What's left to say that hasn't been said. I think there are just as many people playing them for years as there ever was.
Now this I can get on board with. As stated earlier, this is an anecdotal OP. I might well be wrong, it just seems to me that people come and go... or maybe the market has got larger and those people who stayed for years still stay for years, but there is a larger transient community that gives me a different impression.
There definitely is. Old games and new games are holding steady with 50-500k subs and they have for years. But games with more people than that have a bigger portion of people coming and going.
This also means that the longevity is the same and it means that more are coming and going. They are not mutually exclusive.
Different activities and different games and different IP will cause different reactions.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I have noticed as i get older i have less time to grind on most games so if it isnt more fast paced and insta gratification i usually cant get into it unless its runescape classic rscslay.com then i have time to grind on that all day lol
Combine that with more games to experience, The person themselves being different than they were 15 years ago, and more experience and you can see there are loads of reasons for this.
But the point remains the longevity is the same just not maybe for us anyone.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
In terms of MMOs, simple answer for me. Because they're all using too much instanced stuff, rather than making a world. Players are playing raids / dungeons, scripted encounters which are exactly the same every time and they never encounter anyone else but their group/guildmates.
People aren't "involved" in the game world, with the community as they were anymore because of this. Instanced content is the same as playing a server based FPS, or a MOBA. Look at Skyforge for instance (no pun intended). The only thing "MMO" about that game is the towns, even the "open world" areas have a cap of 32/64 players.
_________ Currently playing: Black Desert Korea (Waiting for EU)
Always hating on instances in MMOs! Open worlds, open PvP, territory control and housing please. More persistence, more fun.
As warbly an argument as ever. He gave reference in GDC articles by PWE on free to play gaming. Burden of proof has nothing to do with that, so mindlessly linking wikipedia about it is entirely inconsequential. Make a valid argument.
Try discussing things rationally instead of these baseless disagreements.
He made a claim. I disputed the claim and demanded evidence. The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. Either they substantiate their claim with evidence, or it's an unsubstantiated claim and can be ignored.
You not liking the source he mentioned, and refusing to do a simple google search even though he gave a particular name to utilize, is not his problem.
The fact you are more willing to spend time looking up meaningless wikipedia pages to link than to simply type "PWE GDC 'free play gaming'" is a unique level of obstinate behavior all it's own. The burden of proof was never a problem, acknowledging the delivery is.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
As warbly an argument as ever. He gave reference in GDC articles by PWE on free to play gaming. Burden of proof has nothing to do with that, so mindlessly linking wikipedia about it is entirely inconsequential. Make a valid argument.
Try discussing things rationally instead of these baseless disagreements.
He made a claim. I disputed the claim and demanded evidence. The burden of proof is always on the person making a claim. Either they substantiate their claim with evidence, or it's an unsubstantiated claim and can be ignored.
You not liking the source he mentioned, and refusing to do a simple google search even though he gave a particular name to utilize, is not his problem.
The fact you are more willing to spend time looking up meaningless wikipedia pages to link than to simply type "PWE GDC 'free play gaming'" is a unique level of obstinate behavior all it's own. The burden of proof was never a problem, acknowledging the delivery is.
hmm i see thread after thread end in nearly the same identical way ... very strange , there seems to be 1 common denominator , i cant quite put my finger on it tho ... ...
Yes .. yes Mr Axehilt you will need to provide links and evidence that the world was once flat or your case is without merit and substance .. or of course you could argue with Pythogoras and Aristotle ... but dam they wont be able to provide links either .. this is quite a conondrum
Want objective evidence? Here. Objective evidence showing several early cultures believed the earth was flat. The claims are backed by multiple sources.
So my case has substance and merit.
See how that works? You challenge my belief, I counter with strong objective evidence backed by multiple sources. And thus your challenge is completely defused, and my claim is substantiated. That's how rational discussion works.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Actually the whole "Earth is Flat" thing is widely exaggerated. It was never a real thing, Christopher Columbus thought that the world was smaller than everyone else did (so sailing West to Asia would be a good idea) but they all thought it was round and had done so for thousands of years.
For the rest, I would like to see that article too.
Right, and I never claimed medieval/enlightenment age cultures believed that (though certainly isolated pockets existed and still do). It's earlier and remote cultures, as mentioned by the wiki (link in my post above this one.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Yes .. yes Mr Axehilt you will need to provide links and evidence that the world was once flat or your case is without merit and substance .. or of course you could argue with Pythogoras and Aristotle ... but dam they wont be able to provide links either .. this is quite a conondrum
Want objective evidence? Here. Objective evidence showing several early cultures believed the earth was flat. The claims are backed by multiple sources.
