Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by pontifex, Feb 3, 2013.
Im waiting for The Elder Scrolls online.
It is supposed to have DAoC style RvR combat.
Somebody posted a few websites that track MMO numbers.
Looks to be pretty outdated but these were popular for a while:
I went back to the MMO that I quit playing the fastest since it's free now (TERA) and I ended up playing 1 day before I quit again. It's not a bad game now that it's free but it's just too grindy, the community still sucks (daily arguments about pedos), and it's more of the same.
Suppose I can get back into GW2 but I actually miss "the trinity".
How is the free version of it? What do they limit or whats the paygate?
Incorrect on the guild and long term stability. What other real challenge is there then? It is a MMO (see the first M) in which challenges will require at least multiple people. If fighting over an open world is engaging that many are looking for, then why do those games seem to do poorly now? Also exploring is not "a challenge", it is just a "movement grind" because you will be gated based on the difficulty of the monsters until you level up to be able to go to that area without being killed so easily. So all you did was take a nopen world, and gated it via difficult monsters instead of instances. Same 'problem' different way it was created.
I enjoyed the old school MMOs and I would call these advanced... so would anyone unbiased about when judging an MMO. Look at all the additions that have been added. These additions mean if new MMOs don't add something similar they will fall behind (because it is what the player base wants). Rift was hurting badly until they added a looking for dungeon option. Once something is very liked and successful, it becomes the "norm" in game genres. And that means all these changes to the genre, that have been well likd means the game is more advanced, as in many more changes from the previous MMO that were good.
There is risk vs reward. We all risk the most expensive thing in our lives playing the challenges. That is time. The time we play, playing the game. Can we get accomplished what we want in time? or will we spend too much time? Also, risk - reward, isn't very useful in MMOs anymore where losing something because of reason X, that took months to get, would mean an instant quit from that person. This is the new generation of MMOs. THis is how the businesses see the most success, and how the majority of players like it. This is the direction it is going. You do not have to like it, but it is what it is.
I cannot comment on how successful sandbox vs theme park MMOs are, but I have only played 1 ever MMO that was actually sandbox like. (GW2) Every other MMO I have played was gated. Either monsters were too high level for me to do anything about going that way, instances were too high level req, or I was not in a large enough group to do said issue. (MMOs I have played - EQ, EQ2, WoW, AC, AC2, Rift, Swtor, GW, GW2, One of those super hero ones.) EQ isn't sandbox. AC isn't sandbox. You were limited in movement by monster levels. Unlike a real sandbox like Elder scrolls, in which wherever you go, monsters and the environment more or less scale with your level. And thus you can go anywhere you want, and have a similar challenge, and not limited to going somewhere because of level. (However, in an MMO setting, this removes the feeling psycologically people enjoy when getting stronger, if the fights just stay challenging)
Also, how much it costs to make and run an MMO today, you better hope they can get almost at least 1 million subs, so they don't lose money on these investments. And to be fair your old MMOs are still there. They are what you want right? EQ and AC are still active. Go play them. Its not like they have gone deactivated.
I think the point is a lot of people want a new version of the old MMO's, i mean you like games right, pong is still there.
No, a lot of people don't. A lot of people assume majority, however majority doesn't. Does enough to warrent someone to make an MMO like that? Most likely. BUt not "a lot", as "a lot" like the casual friendly, hardcore competition nature WoW gives.
Plenty are tired of WoW, but they wouldn't want to go to an older version of an MMO, where it isn't casual friendly, as majority of MMO players are just that casuals, or bad, or love to just troll in a starter zone with jokes such as the xbox 360 one.
Just to clarify, I am not disagreeing that one shouldn't be made, because I would try it (I try to try all MMOs now, because I am still looking for one that satisfies my solo playing, my large group playing, my achievement/exploration hunting, and many mini games to play at the same time.) I am just disagreeing with your usage of "a lot" and most people who think that a lot of people would like what they do, usually are just projecting their expectations onto others.
I like almost everything, only thing my "arguement" is, is using the factual stats available for MMOs that succeeded, failed, or became out of date.
