The only thing that makes an MMO is the amount of people playing the game together. Thats it. Nothing else. Massively Multiplayer Online. Nothing else. Not team work, persistence, RPG elements, nothing... just how many people are playing together.
MMO is not a genre.
Agreed, the definition of what kind of MMO is what RPG or BA stand for....
I also don't get why everyone seems to think that the whole world in the game has to be dangerous all the time, why can't there be areas that are just fun, no danger, no crafting, no gathering, just fun stuff ... mini game kind of stuff (similar to the DarkMoon Faire). Heck even in Harvest Moon it was nice to be able to not have the clock run down when indoors. It's not like you'd be forced to go to those places if you didn't want to and prefer to have to run for your virtual life every moment of your game.
Just "chill" areas all over the world to hang out, play chess or checkers with friends/guild mates or to meet and make new friends(gee, maybe even create a community feel in the game!). There could be "fashion" shows(yes I know all you epeens love to show off your latest and greatest epic), pie(grog drinking) eating contests, and yes there could be some kind of buff or reward for participating but nothing game breaking, maybe use a roulette wheel or a shooting gallery with different cool items(nope no balloons.... think image items, perhaps tats or tiaras tho ) that you can try for once a day.
I'm sure everyone could come up with all kinds of ideas for developers to include in these type of areas, something appropriate for the genre of the game.
The last bit there is something that really annoys me in mmorpgs, for gawd's sake, why does every game seems to have to have fluffy kittens or bunny hats or neon coloured clothing/hair etc in them, let alone totally whacked out forms of travel. Whatever happened to games that stayed true to a specific genre instead of muddying the waters and diluting its style so much that it ends up having none at all.
ie. Historical/fantasy(old time stylized clothing, forms of travel like tamed live mounts, ships or using runestones and portals if the game has a magical component to it) and NO skateboards, mechanized hauling rigs, bikinis, etc.
Fantasy/fantasy(elves, goblins, fairies, dragons, unicorns, ogres, and the worst of them all, the humans!)
Steampunk, etc., is there a mmorpg that doesn't try to be all to everyone out there?
I think the reason so many miss the original UO and the original WoW mmorgs is because they used to be true to their stories and then they changed to something almost unrecognizable(Personally I liked having Trammel but then they did the neon and it all went downhill after that, with WoW the final straw for me was when they destroyed the world.. imo, for a crappy expansion).
There is nothing wrong with static things in games or in life, for me there's nothing worse than going back to visit a place from my youth to revisit/relive the good times and memories with friends and family... and it's gone, or sometimes worse, changed to something totally alien to what it had been. Something like what both UO and WoW had done that I believe is at least a good portion of what disenfranchized many of their loyal players.
Quite right Op, but if enough players accept cheap tinyworld derivatives they don't need those of us who realise how great a game a proper world makes.
Well first of all hardly anyone thinks the world should be dangerous and second why cant we have atleast a few newer mmorpgs the way we want them? You guys get plenty of barebones mmorpgs with the I win button and no consequence instant gratification crap, thats literally almost 100 percent of mmorpgs so why are you even complaining?
Originally posted by immodium Compared to the old MMO's the new MMO worlds are far more interesting to explore than the old ones.
Pssh. Why because they're prettier? Theres nothing to explore. At least in EQ, when I went roaming I found interesting and unique things. Not just mobs, the environment actually told a story without having to lead me around by the nose. Wander out into the wilderness, mind the random dangerous monsters that actually roamed around. Look, a strange faction of halflings congregating around a monument or shrine of some sort... and they don't like me even though I'm a fellow hobbit? Why is that? Oh that worship a different god? Look, a mob that is different than the others, and whats this, it drops rare items or offers rare quests? That kind of thing has been completely lost. Modern games are so generic, they couldn't give you depth unless they created a 500 foot crater in the middle of a map.
I just got done playing FF14 for the first time, and every single area for the first 20-30 levels looked the same, every monster was just used and reused throughout every zone, and every last one of them was static, had no other purpose than to be slaughtered. Each area surgically sectioned off with mobs increasing gradually in level from one spot to the next. No danger, no roamers, oh no! cant have that!!! Can't have anyone dying now can we?! Sure, the graphics and scenery are beautiful, what little you can actually explore that isn't partitioned off by invisible walls.
Far more interesting my ass.
You should try ESO. Then you may realize how pathetic in comparison EQ world is.
And to OP. SWG worlds are up there as the most bland to explore within the genre.
I disagree 100%. Yes ESO is far graphically more sophisticated, but EQ1 world is far more interesting as there's real feeling of danger - you can't just run straight through the mobs without fear of dying. EQ1 might look like crap, but the world has a real sense of challenge and danger which ESO does not.
Mobs in ESO leash, in EQ1 they didn't, a single 35 giant could wtfpwn a raid geared level 50 warrior solo. In ESO you can waltz through open world mobs without a care.
I've never understood this concept. So the ONLY reason a world is interesting is if when you leave your home your presented with danger?
