as close to my "perfect game" as could be. Even a $15/month sub game needs to be fun for me to get me paying.
Since what I am seeking is no longer popular, I don't see this happening soon (or possibly ever).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Oh, I agree! A game, in order to get my $50/month would have to be as close to my "perfect game" as could be. Even a $15/month sub game needs to be fun for me to get me paying.
Since what I am seeking is no longer popular, I don't see this happening soon (or possibly ever).
No sane devs can sell a game at $50/month (enough to make good money) no matter how they make the game. That kind of economics is just not there.
There are so many fun games (for many) out there that I doubt more than a few would pay $50/month for anything. I won't.
Oh, I agree! A game, in order to get my $50/month would have to be as close to my "perfect game" as could be. Even a $15/month sub game needs to be fun for me to get me paying.
Since what I am seeking is no longer popular, I don't see this happening soon (or possibly ever).
No sane devs can sell a game at $50/month (enough to make good money) no matter how they make the game. That kind of economics is just not there.
There are so many fun games (for many) out there that I doubt more than a few would pay $50/month for anything. I won't.
If people can pay $150 for early alpha access or dump $1000's on model ships that will be in a game before the game is even made... they can come up with $50 a month. Hell, if you told my grandfather (when he was still alive in the early 70's) that people would be paying $3.00 for a cup of joe, he'd think you were on dope. That wasn't inflation... it doesn't cost $3.00 to make a cup of coffee... that was purely the public wanting it so badly that they'd spend that much for it. Gaming is no different and we're seeing more and more of that every day.
If people can pay $150 for early alpha access or dump $1000's on model ships that will be in a game before the game is even made... they can come up with $50 a month. Hell, if you told my grandfather (when he was still alive in the early 70's) that people would be paying $3.00 for a cup of joe, he'd think you were on dope. That wasn't inflation... it doesn't cost $3.00 to make a cup of coffee... that was purely the public wanting it so badly that they'd spend that much for it. Gaming is no different and we're seeing more and more of that every day.
You are confused between "able to" and "willing to". Sure people can afford $50 a month .. but given so much competition out there, are they willing to?
I surely don't given there are so many free games out there, or even $60 great AAA games.
No sane devs can sell a game at $50/month (enough to make good money) no matter how they make the game. That kind of economics is just not there.
There are so many fun games (for many) out there that I doubt more than a few would pay $50/month for anything. I won't.
I think a game that really provided a vreal 3D multiplayer RPG experience complete with tons of hired game masters to create spontaneous content or maybe a true virtual world game where the world was big enough that it took many RL hours to cross and they added new zones every few months plus had tons of simulation type mechanics would be worth $50 a month to me. Obviously it would have to offer something way above what current games offer to be successful with that sort of pricing model and would almost definitely be a highly specialized niche game giving a certain group of people exactly what they want rather than trying to appeal to everybody. It's the difference between Wal-Mart and a boutique store.
If people can pay $150 for early alpha access or dump $1000's on model ships that will be in a game before the game is even made... they can come up with $50 a month. Hell, if you told my grandfather (when he was still alive in the early 70's) that people would be paying $3.00 for a cup of joe, he'd think you were on dope. That wasn't inflation... it doesn't cost $3.00 to make a cup of coffee... that was purely the public wanting it so badly that they'd spend that much for it. Gaming is no different and we're seeing more and more of that every day.
You are confused between "able to" and "willing to". Sure people can afford $50 a month .. but given so much competition out there, are they willing to?
I surely don't given there are so many free games out there, or even $60 great AAA games.
I certainly am willing to pay 50$/month for my perfect game. I don't play any mmo right now, because none of them are good enough for me. Even if they are free, I won't play something I don't like.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky I have money for gaming. I'm willing to pay $15-50 each month for a great game that I could spend years in. Just because no MMO exists NOW that I would do so does NOT mean I would never again pay a sub.I do not follow the logic here...
While I support this idea (and have argued for it myself on occasion) I do see the huge risk involved in making a game like this especially in this market. You ask $50 a month for anything you'd better completely hit it out of the park in terms of consistent quality. Many people have been convinced by F2P that hopping from game to game is normal and some of those games actually give a decent experience even to those who don't pay anything. I think maybe a game could do for MMOs what HBO did for cable TV and get away with charging a higher sub than $15 a month but you need a very smooth launch and very high quality to get away with it.
