Man, how many times must I find myself rushing to see the screen-shots of some past, current, or future MMO in order to decide if I want to play it or not. How many other people do this? They are, IMHO, a complete waste of time when it comes to telling you about the most important aspect of any MMO, the *playability*, or just, the "game" itself.
Worse yet, concept art. Oh gawd, who the hell cares? I know I don't. Why would I want to look at anything besides the finished product that I'll definitely see again when I launch the game on my PC?
I personally download and try almost every MMO available. I hold back on the retail box games and subscription games until a free trial is available (unless I was a beta tester, and have a good feel for the game already). I've made the "ooh, but look at the screen-shots" mistake one too many times.
So many games have pretty graphics, and "awesome" screen-shots, just to find out that the playability is actually near 0. How many f2p games have YOU downloaded based on screen-shots, just to uninstall the "game" the next day (or worse yet, 5 minutes after logging in and "playing" the so-called game).
I'm a veteran gamer, and remember when game demos didn't take up 1 gig+ to download, then some 10-20 minute install and setup (getting a game account and all that hassle), just to try the game out. It used to be so easy to quickly get up and running with a demo not so many years ago and be able to truly judge if you are going to want to play this game some more (by buying or subbing it) or not.
Now we have near constant dev chats, concept art, screenshots (which you may NEVER see in the shipping game), and posts by 12 year olds who have never played a single MMO saying "this game pwns!!!" and so on. Sometimes, luckily, we get free trials here and there (which I don't call free if you need a credit card and actually will be billed if you don't cancel your "free trial" you just had to sign up for).
I've personally downloaded over 30 f2p games, beta tested about 20+ retail and f2p games, mostly based of pretty screenies, that I uninstalled in 5 mins to the next day or so (max) because the gameplay was laughable. The same goes for "free" trials of "retail" or sub-based games.
What's wrong with a "demo server"? We could download a MUCH smaller client, log into the very limited demo server - say, with an included tutorial,1-3 maps max, a max level of 5-20 (based of the type of MMO of course), and supply only a 1 week of playtime with auto account deletion (for those that want to abuse the server).
Maintenance would be next to 0 for such a small server, and this server is the advertising for a company's game, so it would be worth the time and money required to get it going and keep it running, FULL-TIME.
I say forget posting 1000 screenshots of your game, concept art, empty promised in dev chats, and let us actually try your game for free, for a week, and let us decide that way, by actually PLAYING the game, to see if we like it or not!!
Enough said, for now...
agreed
Wed Feb 06 2008 4:38PM ReportI'm with ya on this boat, like you many f2p games i dled due to screenshots or mixed hype, within 5-10mins of logging in already uninstalling the game.
The reason though for a demo server is 1 it will cost the same rate for a regular server -minus the access bandwidth, if you think servers are cheap you got another thing coming. 2 it's something a developer doesn't want to screw with, it's just another added annoyance to add to the list. 3 to cut up an MMO is more work then its worth and most program it to be one big chunk this is why some trials allow you in the world but only let you lvl so far. A level stop is an easy fix but to chop up the game is not.
I am however in agreement to subscription games having trials to try out the game, it's only fair if we going to pay for the product to know what the hell it is. I mean you go to home depot to buy a screw driver you're free to test and look at it and the different choices before buying it, why not in the MMO world?
Theres many MMOs and Games Ive bought on impluse that didnt even last that day, to name a few RF Online and the mistake of buying their counter product Archlord, which now both are f2p cause they can't get people to pay for the damn things.
Anyway good thought.
Wed Feb 06 2008 4:50PM Reportagreed...
Videos show a lot more than screenies,
When I first started looking into LOTRO I was like "Wow..." after playing it I said "God damn its better than it looked" but due to a lack of hardcore play and not just my kinda game, I kinda quit...
Though I might resub just for the heck of it, till something else comes out.
Wed Feb 06 2008 5:54PM ReportI agree to you to some extent but not all. What I really like is they will show advertisements for some game... all in 3D... only to view the screen shots ... and its all in 2D and looks like completely poop.
Being a chick Im kinda picky about the games I like to play. I like those cute cartoon style characters that I can change the clothes of personalize with different things like.. different shoes, armors, clothes, hats... or whatever.