No. Take Earth for example, a great world to explore. Even if I was the only living animal on the planet it would still be a great world to explore.
A great world does not need danger present.
That's why ESO world is far better to explore than EQ. If you remove the mobs/danger the world is far more interesting to explore.
And it's also prettier.
The ultimate reason these games fail to be worlds, including ESO and the newer MMORPG's is that I've lost 3 senses when I enter them, touch, taste and smell.
Originally posted by immodium Compared to the old MMO's the new MMO worlds are far more interesting to explore than the old ones.
Pssh. Why because they're prettier? Theres nothing to explore. At least in EQ, when I went roaming I found interesting and unique things. Not just mobs, the environment actually told a story without having to lead me around by the nose. Wander out into the wilderness, mind the random dangerous monsters that actually roamed around. Look, a strange faction of halflings congregating around a monument or shrine of some sort... and they don't like me even though I'm a fellow hobbit? Why is that? Oh that worship a different god? Look, a mob that is different than the others, and whats this, it drops rare items or offers rare quests? That kind of thing has been completely lost. Modern games are so generic, they couldn't give you depth unless they created a 500 foot crater in the middle of a map.
I just got done playing FF14 for the first time, and every single area for the first 20-30 levels looked the same, every monster was just used and reused throughout every zone, and every last one of them was static, had no other purpose than to be slaughtered. Each area surgically sectioned off with mobs increasing gradually in level from one spot to the next. No danger, no roamers, oh no! cant have that!!! Can't have anyone dying now can we?! Sure, the graphics and scenery are beautiful, what little you can actually explore that isn't partitioned off by invisible walls.
Far more interesting my ass.
You should try ESO. Then you may realize how pathetic in comparison EQ world is.
And to OP. SWG worlds are up there as the most bland to explore within the genre.
I disagree 100%. Yes ESO is far graphically more sophisticated, but EQ1 world is far more interesting as there's real feeling of danger - you can't just run straight through the mobs without fear of dying. EQ1 might look like crap, but the world has a real sense of challenge and danger which ESO does not.
Mobs in ESO leash, in EQ1 they didn't, a single 35 giant could wtfpwn a raid geared level 50 warrior solo. In ESO you can waltz through open world mobs without a care.
I've never understood this concept. So the ONLY reason a world is interesting is if when you leave your home your presented with danger?
No. Take Earth for example, a great world to explore. Even if I was the only living animal on the planet it would still be a great world to explore.
A great world does not need danger present.
That's why ESO world is far better to explore than EQ. If you remove the mobs/danger the world is far more interesting to explore.
And it's also prettier.
The ultimate reason these games fail to be worlds, including ESO and the newer MMORPG's is that I've lost 3 senses when I enter them, touch, taste and smell.
Your missing the point completely, allot of people actually do enjoy these kinds of games thats why rpgs like dark souls have such good rep. Now anyways the point in any rpg is to progress, but that progress needs to feel rewarding for example accomplishing surviving a dangerous world, your home is meant to be a break from all of that, a world can be beautiful and dangerous you know. How is skyrim not dangerous? You die and if you didnt save well there is a consequence of dying in a dangerous world. In a game with fighting it does need a sense of danger rather you agree or not.
If you literally just want to explore there is a new mmorpg that just came out with no combat and is a pure exploration mmorpg. I forget the name I hear it does well.
Originally posted by immodium Compared to the old MMO's the new MMO worlds are far more interesting to explore than the old ones.
Pssh. Why because they're prettier? Theres nothing to explore. At least in EQ, when I went roaming I found interesting and unique things. Not just mobs, the environment actually told a story without having to lead me around by the nose. Wander out into the wilderness, mind the random dangerous monsters that actually roamed around. Look, a strange faction of halflings congregating around a monument or shrine of some sort... and they don't like me even though I'm a fellow hobbit? Why is that? Oh that worship a different god? Look, a mob that is different than the others, and whats this, it drops rare items or offers rare quests? That kind of thing has been completely lost. Modern games are so generic, they couldn't give you depth unless they created a 500 foot crater in the middle of a map.
I just got done playing FF14 for the first time, and every single area for the first 20-30 levels looked the same, every monster was just used and reused throughout every zone, and every last one of them was static, had no other purpose than to be slaughtered. Each area surgically sectioned off with mobs increasing gradually in level from one spot to the next. No danger, no roamers, oh no! cant have that!!! Can't have anyone dying now can we?! Sure, the graphics and scenery are beautiful, what little you can actually explore that isn't partitioned off by invisible walls.
Far more interesting my ass.
You should try ESO. Then you may realize how pathetic in comparison EQ world is.
And to OP. SWG worlds are up there as the most bland to explore within the genre.
I disagree 100%. Yes ESO is far graphically more sophisticated, but EQ1 world is far more interesting as there's real feeling of danger - you can't just run straight through the mobs without fear of dying. EQ1 might look like crap, but the world has a real sense of challenge and danger which ESO does not.