Oh, I agree! A game, in order to get my $50/month would have to be as close to my "perfect game" as could be. Even a $15/month sub game needs to be fun for me to get me paying.
Since what I am seeking is no longer popular, I don't see this happening soon (or possibly ever).
For a MMORPG to garner a $50.00 fee, it has to offer players something of real value that they can't get elsewhere.
It's one big reason how EVE retains it's niche, with game play pretty unique to the genre. Players stick with it over the long haul for what it offers.
Now the question is, what would really appeal to players in order to justify the fee. For me right now, extraordinary, personal customer service would go a long way.
In game moderation that was active and strongly enforced the rules in chats and in game, or assisted with issues that occur directly, instead of send an email.
Also would be good if same folks could host in game events and activities, special contests and the lot. Or surprise invasions, anything to make the world feel more responsive and dynamic.
Heck, I'd pay a premium sub if it would actually guarantee that I could access all of the game's content, with nothing locked behind a cash/shop pay wall. (I realize some games are still like this today, but they are few and far between.)
Now, toss in an automatic "I win" button that I could press once a day to punish "asshats" who annoy me, and you'll easily get $50 from me.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If people can pay $150 for early alpha access or dump $1000's on model ships that will be in a game before the game is even made... they can come up with $50 a month. Hell, if you told my grandfather (when he was still alive in the early 70's) that people would be paying $3.00 for a cup of joe, he'd think you were on dope. That wasn't inflation... it doesn't cost $3.00 to make a cup of coffee... that was purely the public wanting it so badly that they'd spend that much for it. Gaming is no different and we're seeing more and more of that every day.
You are confused between "able to" and "willing to". Sure people can afford $50 a month .. but given so much competition out there, are they willing to?
I surely don't given there are so many free games out there, or even $60 great AAA games.
I certainly am willing to pay 50$/month for my perfect game. I don't play any mmo right now, because none of them are good enough for me. Even if they are free, I won't play something I don't like.
How many are like you? That is the question. I am certainly not. And given all the free stuff, i highly doubt there are a lot of players willing to commit to $50 a month, no matter what the game is.
No sane devs can sell a game at $50/month (enough to make good money) no matter how they make the game. That kind of economics is just not there.
There are so many fun games (for many) out there that I doubt more than a few would pay $50/month for anything. I won't.
I think a game that really provided a vreal 3D multiplayer RPG experience complete with tons of hired game masters to create spontaneous content or maybe a true virtual world game where the world was big enough that it took many RL hours to cross and they added new zones every few months plus had tons of simulation type mechanics would be worth $50 a month to me. Obviously it would have to offer something way above what current games offer to be successful with that sort of pricing model and would almost definitely be a highly specialized niche game giving a certain group of people exactly what they want rather than trying to appeal to everybody. It's the difference between Wal-Mart and a boutique store.
For you ... may be.
Why would I need spontaneous content, when i can get packaged good content for a lot cheaper? In fact, i prefer packaged planned content just because they have time to polish it.
And SKYRIM Is way bigger than what i need already ... so there is no need to pay any sub to get a "big enough" world. In fact, i don't want to waste time crossing any landscape. That is not why i play games. I would rather click a button, and do a challenging random dungeon (like Diablo, or Marvel Heroes).
It's entirely possible to create a mmorpg that I would play for years.
I just dont see it happening when mmorpgs seem to shrink smaller and smaller (not talking about map size, even if that too happens), into these super fast lobby games that has "end game" where I'm supposed to grind endless hours of lobby raids and/or lobby pvp for simple gear, and forget completely about the open world I buy these games in the first place for.
It's like a bad joke when devs build massive open worlds for these games, spending thousands of hours creating these enormous worlds, and then slams a level based progression system on top of it to make sure that any zone you outlevel becomes useless to you, with useless rewards and one shottable "grey" mobs. Just why? Why? What is the point if you are ment to complete the zone in few hours and after that it's just a spot on the world map which has lived its purpose.
Why not just create a singleplayer game with coop + end game from the beginning, at least then the leveling experience would be a lot more rich because it could have interesting triggers and events, not to mention cinematic scenes, outside the restraints of open world shared map, where everyone still solo.
When the rare occasion happens that a game comes out which has a lot of features I want, it usually has some other major downer features that kills it for me. I know I demand too much from these games, that's why I can never find the dream mmorpg, but I cant help it, if all these inferior games just are not fun for me after a week, what can I do? I cant just decide that they are fun games, when they are not.
