| 73 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
4/16/09 12:43:10 AM#26
If all else fails, remember, that there is still Katamari Damacy. Oh wai. The creator has ran out of ideas as well... MMOs won't evolve, as long as they're so money-driven. Let's just say that MMOs won't ever evolve. I hate WoW because it made my plush hamster kill himself, created twin clones of Hitler, punched Superboy Prime in reality, stared my dog down, spoiled my grandmother, assimilated me into the Borg, then made me into a real boy, just to make me a woman again. |
|
|
4/16/09 12:58:33 AM#27
Originally posted by shadowxdrago I read the whole post, but had to come back to this one. Personally, I'll leave the idea of "evolution" out of the conversation. Use it if you want, but everyone here should simply realize that all things evolve, period, if for good, bad, complexity, or simplicity. Goes for just about anything, especially gaming.
To address the above quote, all I can say is WTF? Please, point me to these advanced shooters that have somehow revolutionized the gaming industry. I don't see them. We left the world of Doom and entered Quake, which evolved into Half-Life and so forth. HL with its mods did more to advance shooters than anything I've seen since. Simply saying we went from Doom to Kill Zone 2 skips a whole lot in between. Saying that anyone's bringing something new with vehicles in shooters is absurd, also.
You want to talk about revolutionary and innovative, look at a game like Tribes, and further Tribes 2. You mention firing a "death disk thingy", I think of my old Spin Fusor that fired an energy-filled disc at your enemy, exploding on impact. None of this namby-pamby point and click BS where no leads were involved, and where you point the crosshair and miraculously, instantaneously hit precisely what you aim at. Bullets had travel times, 8 years ago. We've "evolved" into weaponery with munitions fired at, apparently, the speed of light. Vehicles? Tribes, again, had aircraft, tanks, tansports, teleports, mobile respawns, bombers, and the list goes on, nevermind that EVERY player had a frigging JET PACK and could FLY ... FLY. Move on a year, and you land on Battlefield 1942. Again, vehicular play, with aircraft in the form of WW2 fighters, bombers, jeeps, tanks, etc. etc. Then, go take a gander at PlanetSide. Mass scale shooter with entire planets it'd take you an hour to traverse on foot. Fights with hundreds of players at a time, again with vehicular ground and air combat, with a very nice balance to it all. All of which were moddable, save for PlanetSide, which even further allowed for innovation.
Leading to today. I recently got my hands on Call of Duty: World at War. All I can say is; garbage. The single player mission was a yawn-fest. The multiplayer is even worse. Maps are tiny. Smaller than Day of Defeat for HL1 tiny. Every single weapon in the game kills at such a rate that any retard can jump in and kill someone with a random spray of gunfire, and most every time it turns into a "who sees who first wins" sort of match. This is a game I was told was one of the best shooters available. Wow. Cramp me into a dinky room and run into insta-gib glory. Maybe I'm getting a bad impression off a poor game, but regardless, looking through a lot of different games, I don't see any that even TRY to offer what other games already have, and did so with as everyone points out, less resources.
Unfortunately, as a whole, shooters have evolved to cater to the slow, stupid, and short attention span. Where's the attraction behind such quick and instant kill action? It screams at the idiot who can't aim "Hey, you can still kill people here!" and tells the guy who wants to sprint around picking people off without caution or consequence "Hey, tactics, caution, or careful play don't matter here... blast your way to glory!". Please, oh PLEASE point me to a game that doesn't fall into that ridiculous style of play. I'll give you a dollar. Give me a re-packed Tribes 2.... oh yeah, it's too hard for average Joe, so noone bothers to even try making such a game anymore.
I'd go into RTS and single-player RPGs, but that's a whole other wall of text that noone will probably read, either. I'll just say that much like current MMO's, there's too much suckling, or to put it another way, hand-holding. Congrats to Fallout 3 for outstanding graphics. They might as well have included the yellow-brick road from start to finish, however.
...And Goronian's got it right, but it applies to all games, and I'll elaborate slightly. So long as any game shoots for mass-appeal or profits, they won't ever bring about anything revolutionary. In fact, until gaming companies go back to doing what they used to - creating games THEY wanted to play - the whole damn industry will flounder.
Hmm, what's on TV..... "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
|
|
|
Jackio81
 Novice Member
Joined: 11/11/08
The MMO genre as a whole is a running joke considering a 5+ year old game is so dominant. |
4/16/09 3:40:37 AM#28
You want to see the future direction of video gaming: Here it is.