A lot can mean different things. Back when EQ came out it had "a lot" of subscribers 100k, then it hit 200k that was huge for the time.
A lot does not have to mean 13 million people, but people do wish for the yester years. Most know it will never happen, its not cost effective to produce something to what is now a niche crowd.
I don't have the time to play a true EQ like MMO like i did when i was younger, days of camping stuff for over 2 RL days, being the first 50 on my server, and being in the top raid guild on the server for the first 3 years. Was a great feeling at the time, getting the first Cloak of Flames drop, strangely is a event that i will remember for a long time no matter how much "sucess" i have in real life. The amount of work, and teamwork it took to be sucessful and in the top tier was pretty crazy back then, i still have friends from back then i still talk to a lot now.
Same, from every MMO I put a decent chunk of time into, I still have people I talk to with regularly. Even though we do not play together anymore. a few Of them I have played with for close to 7 years on different MMOs.
We are different kinds of players. Your definitions are a little off though. GW2 is definitely not a sandbox or even close. Our definitions on many things and opinions on design are different.
Couple things I would say though:
1. It's not fair to say an old school sandboxy games aren't made because they are unsuccessful. There hasn't been one made since 2004 that isn't full loot pvp. They haven't been made because all AAA studios are looking to steal a portion of the WoW playerbase, and they believe that emulating that game in a different setting will work.
2. Can't go back and play those old MMOs, it's just not the same now. Those players are mostly max level so leveling up would be a solo affair, and even at max levels it would be hard to find a guild/group.
3. It's going to take SOE taking a chance to make an older style MMO (which they're hinting at) or an Indie studio to make one. It doesn't have to take many millions of dollars to make a MMO. It has taken 100+ million to make a MMO recently, but it's just unnecessary. For a sanboxy MMO there doesn't need to be voice acting, doesn't need to have graphics better than anything out there, doesn't need a tv marketing blitz, doesn't need a lot of things that these themepark MMOs do.
Bottom line, I just want a game made for gamers like me. We're out here waiting and waiting.
Or just play Eve Online and be happy.
I felt most games did better with a steady group, DDO however really excelled with a steady group though, better than other games, still have my best memories from those years.
#1) I never said they were not successful, I am saying it is like wanting to use an abacus, because you felt like that was the better way to go, instead of a small calculator. They were fun and great when they were the only choices, but once more choices that were more appealing to the masses showed up, they started using that. That then becomes the genre norm, and going backward 9 times outta 10 is a dumb business decision.
#2) Sure you could, but its not what you want. You want a game like that which is popualr enough for you to enjoy it. Which is what I am saying probably will not happen, because that is not the popular way of playing MMOs anymore.
Yes and I want a game made for gamers like me too. However a game that would totally lose me, wouldn't be highly popular. Thus I have to comprimise and enjoy games that are close to it.
I am willing to bet, even if SoE was to attempt an older style MMO, they will still have some of the newer tools involved. And it takes a lot of computation power to do a sandbox non instanced world for mutliple people to play on effectively. So it doesn't need voice acting and such to be expensive.
Which brings me to your #3 which I do not think you understand. My argument is never that it wouldnt be cool for every choice of MMO be made for every gamer to find their favorite, like older MMOs remade. However it has been shown statistically that the WoW/Rift/(recently) GW2 style is the popular and smart decision style to go with, because if the older MMOs were the more popular choices to go, they would still have plenty more subs/players than they do now. And businesses need to target the largest audience available, or the top people of the corporate will say no thank you. (and indie developers normally do not have the funds and process/running power for a MMO size of a game)
There is no processor computation issue with a sandbox MMO or an Indie developer. They use less textures and the Hero Engine is a cheap license. Cost does not need to be many millions of dollars. Non instanced worlds are still separate zones, just no loading screens once you get towards the borders of those stitched together areas.
I don't get what your hangup with the realization that people who want old school types of MMOs aren't going to play something 10 years old with a player base that is all max leveled and extremely dated optimized engine and outdated graphics. Those games not having huge populations prove nothing regarding the demand for that type of game.