It would be possible to create a mmorpg that I'd play for years, but I guess devs/publishers just sees these one time level grinds to max level + lobby endgame games more safe bet, or maybe they just are blind and completely lacks imagination and ambition.
Well pre 2004 mmo games were still building to the Baldurs Gate Standard. Now there is no standard, every lobby game and moba is considered an "mmo" now.
1. Lack of content or reason, games are not built for the sake of having a good game, they are now just marketing cash cows. The lore comes from nowhere and no one cares about a game thats just going to be some version of WOW, GW2 etc.
2. No races or character customization anymore. Devs these days are too lazy to even have non human races, Archage is just another example. 4 types of human one with furry cat ears.
3. Lack of class dynamics. Its gotten so stale that every game is essentially just ripping off wow classes, warlocks with dots, a hunter and rogue all with wow abilities like shadowstep, dots, some wow paladin clone with a bubble. But no druids, that would require more character models. Interesting classes like shapeshifters, anything not pure dps is not done anymore, they go for pure spam dps these days and rationalize it with excuses to Zerg and pvp restrictions. "Classes" these days are little more than they are in MOP and barely better than the character selection screen in a MOBA.
4. Linear worlds, no freedom to pvp, crafting is a joke most of the time, no real home ownership unless its some instance nonsense, quests are ezmode follow the exclamation point. Unlike the old days its now become a feminist nanny state in all of these games, no open world pvp allowed, cant make people upset, the days of breaking into someones house and assassinating them and stealing their stuff, is over. Most of these games die the death of 1000 cuts and the only people left playing are anti social dickheads doing gear runs in instances.
5. worlds are too safe, AI is a joke, mobs are easy, death penalties are non existent.
6. Factions should be optional, too much of this copy the wow system of two big factions, everyone is the good guy scenarios.
7. Lack of non combat "classes" I blame instance raiding for this debacle. There used to be a place for classes that did not engage in battlegrounds or do raids and dungeons. Market based, agricultural and societal based classes are a long dead dream and very telling of the backwards steps games have taken. I ask myself, how many games since UO let me make a cartographer. ... or my Tinker Mage. .. ah my tinker mage.
8. Flat earth syndrome. Devs have gotten so formulaic that no none notices how flat and boring the actual terrain is or how god awfully small the maps are, the buildings are even small 5 steps gets you up to the top of most mmo buildings no matter how large these days. Games full of background art but no substance,
9. Cash shops and goldsellers, they gave up fighting these people now new games make games FOR these scumbags, pay to win cash shops are handouts to these types of people. Instead of putting security in the game to stop it, they surrendered to soft allowed crime and broken economies.
10. Gear levels, gear does not have to work this way, they do it to enforce the wow trinity paradigm of dungeon raiding to progress, classes are tweaked to how they would be in max level gear, burst and class balance is based on killing high level monsters with a group of other peoples at your gear level. This has led to class homogenization, rapidly gaining gear sets, rapid loss of content, one side wants faster progression EZ mode one side want hard core Raids so content wont run out so fast. They try to placate both by making more expansions, of course the sanity of the rest of the game suffers over time. You dont have to get rid of trinity or raids, but this paradigm is dead.
Originally posted by delete5230 Wrong,Many of us here would love to continue. But now we have : Less than 30 days of content
QFT.
I didnt know mob grinding in the same spot for hours and hours were considered content. Modern Day mmorpgs have way more content than the old mmorpgs
There was whole heckuvalot MORE to old games than JUST sitting in one spot and camping. A HECKUVALOT! I am sorry you are too blind to see the many, many, many varied activities that the "old game" offered besides "just killing stuff" that today's MMOs offer.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Kyleran For a MMORPG to garner a $50.00 fee, it has to offer players something of real value that they can't get elsewhere.It's one big reason how EVE retains it's niche, with game play pretty unique to the genre. Players stick with it over the long haul for what it offers.Now the question is, what would really appeal to players in order to justify the fee. For me right now, extraordinary, personal customer service would go a long way. In game moderation that was active and strongly enforced the rules in chats and in game, or assisted with issues that occur directly, instead of send an email.Also would be good if same folks could host in game events and activities, special contests and the lot. Or surprise invasions, anything to make the world feel more responsive and dynamic.Heck, I'd pay a premium sub if it would actually guarantee that I could access all of the game's content, with nothing locked behind a cash/shop pay wall. (I realize some games are still like this today, but they are few and far between.)Now, toss in an automatic "I win" button that I could press once a day to punish "asshats" who annoy me, and you'll easily get $50 from me.