Now make an MMO that looks and plays like that and I guarantee you it'll be the WoW killer...lol =P |
|
4/16/09 3:43:45 PM#29
Originally posted by altairzq
It has. It is easier and allow more casuals to have fun.
|
|
|
4/16/09 4:04:38 PM#30
Someone wrote a tiny article on just that, it's called "Evolution of Video Games": http://favoniangamers.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/evolution-of-video-games/ -- |
|
|
4/16/09 4:07:04 PM#31
Well I can atleast say there are some evolved games out there on console and pc, look at kotr and oblivion or even the witcher. Then you have games like bioshock it was evolved for a shooter but still a shooter, SOTC on ps2 lots of ps2 games where unique so was gc but now this gen there are many redundent skins many companies are using these tactics but they are starting to finally realize we are not stupid and are finding the games very boring and unworthy of our time and efforts.
I have a wii and I find allot of those games more unique then others even though the graphics arent all that great, I even have more fun with retro systems then the new ones at times what does that tell you? The only unique mmorpgs out there are probably text based if anything maybe eve even though I think its scam. And possibly vangaurd. I do think games are evolving just not as fast as people may claim or think. |
|
|
4/16/09 4:13:53 PM#32
The difference between EQ or UO in 1998 and say, WOW in 2009 is substantial. Unless you consider that you level up for exp in all MMOs as NOT evolving. With that sort of attitude, cars havent' evolved either because they're still mostly on 4 wheels, have 1 steering wheel and take you someplace. You've got a lot of tunnel vision is you think nothing has changed. EQ orginally had no in-game maps, no mini-map, just a few skills to use, very simplistic 1 dimentional classes, VERY little graphic variety, no tool tips, no soloing options, no instances, very simplistic animation, harsh death penalties, long wait times for everything, lots of downtime, very few quests, a giant screen hogging UI, only one way to gain EXP through spawn camping, no auction house, no mail system, no mounts, no grass, and many more frustrating characteristics. Is WOW anything like that now? Nope. MMOs have come a long way. Lets not get into FPSs. Unless, you consider them all the same because you aim and shoot. That also makes one a dimwitt. |
|
|
4/16/09 4:34:31 PM#33
Gaming has definately evolved. It used to be a hobby just for nerds; I can say that without fear of censure because I was one of those nerds. Now it's a mainstream hobby enjoyed by people from all ages and walks of life; oh, and some of us nerds still play too. The unfortunate thing is that in evolution there must always be dead ends, and the old hardcore nerdsquad seems to be going the way of the dinosaur. Adaption is the only logical course of action. Embrace the casual!  Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift |
|
|
4/16/09 4:43:00 PM#34
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr So... There are no more books being written, that cater to niche audiences, yet come off as briliant? They must've adapted as well! I hate WoW because it made my plush hamster kill himself, created twin clones of Hitler, punched Superboy Prime in reality, stared my dog down, spoiled my grandmother, assimilated me into the Borg, then made me into a real boy, just to make me a woman again. |
|
|
4/16/09 4:49:46 PM#35
Originally posted by Goronian
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift |
|
|
4/16/09 4:54:26 PM#36
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I'm sure that there'll always be evolutionary throwbacks for the "cling-to-the-past" types. Unfortunately, most of them will be treated like Darkfall; badly supported by the industry and investors, snickered at by the mainstream community and generally destined to suck. OBJECTION! New, fresh generation of gamemakers will come, with new ideas, that may catch attention of a major developer. A lot of now classic musicians/directors/writers came out seemingly out of nowhere in the Times Of Stagnation!
I hate WoW because it made my plush hamster kill himself, created twin clones of Hitler, punched Superboy Prime in reality, stared my dog down, spoiled my grandmother, assimilated me into the Borg, then made me into a real boy, just to make me a woman again. |
|
|
4/16/09 5:36:18 PM#37
Originally posted by Goronian
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift |
|
|
4/16/09 5:42:01 PM#38
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr Then we'll get the next evolution of MMOGs, where presumably the games play themselves and we just watch. Uh... Heh-heh... For your information, Shigeru Miyamoto is working on such a concept. No, I'm dead serious... Yeah... It's awkward.