So my case has substance and merit.
See how that works? You challenge my belief, I counter with strong objective evidence backed by multiple sources. And thus your challenge is completely defused, and my claim is substantiated. That's how rational discussion works.
You know that at the bottom of wiki they state the actual sources right. And those sources can be used in actual peer reviewed papers and journals and are considered credible for post grad work.
And as stated already and confirmed by your link the concept of a spherical world can only be traced back to 6th century B.C.
There were many many beliefs before and after then.
Post edited by VengeSunsoar on
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
You not liking the source he mentioned, and refusing to do a simple google search even though he gave a particular name to utilize, is not his problem.
The fact you are more willing to spend time looking up meaningless wikipedia pages to link than to simply type "PWE GDC 'free play gaming'" is a unique level of obstinate behavior all it's own. The burden of proof was never a problem, acknowledging the delivery is.
Right, hahaha! And I'm sure you'd accept me vaguely alluding to "this article I read once" as objective evidence proving my position, right? No? Well then we can't do that here either.
The truth and the value of directly-linked evidence isn't something that changes just because you like or dislike someone, Deivos.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Many years ago when I picked up an mmo I expected to stay there for several months at least. These days I barely expect to stay more than one. Why is this?
Possibly because you have skewed views and unrealistic expectations based on personal bias and ignorance of history. Another possibility is that marketing just works really well on you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
A big factor is fewer monopolies. Players who were mildly dissatisfied with Asheron's Call were like "oh, well I guess there aren't really any options on the market to play instead so I'll keep playing AC." (Or those of us who were significantly dissatisfied just went back to our RTSes and/or FPSes.)
Players nowadays have plenty of choice, so if a MMORPG fails to deliver they can quit and immediately play something else. Choice is better for players.
If you want to spin that as "over-saturation" and somehow imply it's a bad thing, you're free to. But competition is well-known to be predominantly a good thing for consumers.
The OP's monetization point only applies to B2P-only games. (Games with no ongoing fees.) These games have zero short-term incentive to retain players, because they make all their money at the start. So they only have a vague long-term reason to retain players (if players enjoyed game A a long time, they're more likely to buy game B, years from now.) Whereas for F2P and subscription games, as this article shows, mathematically any game with ongoing fees is much better off with higher retention. That article is for F2P games; obviously retention is much more important for subscription based games (where the ARPDAU will be dramatically higher.)
Timesinks were never "acceptable". Many of us who played games before MMORPGs knew that a good game doesn't ask you to sit around doing nothing (and it certainly doesn't then proceed to charge by the month, after intentionally delaying you.) But the lack of timesinks hasn't made players move on to other games, it's made them stay longer (as evidenced by how many more players stuck with WOW than with the earlier timesink-intensive games.) Players aren't playing these games to have their time deliberately wasted. THey're playing for some goddamn adventure, and if a game tells them "Sorry no adventure right now; stare at your spellbook instead" then that game is less likely to retain players.
You're posting stuff that goes against what many here want to believe. y u so evil?!?!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Yes .. yes Mr Axehilt you will need to provide links and evidence that the world was once flat or your case is without merit and substance .. or of course you could argue with Pythogoras and Aristotle ... but dam they wont be able to provide links either .. this is quite a conondrum
Want objective evidence? Here. Objective evidence showing several early cultures believed the earth was flat. The claims are backed by multiple sources.
So my case has substance and merit.
See how that works? You challenge my belief, I counter with strong objective evidence backed by multiple sources. And thus your challenge is completely defused, and my claim is substantiated. That's how rational discussion works.
There's an enormous difference between:
1) not knowing and likely not even caring about the global topology of the earth, and 2) insisting that the earth is definitely flat
If someone made a map of the solar system a thousand years ago, he'd include the sun, moon, earth, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and nothing else. (People could tell that these were different from the stars because they seemed to move relative to the stars, which didn't seem to move relative to each other.) Does that mean he was insisting that Uranus, Neptune, Ceres, etc. didn't exist? Of course not; a list of what you know is not insistence that there isn't anything that you don't know.