Yes, this $50/month game would have to be feature rich with omnipresent GMs actually in the game world.
Your last 2 features got me smiling. With $50/month, they better not even THINK of having a Cash Shop or having me pay for expansions. The "I win" button for asshats is priceless
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Why not just create a singleplayer game with coop + end game from the beginning, at least then the leveling experience would be a lot more rich because it could have interesting triggers and events, not to mention cinematic scenes, outside the restraints of open world shared map, where everyone still solo.
May be they will. At least Blizz does not seem to be interested in making another classical MMORPG anymore (after ditching titan).
I've been saying this for a while. The newness of a persistent world has long since been worn out for those of us who have played them since the beginning.
Nothing will ever recapture that feeling the first MMORPGs gave us. But for some of is we can still enjoy them for what they are.
Comments
Great posts, both of you. Thanks for the hamburger link Lok! One could argue we don't want to pay steak prices, so we are offered hamburger. But F2P costs a great many people much more than the price of steak. I would happily pay steak price subscriptions; but not interested in F2P.
People say this all the time, but that population is even smaller than the niche market hard core gamers make up.
What game, that exists today, right this very minute, that is released and has a subscription model is worth $30 a month to play? If you can't name one, then the promise of paying more, is moot because no such game exists. We're not talking future here. We're not talking altering an existing title to suit your needs. As-is buddy. As it is this very second.
EVE is worth $30, in fact I pay $45 so I can train and fly 3 pilots, and at times have paid $60 a month.
The problem is this is really subjective. I would not pay $5 a month to play EVE. The base concepts behind the game are great but the actual gameplay is just downright dull. I probably wouldn't play it 10 hours a week if you were paying me $5 a week to play it to be honest. If it were just 100% free I'd probably just keep skilling up and playing it a few hours a week at random.
While I support this idea (and have argued for it myself on occasion) I do see the huge risk involved in making a game like this especially in this market. You ask $50 a month for anything you'd better completely hit it out of the park in terms of consistent quality. Many people have been convinced by F2P that hopping from game to game is normal and some of those games actually give a decent experience even to those who don't pay anything. I think maybe a game could do for MMOs what HBO did for cable TV and get away with charging a higher sub than $15 a month but you need a very smooth launch and very high quality to get away with it.
I like it! Seriously though, I understand where people get frustrated with the "back in the day" routine. I really do understand. That's why I wrote the second paragraph. I just don't think gamers can compare anymore. There just is no comparison because times have changed, gamers have changed, etc.
Thanks for the kickstarter idea though!
Thanks. I never liked the "first kiss" argument either, but sometimes I feel it applies. I can say this, I watch young kids play minecraft and go into pvp servers and they exhibit the same degree of excitement I did when I started playing online. And although I am of the "old crowd," I don't like to fall into the "back in the beginnings of mmorpgs" routine because it was more than that. It was the "back when people started playing online" and now that is just taken for granted. So just the fact that there are 1000's of other people playing with you is just expected now. Now the game has to be really good to keep you. Those games exist, but they are few between and often very niche. With niche comes loss of the 1000's of people. With loss of 1000's of people comes failure to meet expectations.
Anyhow, I could ramble a while on this like an old man. Now I play games I enjoy and do it with people similar to me. The graphics on the screen really don't matter, but we have fun none-the-less. I hope other people are still out there enjoying some of the games that are out there too as long as I keep wanting to play!
I understand the notion that back then there was the element of being new and fresh which increased the fun, but I do not agree that this solely explains the difficulty of finding satisfactory games today as if the games are just the same in terms of quality.
The games turned into anti social easy mode lobby games which is very different than the games older gamers fondly remember.
There have been some attempts to break this situation (GW2 comes to my mind) but they were not quite there. So, no it is not the fault of older generation gamers.
I'm going to speculate and say that 99% of the people on these forums are playing one MMO or another. They come here to find news on new ones coming out and are the ones new MMO's need to attract because while I am content to play EVE or LotRO or Perpetuum, depending on the mood I am in, I am and most of us here are willing to try out a new title just as quick.