I hate WoW because it made my plush hamster kill himself, created twin clones of Hitler, punched Superboy Prime in reality, stared my dog down, spoiled my grandmother, assimilated me into the Borg, then made me into a real boy, just to make me a woman again. |
|
|
4/16/09 5:44:35 PM#39
Graphics are evolving, but everything else seems stagnant or is devolving. =\ |
|
|
4/16/09 6:00:25 PM#40
Originally posted by nariusseldon
It has. It is easier and allow more casuals to have fun.
You are confusing "Evolved" with "Ruining". Common mistake made by your type, no worries. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
4/16/09 6:07:37 PM#41
Originally posted by Josher Which side are you arguing for? Nearly everything you mentioned either hasn't changed, or has changed for the worst, and made today's MMO's the simplistic whack-a-mole crap that they are today. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
4/16/09 6:40:33 PM#42
Originally posted by Abrahmm Which side are you arguing for? Nearly everything you mentioned either hasn't changed, or has changed for the worst, and made today's MMO's the simplistic whack-a-mole crap that they are today. Well, actually he lists how MMO's have evolved, which if that's his point he's correct. You do clearly point out what I agree with to be where they've gone wrong in a lot of cases. People are just confused by the whole concept of something evolving because they generally correlate evolving away from their ideals into not evolving at all. That's simply not true.
Anyway, quoted because I totally agree with you, even if I never played EQ, UO, or SWG. It might've been in this post somewhere (or maybe mortal online forums), but I read something recently and someone said that the idea of no mini-map or map is shocking, then someone argued that they are sick of controlling their characters by staring at the minimaps. I happen to agree with the latter. All too often I find myself not even remembering where I just came from without checking the map because I was so busy watching my little 2D arrow in the upper-right corner of my screen go to the big shiny dot I was heading to, rather than even take the time to notice the game world around me. And I swear, the idea of a game that plays itself while you simply sit back and watch doesn't surprise me at all. Mildly interactive TV - gaming's evolutionary future, I swear. "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
|
|
|
4/16/09 6:43:54 PM#43
Originally posted by Shiymmas Well, actually he lists how MMO's have evolved, which if that's his point he's correct. You do clearly point out what I agree with to be where they've gone wrong in a lot of cases. People are just confused by the whole concept of something evolving because they generally correlate evolving away from their ideals into not evolving at all. That's simply not true.
Anyway, quoted because I totally agree with you, even if I never played EQ, UO, or SWG. It might've been in this post somewhere (or maybe mortal online forums), but I read something recently and someone said that the idea of no mini-map or map is shocking, then someone argued that they are sick of controlling their characters by staring at the minimaps. I happen to agree with the latter. All too often I find myself not even remembering where I just came from without checking the map because I was so busy watching my little 2D arrow in the upper-right corner of my screen go to the big shiny dot I was heading to, rather than even take the time to notice the game world around me. And I swear, the idea of a game that plays itself while you simply sit back and watch doesn't surprise me at all. Mildly interactive TV - gaming's evolutionary future, I swear. You are right, I think the word "evolved" can be interpreted a few different ways. I think of it as "Advancing", but I haven't seen much of an advancement in MMOs. On the other hand, it could mean "increasing it's ability to survive", in which case MMOs have evolved, as the dumbed down game play caters to many more people than the past. I think Evolve is a bad word choice. Maybe advancement would be better. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
4/16/09 6:44:05 PM#44
I agree, MMOs have NOT evolved.....and that is part of what is causing this low period in MMO Gaming.... MMOs should have evolved in the last 5 years, but haven't. Sure some of the features have changed, game engines in some, but what MMOs could have been...that vision has been lost. |
|
|
4/16/09 6:49:01 PM#45
Originally posted by Gardavil
I agree, the vision has been lost. So many of these features that the newer gamers complain about, or that have been removed, had a purpose. Death penalties, downtime, they weren't just put in to piss off the players and make things take longer, they were put in to encourage socialization, introduce risk to balance the rewards, or to simply think twice before doing something stupid. Instead, today, we get the ultra casuals that bitch and moan about anything deemed "hard", pushing this genre further and further from all it could have been, all of it's possibilities. Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic |
|
|
4/16/09 6:56:14 PM#46
Mmorpg these days (not at all,some)suck, its simple ,its turned out on a big company who buy small company to make profits ,and f... their games.I still remember in the time when games was fun....now today it just meh.
|
|
|
4/16/09 6:57:06 PM#47
I think it boils down to that gaming companies no longer make these games as the engine to fuel the game they themselves want to play. The MMO industry has become big business - the potential to make a fortune, and most companies out there are trying to do just that by catering to the widest possible audience they can in attempt to make their profit margin that much higher. The problem then becomes that these games are created without much consideration to what may be fun. They're made with intent to manipulate people psychologically to chase that godforsaken carrot on a stick to keep those monthly fees coming in.
