MMORPG: Any good ones in the works?

[Arglebargle]

Yeah, I played Vanguard recently for about 6 weeks, and thought it was very good. Lots of depth and background, and worked fairly well for me.

It's a flaw of the MMO community, I think, to base all a game's rep on the release quality. Of course, it is a flaw of the devs/publishers/etc to push something out the door so poorly set up. But we continually chase after the new, and the developers keep pushing out the half baked goodies.

If they weren't so tied to their $15 a month format, something like Vanguard at $7.50 or $5 a month would probably be revitalized. I guess they worry that it might somehow invalidate their other $15 offerings.

 

[damocles]

Yeah, I played Vanguard recently for about 6 weeks, and thought it was very good. Lots of depth and background, and worked fairly well for me.

It's a flaw of the MMO community, I think, to base all a game's rep on the release quality. Of course, it is a flaw of the devs/publishers/etc to push something out the door so poorly set up. But we continually chase after the new, and the developers keep pushing out the half baked goodies.

If they weren't so tied to their $15 a month format, something like Vanguard at $7.50 or $5 a month would probably be revitalized. I guess they worry that it might somehow invalidate their other $15 offerings.

yeh, Vanguard is actually quite good now (not sure about high level content). If they had taken the time to finish the game pre-release it may have been moderately successful. I played the beta and was intending to buy until I found out how bad the final release was

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I've thought this for sometime why not mark down monthly charges on mmo's as they age, also why not charge a few extra dollars upfront for the first batch of new mmo's and give 3 month's free that way if crap doesn't work immediatly people wouldn't be so pissed off?

 

[Magusigne]

I've thought this for sometime why not mark down monthly charges on mmo's as they age, also why not charge a few extra dollars upfront for the first batch of new mmo's and give 3 month's free that way if crap doesn't work immediatly people wouldn't be so pissed off?

Firstly,

MMO's that have been around long enough to mark down there monthly fee know they are doing something right (like WoW) and can stick it to their customers as they have them hooked.

Starting MMO's typically want to take your money and run with it because they know that there MMO subscription will more than halve after the first month of subs. As they release partially completed MMO's with No end game created.

 

[I Saw OJ]

<--- is waiting for an MMO set in the Shadowrun universe.

 

[ahurtt]

Firstly,

MMO's that have been around long enough to mark down there monthly fee know they are doing something right (like WoW) and can stick it to their customers as they have them hooked.

Starting MMO's typically want to take your money and run with it because they know that there MMO subscription will more than halve after the first month of subs. As they release partially completed MMO's with No end game created.

I agree. Popular MMO's aren't going to start marking down their subscription fees until they see a critical mass of subscribers quitting while citing the reason "Too expensive" or start saying "going to play game XYZ" which only costs $X per month. After all this time, Wow is still so insanely popular they could probably actually get away with raising their subscription rates and still do just fine. Trust that when the time comes, they will do what the market demands though. These guys aren't stupid. They aren't going to forego easy profit just because their game is aging as long as there is no viable competitor taking away significant enough market share from them.

 

[VashHT]

Personally I'm waiting for GW2 to come out. The first one wasn't really a MMO but I still liked the pvp and pve better than any "real" MMO I've played. The 2nd one is supposed to be persistent world and be a true MMO, an I have faith that arenanet will actually make a MMO where the pve is actually fun and not just a boring ass grind to the endgame.

 

[Shyatic]

Personally I'm waiting for GW2 to come out. The first one wasn't really a MMO but I still liked the pvp and pve better than any "real" MMO I've played. The 2nd one is supposed to be persistent world and be a true MMO, an I have faith that arenanet will actually make a MMO where the pve is actually fun and not just a boring ass grind to the endgame.

Gonna be a monthly fee?

 

[VashHT]

Gonna be a monthly fee?

They keep saying it is going to be the same pay scheme as the first game, so no monthly fee.

 

[VooDooAddict]

I agree. However most people tend to equate hardcore with PVP. I want a hardcore PVE game where you can invest in the character etc. EQ still survives in some ways because of this.

The hard part is to build a sufficiently compelling game upon release and cater for a realistic fanbase.

This is why I've fallen for Eve.

There's some sufficiently hard PvE and there's more significant penalty for death than something like WoW.

The only "problem" that I sometimes have with Eve is that there's really no true Safe Zone from PvP. Sometimes makes it hard to bring in new people.

 

[Modelworks]

Not playing any of them because I haven't seen anything that breaks from the , player does quest, player kills mobs, player turns in items, player levels, player repeats mantra.


They all suffer from one big issue for me. They make the player be the one to make the game world come alive. You cannot depend on PlayerA to be the one to make the village with the merchant who is always the same, always says the same things , to be the one to make that area come alive. That is why so many MMORPG have lower level areas that are vacant. Why would I want to go do what I did 100 times before ?

I am waiting for someone to have the vision that the world they create needs to be able to come alive on its own, that the NPC need to be acting like players would be playing that role whether there is a player logged in or not. If I go to a village I want to see that merchant gone , gathering things to sell or fighting. The blacksmith needs to be gone to lunch or fighting with the man at the stables because he slept with his wife.

The way MMORPG are now is like the old days of theme parks. You go on a safari ride where you are stuck in a car on a track with cardboard cutouts that pop up and pre-recorded animal sounds.

When MMORPG catch on that they need close to life animals that don't just respond to scripts and triggers I'll come back to the genre. If the world of characters they create have no life of their own unless I give them one by clicking on them , then don't expect me to play.