Mobs in ESO leash, in EQ1 they didn't, a single 35 giant could wtfpwn a raid geared level 50 warrior solo. In ESO you can waltz through open world mobs without a care.
I've never understood this concept. So the ONLY reason a world is interesting is if when you leave your home your presented with danger?
No. Take Earth for example, a great world to explore. Even if I was the only living animal on the planet it would still be a great world to explore.
A great world does not need danger present.
That's why ESO world is far better to explore than EQ. If you remove the mobs/danger the world is far more interesting to explore.
And it's also prettier.
The ultimate reason these games fail to be worlds, including ESO and the newer MMORPG's is that I've lost 3 senses when I enter them, touch, taste and smell.
Your missing the point completely, allot of people actually do enjoy these kinds of games thats why rpgs like dark souls have such good rep. Now anyways the point in any rpg is to progress, but that progress needs to feel rewarding for example accomplishing surviving a dangerous world, your home is meant to be a break from all of that, a world can be beautiful and dangerous you know. How is skyrim not dangerous? You die and if you didnt save well there is a consequence of dying in a dangerous world. In a game with fighting it does need a sense of danger rather you agree or not.
If you literally just want to explore there is a new mmorpg that just came out with no combat and is a pure exploration mmorpg. I forget the name I hear it does well.
Originally posted by immodium Compared to the old MMO's the new MMO worlds are far more interesting to explore than the old ones.
Pssh. Why because they're prettier? Theres nothing to explore. At least in EQ, when I went roaming I found interesting and unique things. Not just mobs, the environment actually told a story without having to lead me around by the nose. Wander out into the wilderness, mind the random dangerous monsters that actually roamed around. Look, a strange faction of halflings congregating around a monument or shrine of some sort... and they don't like me even though I'm a fellow hobbit? Why is that? Oh that worship a different god? Look, a mob that is different than the others, and whats this, it drops rare items or offers rare quests? That kind of thing has been completely lost. Modern games are so generic, they couldn't give you depth unless they created a 500 foot crater in the middle of a map.
I just got done playing FF14 for the first time, and every single area for the first 20-30 levels looked the same, every monster was just used and reused throughout every zone, and every last one of them was static, had no other purpose than to be slaughtered. Each area surgically sectioned off with mobs increasing gradually in level from one spot to the next. No danger, no roamers, oh no! cant have that!!! Can't have anyone dying now can we?! Sure, the graphics and scenery are beautiful, what little you can actually explore that isn't partitioned off by invisible walls.
Far more interesting my ass.
You should try ESO. Then you may realize how pathetic in comparison EQ world is.
And to OP. SWG worlds are up there as the most bland to explore within the genre.
I disagree 100%. Yes ESO is far graphically more sophisticated, but EQ1 world is far more interesting as there's real feeling of danger - you can't just run straight through the mobs without fear of dying. EQ1 might look like crap, but the world has a real sense of challenge and danger which ESO does not.
Mobs in ESO leash, in EQ1 they didn't, a single 35 giant could wtfpwn a raid geared level 50 warrior solo. In ESO you can waltz through open world mobs without a care.
I've never understood this concept. So the ONLY reason a world is interesting is if when you leave your home your presented with danger?
No. Take Earth for example, a great world to explore. Even if I was the only living animal on the planet it would still be a great world to explore.
A great world does not need danger present.
That's why ESO world is far better to explore than EQ. If you remove the mobs/danger the world is far more interesting to explore.
And it's also prettier.
The ultimate reason these games fail to be worlds, including ESO and the newer MMORPG's is that I've lost 3 senses when I enter them, touch, taste and smell.
Your missing the point completely, allot of people actually do enjoy these kinds of games thats why rpgs like dark souls have such good rep. Now anyways the point in any rpg is to progress, but that progress needs to feel rewarding for example accomplishing surviving a dangerous world, your home is meant to be a break from all of that, a world can be beautiful and dangerous you know. How is skyrim not dangerous? You die and if you didnt save well there is a consequence of dying in a dangerous world. In a game with fighting it does need a sense of danger rather you agree or not.
If you literally just want to explore there is a new mmorpg that just came out with no combat and is a pure exploration mmorpg. I forget the name I hear it does well.
For me this is not the case. I found I could barely play ESO at all. It all feels very artificial like most MMOs do for me these days. (My opinion)
In EQ the world felt far more alive despite the worse graphics and animations.
The Witcher 3, Skyrim, and Grand Theft Auto 5, and Dark Souls games also do a much better job of making the world feel world feel enjoyable to explore despite the fact that there is fast travel and most things are marked on the map (if you consider that exploring :- ).
A lot of that has to do with the potential dangers, but also just know knowing what to expect in general. Usually in current MMOs the games are so structured that everything is laid out in a specific path for specific levels. There is no chance of coming across something that might present a challenge or something you shouldn't be doing yet.
If you read about explorers throughout history most of what drove them was the excitement of going into the unknown, not knowing what to expect, and the dangers that presented (not many were willing to risk it).