The percentage of people having broadband internet prior to WoW was about 1/4th of what it is now, and the media blitz and minstreaming MMOs that started with WoW has also brought many people to play these games that either couldn't, or didn't know about them before.
There are definitely more than a few hundred thousand MMO players who want an old style MMO. That's all it takes to be successful as long as a company doesn't go all hollywood and spend as much as SWToR did. Look at that game, over 150 mil spent and has ~500k players now a year after launch.
WoW/GW2/etc are a smart business decisions for a company, but that doesn't give gamers a great game, just a good enough game. In my mind, I think of it like McDonalds doesn't have the best burgers just because they sell the most. Ultra high popularity doesn't mean a better burger, just means it's more convenient and accessible.
I just wanted to say that I've given a try to Tera Rising (F2P now), since two days or so by now. I have created two characters, one of which is Level 30 now (Aman Lancer). I remember trying Tera Online very soon after it was released, or perhaps it was a few days before its release, but it was a trial version, which was something like a year ago or so (not sure anymore). I remember back then that I really liked the dynamic combat system but I knew I wouldn't spend much money (if at all) for a subscription-based game, which I ended up doing (I.E. not buying it).
Well now I can enjoy the full game and I must say that I'm having a blast with it. I really like the class I'm leveling now (Lancer, I.E. "Tank"), and my second character won't wait too long before I give that one a go as well (Healer). I won't write a novel about it (not sure how I can resist doing just that right now, it's difficult!) but generally speaking it's a good game and so far it keeps surprising me. I think that - overall - it's all about the combat system, and probably the animations and, well general graphics, art style and presentation. Seriously that seamless travel system on a winged-horse is just ridiculously good to look at. And Velika feels like an airport with all those flying horses constantly "taking off" and "landing" on the main platform, it helps give the impression (not "illusion") of a breathing and very active game world. Anyway, the only thing so far that "annoys" me just a bit (but I live with it, after a while it's ok) is the complete lack of lateral/diagonal animations. I mean it's not like it's "bad", there's just none at all. I forgot about that part when I started this F2P version, because that trial a year ago gave me the impression that their animations were simply either not completed or not "finished" by the time that their trial was out (which could have been possible back then). I mean... well I thought that they would have found the time and would have had the money and animators alike to work on that after a year? No? You know, just adding some animations here and there? I guess it wasn't a priority for them or their animators cost them too much. But yeah anyway it's "ok".
It just looks weird at the same time though because, basically, the animations that do exist are just awesome, they're smooth, and although certainly not "realistic"' they are very stylized and some of them of course being exaggerated. But I mean in terms of animation quality (not "realism") they are great. But then you see someone fighting, or a horse galloping around and they don't "turn" around, they just change direction suddenly, *bam*, now faces left, *bam* now faces forward, *bam* the guy pressed 'S' now horse suddenly faces forward but on the opposite direction (without animation transitions). It's... how can I put it, it's "harsh" on the visuals I guess, or the immersion if you prefer. It's like a modern game but its animations are stuck back in 2000 or something, feels weird. But outside of the animations (lack thereof) for specific movements of characters (and mounts) there's really nothing so far that bugs me much, if at all. There's one thing that I must say, however. It's about the trinity system of most MMOs (you know, Healer, Tank, DPS). Well, I also play GW2 occasionally lately (played it a lot for a good two weeks almost non-stop after release though) and I must say that I missed the trinity system. I wasn't even sure about it myself since other than GW2 the other MMOs I was also playing weren't exactly functioning the same way as a true classic trinity system MMO would (similar but not exactly the same).
Now with TERA it's just clear, direct and straightforward. You know what you want to be, or what you need to do dungeons, want to DPS? Well, do that, want to Heal? There's a class just for that, want to tank then go Lancer it just screams for it. In GW2 everyone is basically their own "healer" and everyone can be an off-tank or everyone can be "dps", while at the same time none of them are necessarily just focused on one, even if you do "spec" that way it doesn't feel right, or at least not like a true trinity system, which of course was ANet's actual goal. But in TERA it's just refreshing, I just missed it, when I thought that I didn't... so I guess I need to appreciate both games differently. I still like GW2 mind you, in fact I think GW2 is a great game (and erm... there's lateral animations in that one... En Masse, just so you know). But yeah anyway, as a tank it's a blast and I can't wait to try my healer soon.