Drawing maps showing a flat earth proves nothing. We do that with maps today. Making a 2D map of a sphere is not a trivial thing to do, as a sphere is not contractible but nearly any useful map will be.
1) not knowing and likely not even caring about the global topology of the earth, and 2) insisting that the earth is definitely flat
If someone made a map of the solar system a thousand years ago, he'd include the sun, moon, earth, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and nothing else. (People could tell that these were different from the stars because they seemed to move relative to the stars, which didn't seem to move relative to each other.) Does that mean he was insisting that Uranus, Neptune, Ceres, etc. didn't exist? Of course not; a list of what you know is not insistence that there isn't anything that you don't know.
Drawing maps showing a flat earth proves nothing. We do that with maps today. Making a 2D map of a sphere is not a trivial thing to do, as a sphere is not contractible but nearly any useful map will be.
We're not talking about people who didn't think about the shape of the earth at all. We're talking about cultures known to have believed the earth was flat.
Why try so hard to find something wrong with it? It's known. We have evidence. It's a real thing that happened.
Instead, accept that strong evidence exists showing some people believed the earth was flat.
Then understand the point that was made: opinion does not dictate reality. Their belief that the earth was flat didn't make the earth flat.
So Formaldehyde's claim being backed by being a "widely accepted" opinion (which itself is an unsubstantiated claim) will not tell us the truth of the matter. Only objective evidence will.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You not liking the source he mentioned, and refusing to do a simple google search even though he gave a particular name to utilize, is not his problem.
The fact you are more willing to spend time looking up meaningless wikipedia pages to link than to simply type "PWE GDC 'free play gaming'" is a unique level of obstinate behavior all it's own. The burden of proof was never a problem, acknowledging the delivery is.
Right, hahaha! And I'm sure you'd accept me vaguely alluding to "this article I read once" as objective evidence proving my position, right? No? Well then we can't do that here either.
The truth and the value of directly-linked evidence isn't something that changes just because you like or dislike someone, Deivos.
When you provide a name and subsequent means for me to locate it, then it's rather literally the same as giving a bibliography on a paper.
It having a blue hue and being clickable is only for the lazy people who can't use google.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Not really. The bibliography provides the name date title volume and page number and author i in print. If on line it provides a wait for it... link.
The point is the person should not have to wade through 10 years and 50 volumes in print or 500k pages to verify it. That is the person making the claims responsibility.
The lazy person is the one making the claim without providing the proof.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I think the answer is really quite simple. It's who the games are designed to appeal to today vs who they were designed to appeal to in early 2000s (Size DOES matter)
Exactly. These older games had features aimed at a particular audience, so playing one may not feel like playing another. Now days it seems MMOs try to add features to be inclusive for every type of player, lose distinction and just feel incredibly generic.
Its kind of like those kids fun centers where you can shoot pool, play some games in the arcade, play laser tag, have a go on the go carts, etc. Which in itself is not a bad business idea, but the way the MMO market has gone about it would be like having twenty different almost indistinguishable fun parks opened in one town.
My analogy would be it's like back in the day when malls were a fun place to go, both alone and with a group of friends because they were full of all kinds of different stores and venues and people watching was still fun and non-threatening(other than the second-hand smoke that was still prevalent).
Some even had designated areas for local groups/schools/santa/easter bunny etc to put on special events, had dollar movie theatres, the one near me even had a bowling alley, plus a couple of banks, a food store, bakery and deli, a cool ice-cream shop, two specialty chocolate stores, a cafe, two game stores(one adult oriented and one specialty with mechano/trains/remote race cars etc) plus a general toy store that carried everything from checkers to video systems/games, a music store that even had instruments too, of course two anchor department type stores plus more!!
There was something for everyone, even if it was just a good place to hang out with your friends and girl/guy watch or make plans on how to spend your evening/weekend.
Now, there's nothing more than "specialty" clothing stores(usually catering only to children and young adults) and some form of food fair where the tables are so restrictive it's hard to even "group" with more people than the four seats attached to them, and all those fun stores.... gone and many of them permanently. Put out to pasture or swallowed by all the large conglomerates and the new outrageous rents the "new and improved" mall management teams have been told to charge, most certainly making it next to impossible for even the best of the best mom and pop type store to eke out a living while staying true to their clientele.
As for the fun place to hang out with your friends... not so much anymore either.
Comments
This also means that the longevity is the same and it means that more are coming and going. They are not mutually exclusive.
Different activities and different games and different IP will cause different reactions.