I remember back in the day, exploring the dark scary and harsh world of EverQuest. I wanted to explore, I wanted to stay in that world because it was so well realised and took me out of reality. When I played Star Wars Galaxies for the first time I got put down on Tatooine and I felt like I was in Star Wars, I could explore this open world. You had the atmosphere of all the ships flying above, the sounds of the creatures that had been tied up and the sounds of robots walking by.
My favourite though was World of Warcraft, it so helps when you have an IP that you already love, you know all these locations but now you can explore them yourself. The zone transitions were amazing, just seamlessly walking from Elwynn Forest to Westfall blew me away. I kept wanting to play that game just to see each new zone and having that amazing seamless transition each time. Going to Booty Bay on the boat was so amazing, in games now you'd click on an NPC and be teleported instantly, but in WoW you took a boat ride like EQ and took the journey. The Griffin rides were amazing too, being able to fly overhead of zones you haven't been to yet and just feeling the sheer size of the world, it made it all feel real.
That is what a new MMO has to do to capture me, sadly they all treat the world like it is getting in the way. They end up getting rid of it and before you know it you have something like SWTOR where you all stand in a hub and instantly travel everywhere. What is the point in an MMO Star Wars game then? I wanted to be in that world, instead I feel like I'm in a station where I just travel to barren levels to do a boring tedious quest. It's a weird situation where KOTOR and Skyrim offered a better MMO experience than the actual so called MMOs, you basically play modern MMOs solo these days as well.
MMO doesn't = a crap RPG full of tedious kill 10 rats quests, it = a world.
If you read about explorers throughout history most of what drove them was the excitement of going into the unknown, not knowing what to expect, and the dangers that presented (not many were willing to risk it).
Well, not exactly. As a former History teacher my reading on the subject of exploration suggests *most* were seeking fortune, social elevation, fame, or advancement in military rank or within their respective scientific community. Relatively few of the better known explorers sallied forth simply to see what was over the next hill. I know someone will toss out George Mallory's *Because it's there," but such sentiment is historically rare.
And this is the lesson that most world-creating game developers miss. There needs to be some practical motivation for exploring, such as the potential to discover some commodity that will materially enrich a player in a truly meaningful way, discovery of some terrain feature thereafter named for the player, or the ability to stake claim to a potentially valuable piece of land that can thereafter be developed through economic investment and toil.
I love an immersive experience as much or more than the next person, but exploration for exploration's sake alone quickly bores me; so do the artificialities of near-worthless found tokens scattered about a world, vis a vis the shards in TOR. A bit of risk during forays about a world is okay, but I certainly don't want to be attacked by marauding wolves (or mud crabs) at every turn. And exploration should have a physical price on the player-character also -- don't eat, can't find food or water, you die. Furthermore, difficult exploration should exact a temporary toll on stamina -- real exploration takes a toll on physical conditioning and so it should in an MMORPG.
As an afterthought, I've got to add that exploration, in most cases, was and is an expensive endeavor. An entire economic system is necessary to support exploration -- food and equipment provisioners, livestock brokers, guides, and armed escorts to name a few. The mere act of exploring game worlds could and should be a deeper enterprise, offering up endless game play opportunities.
If you read about explorers throughout history most of what drove them was the excitement of going into the unknown, not knowing what to expect, and the dangers that presented (not many were willing to risk it).
Well, not exactly. As a former History teacher my reading on the subject of exploration suggests *most* were seeking fortune, social elevation, fame, or advancement in military rank or within their respective scientific community. Relatively few of the better known explorers sallied forth simply to see what was over the next hill. I know someone will toss out George Mallory's *Because it's there," but such sentiment is historically rare.
And this is the lesson that most world-creating game developers miss. There needs to be some practical motivation for exploring, such as the potential to discover some commodity that will materially enrich a player in a truly meaningful way, discovery of some terrain feature thereafter named for the player, or the ability to stake claim to a potentially valuable piece of land that can thereafter be developed through economic investment and toil.
I love an immersive experience as much or more than the next person, but exploration for exploration's sake alone quickly bores me; so do the artificialities of near-worthless found tokens scattered about a world, vis a vis the shards in TOR. A bit of risk during forays about a world is okay, but I certainly don't want to be attacked by marauding wolves (or mud crabs) at every turn. And exploration should have a physical price on the player-character also -- don't eat, can't find food or water, you die. Furthermore, difficult exploration should exact a temporary toll on stamina -- real exploration takes a toll on physical conditioning and so it should in an MMORPG.
Biggest problem for me in most MMOs is they aren't really *persistent,* Player-characters should be at risk when they're not online, even in the most minimal sense. I certainly do believe this would foster greater cooperation amongst players and would make guilds truly meaningful.
Sorry to have gone far afield.
It depends on the culture a bit I suppose. Hunter gathers and Indians today explored to see what was over the next hill.