Again, you keep projecting you expectations and standards on others. With all there is to do on WoW and GW2 I find them vastly superior than EQ and AC ever was. And that is what makes them a great game (to me, my opinion). Instead of just going and fighting monsters and getting the best gear you can. Sure at their time EQ and AC were AMAZING (Eq more than AC), but that was then. And without the Boost to exploring a whole new idea of a game genre (MMO) that one would get excited about, these games wouldnt do well like that anymore.
No one ever said the best games are the most popular. But business models don't aim for the "best" game. They aim for the most popular (example: Call of duty 217) What can they do to make as many play, enjoy, and be used to sell other merchandise on. When WoW can make 4.5 million dollars selling a $10 digital companion pet that does nothing but look cool, its the smart business decision.
Companies don't go "Oh look, approx. 400,000 people want an EQ like game, we should make one for them and barely pull a profit for many years worth of work putting it together"
SWtor made the same mistake Elder scrolls is getting ready to. They are going to take a game that is very popular single player, and turn it into a MMO that destroys most of the fun/good things the single player game had.
And you can say I am hung up on why you won't play a game 10 years old. But again I will ask, if that is the kind of game you want why not play it? I enjoy old N64 games and such because those are games of that genre I enjoy (goldeneye, diddy kong racing, etc.). However your issue with playing it, is it would be no fun "since everyone is full level and no one would really be around to play with me" which goes back to me saying you want a game like that, that is popular. However a game like that would not last after the first few months unless they were to do some of the newer innovations set in to allow more casual play, thus ruining the type of game you described you wanted.
Edit: If you want me to say it more blunt, you are sounding like one of those grandfathers that say: "Back in my day....." Gibberish that means nothing, because we don't live in the past, we live in now.
You are going to hate me, but I am having a hard time picturing this. Anyway to explain it better? Because this sounds interesting to just watch happen/not happen.
Haha, yeah ok.
The best way to understand it is to watch footage of TERA gameplay on YouTube or something. But the best way I can describe it is as follows:
The characters and mounts don't actually "turn" with animation transition on their torso, or legs, or feet, or nothing at all. No "body parts" are animated for "turning" around. So, basically, if you press 'W' to move forward but you decide to press 'D' at the same time (while holding 'W') to move diagonally then your character (or mount) will suddenly face the last direction of the key input you pressed. The character won't actually move diagonally, it's just changing its angle abruptly and still faces forward and goes where you pressed 'D' would lead you. I mean not even their heads look left or right (neither the character's nor the mount's), you always "face forward" and you never "look left" or "turn left", ever, forward... always forward... to destiny and beyond my friend, forward towards the LIGHT!
Ok I'm a bit tired...
Anyway, as I said, just watch some gameplay on YouTube and you'll see it.
I feel terrible for saying this but the only MMO that would ever topple World of Warcraft is a Pokemon MMO and sadly, Nintendo is either too stupid, too scared, or too incompetent to do it. If they made it for the Wii U, Nintendo would be printing so much money, they might as well start printing their own currency.
But it's never gonna happen. :'''(
When you find it, PM me please......
Hah for sure
I don't like the newer style of mmorpgs like Tera where you have to keep moving. I have enough trouble trouble remembering what skills are when and when to use them without having to add in movement too.
and then forcing you to use hotkeys sucked. don't force me into a play style.
My favorite MMOs have been DAoC, WoW (1st 6 months from launch) and Rift (1st 3 months from launch).
I never played EQ when it was popular. I tried it several years later, like after WoW came out. I just couldn't get into any of the others I listed. They just didn't have that "magic" that those 3 had.
Best MMO I've ever played.
Easily the best and most compelling MMO on the market, the community as well is fantastic :