We have expanded beyond that one and only. It did require an injection of jaded, bitter vet so we are the hardest group to please but it's by no means impossible.
If a new MMO came out tomorrow and I had 10,000 good things to say about it? Keeping that discussion on page one is an impossible task. It's far more 'forum friendly' to feed on the negative. Even games I don't really play much, I say good things about but they fall away. It doesn't change what I said, it doesn't stop me from being here.
You read these forums and their point all wrong I think.
No. No one says never. But you can't prove the other way either. It does not mean that players WILL pay. It only means that you do not know for sure that they won't.
Given that none exists today, and that people are getting used to sub-free games, i doubt there will be such a "great" MMO that would command expensive subs. But hey, prove me wrong.
Since what I am seeking is no longer popular, I don't see this happening soon (or possibly ever).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
No sane devs can sell a game at $50/month (enough to make good money) no matter how they make the game. That kind of economics is just not there.
There are so many fun games (for many) out there that I doubt more than a few would pay $50/month for anything. I won't.
If people can pay $150 for early alpha access or dump $1000's on model ships that will be in a game before the game is even made... they can come up with $50 a month. Hell, if you told my grandfather (when he was still alive in the early 70's) that people would be paying $3.00 for a cup of joe, he'd think you were on dope. That wasn't inflation... it doesn't cost $3.00 to make a cup of coffee... that was purely the public wanting it so badly that they'd spend that much for it. Gaming is no different and we're seeing more and more of that every day.
You are confused between "able to" and "willing to". Sure people can afford $50 a month .. but given so much competition out there, are they willing to?
I surely don't given there are so many free games out there, or even $60 great AAA games.
I think a game that really provided a vreal 3D multiplayer RPG experience complete with tons of hired game masters to create spontaneous content or maybe a true virtual world game where the world was big enough that it took many RL hours to cross and they added new zones every few months plus had tons of simulation type mechanics would be worth $50 a month to me. Obviously it would have to offer something way above what current games offer to be successful with that sort of pricing model and would almost definitely be a highly specialized niche game giving a certain group of people exactly what they want rather than trying to appeal to everybody. It's the difference between Wal-Mart and a boutique store.
I certainly am willing to pay 50$/month for my perfect game. I don't play any mmo right now, because none of them are good enough for me. Even if they are free, I won't play something I don't like.
I didnt know mob grinding in the same spot for hours and hours were considered content. Modern Day mmorpgs have way more content than the old mmorpgs
For a MMORPG to garner a $50.00 fee, it has to offer players something of real value that they can't get elsewhere.
It's one big reason how EVE retains it's niche, with game play pretty unique to the genre. Players stick with it over the long haul for what it offers.
Now the question is, what would really appeal to players in order to justify the fee. For me right now, extraordinary, personal customer service would go a long way.
In game moderation that was active and strongly enforced the rules in chats and in game, or assisted with issues that occur directly, instead of send an email.
Also would be good if same folks could host in game events and activities, special contests and the lot. Or surprise invasions, anything to make the world feel more responsive and dynamic.
Heck, I'd pay a premium sub if it would actually guarantee that I could access all of the game's content, with nothing locked behind a cash/shop pay wall. (I realize some games are still like this today, but they are few and far between.)
Now, toss in an automatic "I win" button that I could press once a day to punish "asshats" who annoy me, and you'll easily get $50 from me.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
How many are like you? That is the question. I am certainly not. And given all the free stuff, i highly doubt there are a lot of players willing to commit to $50 a month, no matter what the game is.
For you ... may be.
Why would I need spontaneous content, when i can get packaged good content for a lot cheaper? In fact, i prefer packaged planned content just because they have time to polish it.
And SKYRIM Is way bigger than what i need already ... so there is no need to pay any sub to get a "big enough" world. In fact, i don't want to waste time crossing any landscape. That is not why i play games. I would rather click a button, and do a challenging random dungeon (like Diablo, or Marvel Heroes).
It's entirely possible to create a mmorpg that I would play for years.
I just dont see it happening when mmorpgs seem to shrink smaller and smaller (not talking about map size, even if that too happens), into these super fast lobby games that has "end game" where I'm supposed to grind endless hours of lobby raids and/or lobby pvp for simple gear, and forget completely about the open world I buy these games in the first place for.