Your right that a large part of why people explored dangerous places was to gain something from it. Yet it was always risky which is why only a few people actually did.
Finding food, facing potential hostile/unknown enemies/creatures, and possible getting sick were all part of the dangers.
The point I feel is that danger, risk, and unknown are all big parts of exploration.
Originally posted by Scot Quite right Op, but if enough players accept cheap tinyworld derivatives they don't need those of us who realise how great a game a proper world makes.
I think people get confused over the meaning of what an MMORPG is and I also think that it's been so long since we had a true MMOORPG, that people accept what we have today as part of the genre.
I hate people who diss a world and say how something is crap because it takes too long etc etc. A good MMORPG will sell, just like how Elite Dangerous, EVE, Dayz, Minecraft, Dark Souls and whatever else sells. It's mostly time and place which changes peoples minds, I think right now is the time and place for a proper MMORPG.
I'm playing WoW Vanilla right now and it is packed, it's also amazing : mmorpg.com wants to ignore that this is happening and focus on the dying genre.
If you read about explorers throughout history most of what drove them was the excitement of going into the unknown, not knowing what to expect, and the dangers that presented (not many were willing to risk it).
Well, not exactly. As a former History teacher my reading on the subject of exploration suggests *most* were seeking fortune, social elevation, fame, or advancement in military rank or within their respective scientific community. Relatively few of the better known explorers sallied forth simply to see what was over the next hill. I know someone will toss out George Mallory's *Because it's there," but such sentiment is historically rare.
And this is the lesson that most world-creating game developers miss. There needs to be some practical motivation for exploring, such as the potential to discover some commodity that will materially enrich a player in a truly meaningful way, discovery of some terrain feature thereafter named for the player, or the ability to stake claim to a potentially valuable piece of land that can thereafter be developed through economic investment and toil.
I love an immersive experience as much or more than the next person, but exploration for exploration's sake alone quickly bores me; so do the artificialities of near-worthless found tokens scattered about a world, vis a vis the shards in TOR. A bit of risk during forays about a world is okay, but I certainly don't want to be attacked by marauding wolves (or mud crabs) at every turn. And exploration should have a physical price on the player-character also -- don't eat, can't find food or water, you die. Furthermore, difficult exploration should exact a temporary toll on stamina -- real exploration takes a toll on physical conditioning and so it should in an MMORPG.
As an afterthought, I've got to add that exploration, in most cases, was and is an expensive endeavor. An entire economic system is necessary to support exploration -- food and equipment provisioners, livestock brokers, guides, and armed escorts to name a few. The mere act of exploring game worlds could and should be a deeper enterprise, offering up endless game play opportunities.
I agree. Exploration should be one of the biggest game-play parts of an MMO that builds on "world".
Although I'd tone it down from realistic dangers from exposure by using well developed skills. In other words, a "ranger" should be able to find enough food and water for a number of explorers (if it's available in the terrain). Healers should be a big part of an expedition. But those skills should be very well developed and still have a chance to fail at least enough to cause characters to suffer some effects like lowered stamina.
Planning and funding an expedition should be game play too. Such things should add to success chances by the natural way of making survival more likely and adding to the time an expedition can be out there, as well as simply being effective. This would also be a natural way to make a big expedition something that groups do. Cities, guilds, religious cults, etc.
I'd also add that LORE can be a very exciting part of exploration and discovery. We're so used to lore with no game play meaning, but that should change. Lost secrets that can lead to finding a weakness in a powerful deamon, how to find secret treasure rooms in ancient ruins, there's no limit to what could be done in exploring the game's lore inside it's world.
Originally posted by Scot Quite right Op, but if enough players accept cheap tinyworld derivatives they don't need those of us who realise how great a game a proper world makes.
I think people get confused over the meaning of what an MMORPG is and I also think that it's been so long since we had a true MMOORPG, that people accept what we have today as part of the genre.
I hate people who diss a world and say how something is crap because it takes too long etc etc. A good MMORPG will sell, just like how Elite Dangerous, EVE, Dayz, Minecraft, Dark Souls and whatever else sells. It's mostly time and place which changes peoples minds, I think right now is the time and place for a proper MMORPG.
I'm playing WoW Vanilla right now and it is packed, it's also amazing : mmorpg.com wants to ignore that this is happening and focus on the dying genre.
I like the last paragraph (wink). I like true mmo's.
Last winter 5 of us at work played using Skype. This winter coming, we have 11 and growing. I think will have a lot more than that.
Horde this time.......FOR THE HORDE !!!!......Were also talking about all making Hunters with names Nancy1, Nancy2, Nancy3 and so-forth.....Not sure if were just kidding about the last part
Originally posted by Scot Quite right Op, but if enough players accept cheap tinyworld derivatives they don't need those of us who realise how great a game a proper world makes.
I think people get confused over the meaning of what an MMORPG is and I also think that it's been so long since we had a true MMOORPG, that people accept what we have today as part of the genre.