If I dont care how a screenshot looks, I wont bother with the game. I gotta like what Im looking at if Im going to waste my time and money on it.
Wed Feb 06 2008 5:59PM ReportYeah, I'm about the same. I really don't need to play a trial to tell if the game has playability though. I just go to a bunch of gaming review sites like Metacritic, Gamespot, etc and read the player reviews. Reading a single review isn't enough because it could just be a matter of that person's opinion. You can usually find game's flaws and strengths by reading a bunch of reviews and seeing what they have in common.
In my opinion, game play does matter but I won't play a game with graphics that don't appeal to me. (I don't mind 2D games but I hate poor choppy 3D graphics)
Wed Feb 06 2008 9:36PM ReportI don't trust screenshots, or even video. For me graphics are a very distant second to gameplay. All of the pretty pictures in the world do not make a bad game fun. I can, however, still enjoy a well done game with dated or only mediocer graphics.
Diablo is still fun, and its not because of the pretty pictures.
Wed Feb 06 2008 9:43PM ReportScreens and videos are pretty subpar examples of a game.
First, Screens show us NOTHING about the game at all. Most just show off a particularly pretty part of the world. Using WoW as an example...it would be akin to showing a gorgeous screen of the outlands instead of Durotar...which is essentially miles of barren rock.
Second, and this ties to screens, videos are often taken on company rigs from company servers. Naturally, latency and graphics look good because these rigs are top of the line and are located mere FEET from the servers. It gives a poor showing of how the game will actually be in regards to lag and visuals on the average PC.
Gamplay should always be paramount in making decisions about games....and tragically we can only get that kind of feed back from actual players. This happens to be why most MMO's have strict NDA's during beta, it bottlenecks poor feedback until they can make changes.
Thu Feb 07 2008 9:28AM ReportI actually like looking at art, but that's because I just like most of the art that comes out. It's also a way to tell people "yes, we're actually working over here!" I've yet to see art match what you see in-game though for MMOs.
As for releasing screenshots, it's a way to say to gamers "hey, we have something that's working!" as well as give them an idea of the mood and general looks of the game. It's a teaser. Plus, trying to dig through all of the MMOs can be tough. Screenshots at least give you a little idea (I know a lot of people who don't like "cute" looking games, so they immediately avoid games with that look).
I completely agree though that no video, art, screenshot or review will ever tell you what you'll think of the game. It used to be that games offering up one week trials early on was a sign that the game wasn't doing well, but slowly but surely we're seeing good, solid games releasing trials because they know that a lot of people aren't convinced by screenshots... they want to try the game. Hopefully this trend will continue on in the future.
Thu Feb 07 2008 9:56AM ReportThe problem tends to be:
Games with good graphics are grindfests or have crappy engines
Games with crap graphics actually have something decent behind.
Now if we could only mix and match a bit ;)
Also I hate click to move, that is a major downer for me in many F2P, it just feels like you have no control of your char.
Thu Feb 07 2008 11:49AM ReportFor me, it's easy.
I never buy anything that isn't a AAA title (i.e. from a major developer) unless there is a free trial that does NOT require credit card information.
I'll most likely buy AoC and WAR without ever playing them (unless you let me into beta PLEASE!) just because of the reputation, hype, and status as AAA titles.
But, I admit, dropping 50-60$ on a game I'll tinker with for a month before shelving doesn't make a dent in my pocket book, so why not?
Thu Feb 07 2008 12:50PM ReportI'm pretty much the same as heerobya in that if it isn't AAA, I'm not interested. The reason being that there hardly has been any innovation in gameplay since WoW with AAA titles so I already have preety much an idea of what the gameplay is like. "Think like WoW". The suits in these companies are too afraid to allow their devs to innovate.
As for F2P, I won't waste my time. The fundamental truth is that if people think they can get money out of someone, they will. If these guys don't believe their product isn't at a level to where it can command a fee, then they aren't making a product that is worth my time.
Thu Feb 07 2008 2:58PM ReportI agree with the 2 people above me. Except I wouldn't have really called EverQuest or Dark Age of Camelot AAA titles when they first came out. No one really knew who Verant was and Mythic had just made decent single player games.
Fri Feb 08 2008 12:25PM ReportMMORPG.com writes:
Login or Register to post a comment