But the point remains the longevity is the same just not maybe for us anyone.
Because they're all using too much instanced stuff, rather than making a world. Players are playing raids / dungeons, scripted encounters which are exactly the same every time and they never encounter anyone else but their group/guildmates.
People aren't "involved" in the game world, with the community as they were anymore because of this. Instanced content is the same as playing a server based FPS, or a MOBA. Look at Skyforge for instance (no pun intended). The only thing "MMO" about that game is the towns, even the "open world" areas have a cap of 32/64 players.
_________
Currently playing: Black Desert Korea (Waiting for EU)
Always hating on instances in MMOs! Open worlds, open PvP, territory control and housing please. More persistence, more fun.
The fact you are more willing to spend time looking up meaningless wikipedia pages to link than to simply type "PWE GDC 'free play gaming'" is a unique level of obstinate behavior all it's own. The burden of proof was never a problem, acknowledging the delivery is.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
ahh well i get more popcorn
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
So my case has substance and merit.
See how that works? You challenge my belief, I counter with strong objective evidence backed by multiple sources. And thus your challenge is completely defused, and my claim is substantiated. That's how rational discussion works.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Right, and I never claimed medieval/enlightenment age cultures believed that (though certainly isolated pockets existed and still do). It's earlier and remote cultures, as mentioned by the wiki (link in my post above this one.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
lol pretty much near know one believed that crap .. just dum dum and with flat heads that quote wiki
And as stated already and confirmed by your link the concept of a spherical world can only be traced back to 6th century B.C.
There were many many beliefs before and after then.
The wiki objectively proves my claim.
Discuss what I've actually said, not what you wish I said. You're the only one talking about Columbus or that time period.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The truth and the value of directly-linked evidence isn't something that changes just because you like or dislike someone, Deivos.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You're posting stuff that goes against what many here want to believe. y u so evil?!?!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
1) not knowing and likely not even caring about the global topology of the earth, and
2) insisting that the earth is definitely flat
If someone made a map of the solar system a thousand years ago, he'd include the sun, moon, earth, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and nothing else. (People could tell that these were different from the stars because they seemed to move relative to the stars, which didn't seem to move relative to each other.) Does that mean he was insisting that Uranus, Neptune, Ceres, etc. didn't exist? Of course not; a list of what you know is not insistence that there isn't anything that you don't know.
Drawing maps showing a flat earth proves nothing. We do that with maps today. Making a 2D map of a sphere is not a trivial thing to do, as a sphere is not contractible but nearly any useful map will be.
Why try so hard to find something wrong with it? It's known. We have evidence. It's a real thing that happened.
Instead, accept that strong evidence exists showing some people believed the earth was flat.
Then understand the point that was made: opinion does not dictate reality. Their belief that the earth was flat didn't make the earth flat.
So Formaldehyde's claim being backed by being a "widely accepted" opinion (which itself is an unsubstantiated claim) will not tell us the truth of the matter. Only objective evidence will.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
It having a blue hue and being clickable is only for the lazy people who can't use google.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
The point is the person should not have to wade through 10 years and 50 volumes in print or 500k pages to verify it. That is the person making the claims responsibility.
The lazy person is the one making the claim without providing the proof.
Note: This is equally the fault of the players (oversaturated) and the devs (opting for known and easy).
Some even had designated areas for local groups/schools/santa/easter bunny etc to put on special events, had dollar movie theatres, the one near me even had a bowling alley, plus a couple of banks, a food store, bakery and deli, a cool ice-cream shop, two specialty chocolate stores, a cafe, two game stores(one adult oriented and one specialty with mechano/trains/remote race cars etc) plus a general toy store that carried everything from checkers to video systems/games, a music store that even had instruments too, of course two anchor department type stores plus more!!
There was something for everyone, even if it was just a good place to hang out with your friends and girl/guy watch or make plans on how to spend your evening/weekend.
Now, there's nothing more than "specialty" clothing stores(usually catering only to children and young adults) and some form of food fair where the tables are so restrictive it's hard to even "group" with more people than the four seats attached to them, and all those fun stores.... gone and many of them permanently. Put out to pasture or swallowed by all the large conglomerates and the new outrageous rents the "new and improved" mall management teams have been told to charge, most certainly making it next to impossible for even the best of the best mom and pop type store to eke out a living while staying true to their clientele.
As for the fun place to hang out with your friends... not so much anymore either.