I hate people who diss a world and say how something is crap because it takes too long etc etc. A good MMORPG will sell, just like how Elite Dangerous, EVE, Dayz, Minecraft, Dark Souls and whatever else sells. It's mostly time and place which changes peoples minds, I think right now is the time and place for a proper MMORPG.
I'm playing WoW Vanilla right now and it is packed, it's also amazing : mmorpg.com wants to ignore that this is happening and focus on the dying genre.
I like the last paragraph (wink). I like true mmo's.
Last winter 5 of us at work played using Skype. This winter coming, we have 11 and growing. I think will have a lot more than that.
Horde this time.......FOR THE HORDE !!!!......Were also talking about all making Hunters with names Nancy1, Nancy2, Nancy3 and so-forth.....Not sure if were just kidding about the last part
WoW does have an amazing world. But for Sandboxers like myself the zoning ruins the ideal of "world".
But it goes to show you, no matter the type of MMO, putting lots of effort into the world building really pays off. While I wish someone would do that for a great Sandbox game, we may never know if that would bring as many subs as WoW had.
Originally posted by Scot Quite right Op, but if enough players accept cheap tinyworld derivatives they don't need those of us who realise how great a game a proper world makes.
I think people get confused over the meaning of what an MMORPG is and I also think that it's been so long since we had a true MMOORPG, that people accept what we have today as part of the genre.
I hate people who diss a world and say how something is crap because it takes too long etc etc. A good MMORPG will sell, just like how Elite Dangerous, EVE, Dayz, Minecraft, Dark Souls and whatever else sells. It's mostly time and place which changes peoples minds, I think right now is the time and place for a proper MMORPG.
I'm playing WoW Vanilla right now and it is packed, it's also amazing : mmorpg.com wants to ignore that this is happening and focus on the dying genre.
I like the last paragraph (wink). I like true mmo's.
Last winter 5 of us at work played using Skype. This winter coming, we have 11 and growing. I think will have a lot more than that.
Horde this time.......FOR THE HORDE !!!!......Were also talking about all making Hunters with names Nancy1, Nancy2, Nancy3 and so-forth.....Not sure if were just kidding about the last part
WoW does have an amazing world. But for Sandboxers like myself the zoning ruins the ideal of "world".
But it goes to show you, no matter the type of MMO, putting lots of effort into the world building really pays off. While I wish someone would do that for a great Sandbox game, we may never know if that would bring as many subs as WoW had.
With the resources they have, and the large audience they've had, I'd like to see what Blizzard could come up with for a UO2. I could even live with slightly cartoonish avatars, as long as they stayed mostly realistic looking and within the limits of the lore(no space aliens! nope, not even if Lord British brought any back on his way back from the moon).
The biggest problem I could see would likely be the server load if they tried to emulate UO's housing/vendor system(something that any UO would have to have as it was a core feature of the whole game) so I would imagine that might still require some zoning, unless they actually kept to the whole concept of the world having splintered into innumerable shards/servers and kept the populations on them small enough to handle it, even accounting for that, I bet they could make a pretty awesome sequel. They have the art work, the artists, the engine, the engineers and the expertise, they just need someone who knows the lore and the rights to do it.
I do hope they learned some lessons with WoW's garrisons and wouldn't try to carry that concept over. Vendors are one thing, but minions, no way. I even think having no AH per se, though some form of connected system for each house's vendors would be great(perhaps the vendors once registered could become part of a larger hub, though a lot of the charm was in having to drop runes for potential customers and if they liked your wares they'd keep it and become a regular customer. Plus it all helped with the economy, runes had to be made, marked, etc.)
Also, if someone doesn't want to actually play the game and would rather use cheats(exploits, hacks, scripts) to gain an advantage, then don't make it easier for them by providing minions to do the work, heck that's like giving everyone bot scripts with their blessing. Anything that is not meant to be part of the gameplay of any game should be quickly squashed and penalized. Re WoW though, no wonder people have been leaving in droves, players want to feel like they're a vital part of the world, even if it is inconvenient to have to go get those mats themselves or take out the garbage, kinda like marriage.;)
Comments
I self identify as a monkey.
Agreed, the definition of what kind of MMO is what RPG or BA stand for....
I also don't get why everyone seems to think that the whole world in the game has to be dangerous all the time, why can't there be areas that are just fun, no danger, no crafting, no gathering, just fun stuff ... mini game kind of stuff (similar to the DarkMoon Faire). Heck even in Harvest Moon it was nice to be able to not have the clock run down when indoors. It's not like you'd be forced to go to those places if you didn't want to and prefer to have to run for your virtual life every moment of your game.
Just "chill" areas all over the world to hang out, play chess or checkers with friends/guild mates or to meet and make new friends(gee, maybe even create a community feel in the game!). There could be "fashion" shows(yes I know all you epeens love to show off your latest and greatest epic), pie(grog drinking) eating contests, and yes there could be some kind of buff or reward for participating but nothing game breaking, maybe use a roulette wheel or a shooting gallery with different cool items(nope no balloons.... think image items, perhaps tats or tiaras tho
) that you can try for once a day.