 

[JoshGuru7]

The hard part is to build a sufficiently compelling game upon release and cater for a realistic fanbase.

Once this is done, your publisher will tell you that you are going to get killed in reviews for including corpse runs and that you would triple your sales if you reduced the death penalty dramatically. The hardest part is deciding you are willing to cater to a relatively small segment of the playerbase.

I've thought this for sometime why not mark down monthly charges on mmo's as they age

Monthly MMO fees are still relatively inexpensive at $15/month compared to substitute goods (purchasing other games). That equates to buying a new game every 3 months, and most people would be thrilled to have a single game purchase of $45 value entertain them for 3 months. As a result, design elements and production values are more important than small pricing differences ($0-$15). Consider that if pricing was the primary decision factor for MMO gamers then GW would have 10 million subscribers and WoW would have 200k.

also why not charge a few extra dollars upfront for the first batch of new mmo's and give 3 month's free that way if crap doesn't work immediatly people wouldn't be so pissed off?

Giving multiple months free may be a decent strategy but game publishers work hard at having their products consistently priced at the local gamestop regardless of quality and at great harm to the consumer. The reason that collector's editions and DLC exist is to allow them to deliver the base product at $40-$50. An MMO with an initial price of $70 simply wouldn't sell as well because "more expensive" comes across as a strong negative without the corresponding "but worth it" advertising campaign to back it up.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Someone could take Oblivion, expand the world to accommodate for hundreds of concurrent players, redo the combat system, redo the leveling / skill system, remove fast travel, and end up with a pretty damned good MMO. The biggest attraction, for me, would be the "living" NPCs. They're still all scripted, but it's leaps and bounds better over the static NPCs found in most MMOs today.

Pick-pocketing other players? Hell yeah.

 

[Stefx73]

Jumpgate Evolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumpgate_Evolution

Space fighter MMO where you have full control of the ship unlike EvE.

I stopped paying attention after it got delayed several times (and it's still not released). I check up on it once every six months or so.

 

[Sylvanas]

<--- is waiting for Bioware's Kotor MMO. The only company capable of making an epic storyteller and a possible WoW killer.

 

[JoshGuru7]

Is Aion still being played? Basically very similar to WoW with more emphasis on PVP, and the end game is supposed to be large un-instanced keep fights?

Yes it is, however it loses a significant chunk of subscribers around level 30 when they realize the level grind is actually a grind and that it is several steps harder than WoW.

 

[Modelworks]

<--- is waiting for Bioware's Kotor MMO. The only company capable of making an epic storyteller and a possible WoW killer.

Epic stories will never happen with the current mindset of the MMORPG market. It can't be epic or legendary if everyone gets to do it. If the game is designed so everyone is guaranteed they get to slay the baddest monster then there is nothing to make me care when it is slain or who did it. If however that monster is attempted by 20 people and the last person kills it and it stays dead then that person has done something epic or legendary. If it just respawns for the next player then who cares. Imagine watching a movie where everyone is the hero, that is what MMORPG are right now.

 

[damocles]

Epic stories will never happen with the current mindset of the MMORPG market. It can't be epic or legendary if everyone gets to do it. If the game is designed so everyone is guaranteed they get to slay the baddest monster then there is nothing to make me care when it is slain or who did it. If however that monster is attempted by 20 people and the last person kills it and it stays dead then that person has done something epic or legendary. If it just respawns for the next player then who cares. Imagine watching a movie where everyone is the hero, that is what MMORPG are right now.

The Sleeper event in EQ (original format) was a bit like that. You only got to wake the Seeper once. My whole server was pissed at the first guild that woke him (preventing access to all the goodies inside its tomb and stopping most of the server seeing the dragon rampage). Also EQ wasnt instanced (at least initially) so you had to compete to get to mobs (always fun having to mobilse a guild).

I'd like to see more unique content in MMOs but if you want to want to play the hero then single player is where it is at. I prefer playing in a community where team cooperation counts.

 

[Modelworks]

The Sleeper event in EQ (original format) was a bit like that. You only got to wake the Seeper once. My whole server was pissed at the first guild that woke him (preventing access to all the goodies inside its tomb and stopping most of the server seeing the dragon rampage). Also EQ wasnt instanced (at least initially) so you had to compete to get to mobs (always fun having to mobilse a guild).

I'd like to see more unique content in MMOs but if you want to want to play the hero then single player is where it is at. I prefer playing in a community where team cooperation counts.

Yes it can seem unfair when you are not the one getting the rewards. It breeds both contempt and respect depending on your view. I think the fear of alienating customers has caused developers to go too far to the everyone can be a winner side. There is little uniqueness in MMORPG games now . If you don't get the epic item then you can get one just like it but with a different name. They want everyone to be equal and that is really for single player experiences not one where you have hundreds of players. They added instancing as a middle ground but it still isn't the same because players realize what they do in an instance doesn't matter.

 

[damocles]

Yes it can seem unfair when you are not the one getting the rewards. It breeds both contempt and respect depending on your view. I think the fear of alienating customers has caused developers to go too far to the everyone can be a winner side. There is little uniqueness in MMORPG games now . If you don't get the epic item then you can get one just like it but with a different name. They want everyone to be equal and that is really for single player experiences not one where you have hundreds of players. They added instancing as a middle ground but it still isn't the same because players realize what they do in an instance doesn't matter.

I pretty much agree. I quit WoW because it basically involved sitting in a city waiting for instances to reset or PVP queues to count down. Unique content/accomplishments don't just have to just involve uber items - other rewards could be just as good