It's like a bad joke when devs build massive open worlds for these games, spending thousands of hours creating these enormous worlds, and then slams a level based progression system on top of it to make sure that any zone you outlevel becomes useless to you, with useless rewards and one shottable "grey" mobs. Just why? Why? What is the point if you are ment to complete the zone in few hours and after that it's just a spot on the world map which has lived its purpose.
Why not just create a singleplayer game with coop + end game from the beginning, at least then the leveling experience would be a lot more rich because it could have interesting triggers and events, not to mention cinematic scenes, outside the restraints of open world shared map, where everyone still solo.
When the rare occasion happens that a game comes out which has a lot of features I want, it usually has some other major downer features that kills it for me. I know I demand too much from these games, that's why I can never find the dream mmorpg, but I cant help it, if all these inferior games just are not fun for me after a week, what can I do? I cant just decide that they are fun games, when they are not.
It would be possible to create a mmorpg that I'd play for years, but I guess devs/publishers just sees these one time level grinds to max level + lobby endgame games more safe bet, or maybe they just are blind and completely lacks imagination and ambition.
Well pre 2004 mmo games were still building to the Baldurs Gate Standard. Now there is no standard, every lobby game and moba is considered an "mmo" now.
1. Lack of content or reason, games are not built for the sake of having a good game, they are now just marketing cash cows. The lore comes from nowhere and no one cares about a game thats just going to be some version of WOW, GW2 etc.
2. No races or character customization anymore. Devs these days are too lazy to even have non human races, Archage is just another example. 4 types of human one with furry cat ears.
3. Lack of class dynamics. Its gotten so stale that every game is essentially just ripping off wow classes, warlocks with dots, a hunter and rogue all with wow abilities like shadowstep, dots, some wow paladin clone with a bubble. But no druids, that would require more character models. Interesting classes like shapeshifters, anything not pure dps is not done anymore, they go for pure spam dps these days and rationalize it with excuses to Zerg and pvp restrictions. "Classes" these days are little more than they are in MOP and barely better than the character selection screen in a MOBA.
4. Linear worlds, no freedom to pvp, crafting is a joke most of the time, no real home ownership unless its some instance nonsense, quests are ezmode follow the exclamation point. Unlike the old days its now become a feminist nanny state in all of these games, no open world pvp allowed, cant make people upset, the days of breaking into someones house and assassinating them and stealing their stuff, is over. Most of these games die the death of 1000 cuts and the only people left playing are anti social dickheads doing gear runs in instances.
5. worlds are too safe, AI is a joke, mobs are easy, death penalties are non existent.
6. Factions should be optional, too much of this copy the wow system of two big factions, everyone is the good guy scenarios.
7. Lack of non combat "classes" I blame instance raiding for this debacle. There used to be a place for classes that did not engage in battlegrounds or do raids and dungeons. Market based, agricultural and societal based classes are a long dead dream and very telling of the backwards steps games have taken. I ask myself, how many games since UO let me make a cartographer. ... or my Tinker Mage. .. ah my tinker mage.
8. Flat earth syndrome. Devs have gotten so formulaic that no none notices how flat and boring the actual terrain is or how god awfully small the maps are, the buildings are even small 5 steps gets you up to the top of most mmo buildings no matter how large these days. Games full of background art but no substance,
9. Cash shops and goldsellers, they gave up fighting these people now new games make games FOR these scumbags, pay to win cash shops are handouts to these types of people. Instead of putting security in the game to stop it, they surrendered to soft allowed crime and broken economies.
10. Gear levels, gear does not have to work this way, they do it to enforce the wow trinity paradigm of dungeon raiding to progress, classes are tweaked to how they would be in max level gear, burst and class balance is based on killing high level monsters with a group of other peoples at your gear level. This has led to class homogenization, rapidly gaining gear sets, rapid loss of content, one side wants faster progression EZ mode one side want hard core Raids so content wont run out so fast. They try to placate both by making more expansions, of course the sanity of the rest of the game suffers over time. You dont have to get rid of trinity or raids, but this paradigm is dead.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Your last 2 features got me smiling. With $50/month, they better not even THINK of having a Cash Shop or having me pay for expansions. The "I win" button for asshats is priceless
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
So much truth in one single post, specially point 4 and 5, i completely agree with you there.
May be they will. At least Blizz does not seem to be interested in making another classical MMORPG anymore (after ditching titan).
Nothing will ever recapture that feeling the first MMORPGs gave us. But for some of is we can still enjoy them for what they are.