I'm sure everyone could come up with all kinds of ideas for developers to include in these type of areas, something appropriate for the genre of the game.
The last bit there is something that really annoys me in mmorpgs, for gawd's sake, why does every game seems to have to have fluffy kittens or bunny hats or neon coloured clothing/hair etc in them, let alone totally whacked out forms of travel. Whatever happened to games that stayed true to a specific genre instead of muddying the waters and diluting its style so much that it ends up having none at all.
ie. Historical/fantasy(old time stylized clothing, forms of travel like tamed live mounts, ships or using runestones and portals if the game has a magical component to it) and NO skateboards, mechanized hauling rigs, bikinis, etc.
Fantasy/fantasy(elves, goblins, fairies, dragons, unicorns, ogres, and the worst of them all, the humans!)
Steampunk, etc., is there a mmorpg that doesn't try to be all to everyone out there?
I think the reason so many miss the original UO and the original WoW mmorgs is because they used to be true to their stories and then they changed to something almost unrecognizable(Personally I liked having Trammel but then they did the neon and it all went downhill after that, with WoW the final straw for me was when they destroyed the world.. imo, for a crappy expansion).
There is nothing wrong with static things in games or in life, for me there's nothing worse than going back to visit a place from my youth to revisit/relive the good times and memories with friends and family... and it's gone, or sometimes worse, changed to something totally alien to what it had been. Something like what both UO and WoW had done that I believe is at least a good portion of what disenfranchized many of their loyal players.
MMO games should ideally have a certain depth to the gameplay, without that the game world probably will seem repetitive, unoriginal and uninspired.
Things one would expect in a world:
- houses
- terrain
- animal life
- flora/fauna
- weather
- texture (wood, metal, cloth)
Even better:
- meaningful interactions with the environment
- environment destruction
- lore based world that make good sense
- emergent gameplay and world building
Things that ruin all of the above:
- gimmicks
- gimmicks
- gimmicks
Also, I think you game devs basicly suck.
Yes and my family would lose me for days in UO, partly because I didn't want to leave but don't tell them that ... xD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWPja_dwuO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHRhq8bc-58
I've never understood this concept. So the ONLY reason a world is interesting is if when you leave your home your presented with danger?
No. Take Earth for example, a great world to explore. Even if I was the only living animal on the planet it would still be a great world to explore.
A great world does not need danger present.
That's why ESO world is far better to explore than EQ. If you remove the mobs/danger the world is far more interesting to explore.
And it's also prettier.
The ultimate reason these games fail to be worlds, including ESO and the newer MMORPG's is that I've lost 3 senses when I enter them, touch, taste and smell.
Your missing the point completely, allot of people actually do enjoy these kinds of games thats why rpgs like dark souls have such good rep. Now anyways the point in any rpg is to progress, but that progress needs to feel rewarding for example accomplishing surviving a dangerous world, your home is meant to be a break from all of that, a world can be beautiful and dangerous you know. How is skyrim not dangerous? You die and if you didnt save well there is a consequence of dying in a dangerous world. In a game with fighting it does need a sense of danger rather you agree or not.
If you literally just want to explore there is a new mmorpg that just came out with no combat and is a pure exploration mmorpg. I forget the name I hear it does well.
I think we get your condescension just fine...
For me this is not the case. I found I could barely play ESO at all. It all feels very artificial like most MMOs do for me these days. (My opinion)
In EQ the world felt far more alive despite the worse graphics and animations.
The Witcher 3, Skyrim, and Grand Theft Auto 5, and Dark Souls games also do a much better job of making the world feel world feel enjoyable to explore despite the fact that there is fast travel and most things are marked on the map (if you consider that exploring :- ).
A lot of that has to do with the potential dangers, but also just know knowing what to expect in general. Usually in current MMOs the games are so structured that everything is laid out in a specific path for specific levels. There is no chance of coming across something that might present a challenge or something you shouldn't be doing yet.
If you read about explorers throughout history most of what drove them was the excitement of going into the unknown, not knowing what to expect, and the dangers that presented (not many were willing to risk it).
All this, and NO CASH SHOPS !
Well, not exactly. As a former History teacher my reading on the subject of exploration suggests *most* were seeking fortune, social elevation, fame, or advancement in military rank or within their respective scientific community. Relatively few of the better known explorers sallied forth simply to see what was over the next hill. I know someone will toss out George Mallory's *Because it's there," but such sentiment is historically rare.
And this is the lesson that most world-creating game developers miss. There needs to be some practical motivation for exploring, such as the potential to discover some commodity that will materially enrich a player in a truly meaningful way, discovery of some terrain feature thereafter named for the player, or the ability to stake claim to a potentially valuable piece of land that can thereafter be developed through economic investment and toil.
I love an immersive experience as much or more than the next person, but exploration for exploration's sake alone quickly bores me; so do the artificialities of near-worthless found tokens scattered about a world, vis a vis the shards in TOR. A bit of risk during forays about a world is okay, but I certainly don't want to be attacked by marauding wolves (or mud crabs) at every turn. And exploration should have a physical price on the player-character also -- don't eat, can't find food or water, you die. Furthermore, difficult exploration should exact a temporary toll on stamina -- real exploration takes a toll on physical conditioning and so it should in an MMORPG.
As an afterthought, I've got to add that exploration, in most cases, was and is an expensive endeavor. An entire economic system is necessary to support exploration -- food and equipment provisioners, livestock brokers, guides, and armed escorts to name a few. The mere act of exploring game worlds could and should be a deeper enterprise, offering up endless game play opportunities.
It depends on the culture a bit I suppose. Hunter gathers and Indians today explored to see what was over the next hill.
Your right that a large part of why people explored dangerous places was to gain something from it. Yet it was always risky which is why only a few people actually did.
Finding food, facing potential hostile/unknown enemies/creatures, and possible getting sick were all part of the dangers.
The point I feel is that danger, risk, and unknown are all big parts of exploration.
I think people get confused over the meaning of what an MMORPG is and I also think that it's been so long since we had a true MMOORPG, that people accept what we have today as part of the genre.
I hate people who diss a world and say how something is crap because it takes too long etc etc. A good MMORPG will sell, just like how Elite Dangerous, EVE, Dayz, Minecraft, Dark Souls and whatever else sells. It's mostly time and place which changes peoples minds, I think right now is the time and place for a proper MMORPG.
I'm playing WoW Vanilla right now and it is packed, it's also amazing : mmorpg.com wants to ignore that this is happening and focus on the dying genre.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
I agree. Exploration should be one of the biggest game-play parts of an MMO that builds on "world".
Although I'd tone it down from realistic dangers from exposure by using well developed skills. In other words, a "ranger" should be able to find enough food and water for a number of explorers (if it's available in the terrain). Healers should be a big part of an expedition. But those skills should be very well developed and still have a chance to fail at least enough to cause characters to suffer some effects like lowered stamina.
Planning and funding an expedition should be game play too. Such things should add to success chances by the natural way of making survival more likely and adding to the time an expedition can be out there, as well as simply being effective. This would also be a natural way to make a big expedition something that groups do. Cities, guilds, religious cults, etc.
I'd also add that LORE can be a very exciting part of exploration and discovery. We're so used to lore with no game play meaning, but that should change. Lost secrets that can lead to finding a weakness in a powerful deamon, how to find secret treasure rooms in ancient ruins, there's no limit to what could be done in exploring the game's lore inside it's world.
Once upon a time....
I like the last paragraph (wink). I like true mmo's.
Last winter 5 of us at work played using Skype. This winter coming, we have 11 and growing. I think will have a lot more than that.
Horde this time.......FOR THE HORDE !!!!......Were also talking about all making Hunters with names Nancy1, Nancy2, Nancy3 and so-forth.....Not sure if were just kidding about the last part
WoW does have an amazing world. But for Sandboxers like myself the zoning ruins the ideal of "world".
But it goes to show you, no matter the type of MMO, putting lots of effort into the world building really pays off. While I wish someone would do that for a great Sandbox game, we may never know if that would bring as many subs as WoW had.
Once upon a time....
With the resources they have, and the large audience they've had, I'd like to see what Blizzard could come up with for a UO2. I could even live with slightly cartoonish avatars, as long as they stayed mostly realistic looking and within the limits of the lore(no space aliens! nope, not even if Lord British brought any back on his way back from the moon).
The biggest problem I could see would likely be the server load if they tried to emulate UO's housing/vendor system(something that any UO would have to have as it was a core feature of the whole game) so I would imagine that might still require some zoning, unless they actually kept to the whole concept of the world having splintered into innumerable shards/servers and kept the populations on them small enough to handle it, even accounting for that, I bet they could make a pretty awesome sequel. They have the art work, the artists, the engine, the engineers and the expertise, they just need someone who knows the lore and the rights to do it.
I do hope they learned some lessons with WoW's garrisons and wouldn't try to carry that concept over. Vendors are one thing, but minions, no way. I even think having no AH per se, though some form of connected system for each house's vendors would be great(perhaps the vendors once registered could become part of a larger hub, though a lot of the charm was in having to drop runes for potential customers and if they liked your wares they'd keep it and become a regular customer. Plus it all helped with the economy, runes had to be made, marked, etc.)
Also, if someone doesn't want to actually play the game and would rather use cheats(exploits, hacks, scripts) to gain an advantage, then don't make it easier for them by providing minions to do the work, heck that's like giving everyone bot scripts with their blessing. Anything that is not meant to be part of the gameplay of any game should be quickly squashed and penalized. Re WoW though, no wonder people have been leaving in droves, players want to feel like they're a vital part of the world, even if it is inconvenient to have to go get those mats themselves or take out the garbage, kinda like marriage.;)