I made a long reply earlier in this thread about FPS games, and what it made me realize to some degree is that the first of games were the best for good reason. Half-Life was an amazing game, to be certain. However, a certain group of players decided to get together and create a mod for the game to their liking - Counter-strike. The reason that game was so wildly successful is that it was made by players, for players, for FREE. That those guys went on to commercial success was no miracle, because they were in touch with what players wanted, because they were players themselves.
What gaming companies have lost anymore is that connection. Anymore, it's some douche-bag game director trying to replicate the past successes of other games by replicating their successful features, all the while catering to the wider demographic in an attempt to boost the bottom line. They don't make games for the fun of it. In fact, I'd bet they do studies into the psychology of what ropes a player in and doesn't let them go, and exploit that to then Nth degree. Look at WoW. I'd guarantee they've studied that game inside and out to truly learn and exploit their players by now.
End of the day, I want games made by players, not some business that's only concerned about the bottom line. Those are the games that truly make it, because they're fun to play, but that's what's been lost, really. "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
|
|
|
4/16/09 6:57:49 PM#48
The answer is absolutely YES. I read most of the posts, but not all admittedly. Starting with making my own vids on a TI 99/4A and PONG....emphatically video games have changed YES. Go go bio-processors and holographix. What HASNT changed? There are still "good games" and "bad games"..
Add: Ever played "Pitstop" for the Apple II? mmmhmmmm |
|
|
4/16/09 7:12:32 PM#49
Speaking about MMOs I wouldn't say "evolved". That implies they have gotten better (which is subjective). As I see it they have: 1) Less detail oriented 2) More instanced 3) Smaller worlds 4) Become more "winnable" games than "lived in" worlds 5) Less polished on release (I'm not saying that the first gen was completly polished) 6) Based on a business philosphy based on immediate box sales as opposed to long term retention 7) Focused more on uber graphics than uber game systems 8) Developed more by corporate executives and shareholders than the old nerds and geeks who decided to take table-top pencil and paper gaming onto computers and online 9) Seen a severe loss of interaction and creativity on the part of both the dev teams and live teams 10) Instituted lackluster changes or "wtf" changes for the sake of change ("see, we did something to look like we're doing something") Obviously those are my opinions yet I don't feel that many of them are far off the mark. Especially if one has been playing MMOs since day 1 of Ultima Online. "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..." |
|
|
4/16/09 7:38:01 PM#50
Your just upset because your wrong about eq, I think the argument stands just fine.
EQ orginally had no in-game maps Oh no, you had to explore and find things on your own? Exploration is far more satisfying, but there where add ons to get maps but I believe you had to explore first, wow has add ons that are just add no exploration now with all the locs for everything. no mini-map Same as above You didn't need one it was easy to do /loc to find out if you where north east south or west or you can make a macro and it was more fun that way, you can also navigate by following the edge of the area and know where you are going or just by memory of the trails, oh and wait there where signs gasp! just a few skills to use No there where few skills with some of the melee classes but that changed later on, the spells would always change graphics and the name even though they where essentially the same thing for example your first aoe was shards of fire your second was bursts that exploded, wow only has the numbers change that is quite boring sorry, oh and on aoes you can tell exactly how far they spread very graphicly obvious. As compared to WoW, which each class has, what, 4-6 skills that they actually use? Right. very simplistic 1 dimentional classes The initial problem you are overlooking is that there are classes, not that they are simplistic. No in eq classes where very complex espically casters and it took hard work to get there variety of spells actually bards where pretty complex to so where other hybrids, I am not sure if your still talking about eq1 here but classes in eq made huge differences in groups and made you feel like you where seriously contributing to your groups im very serious it really made you feel that way wow is not even 2 percent of that feeling. VERY little graphic variety Not quite sure what you mean here. SWG had a ton of graphical variety in all of the different items, armor, and weapons a character could wear, not to mention decorate with. no tool tips What? no soloing options Soloing is always an option, just not optimal. Again another downfall of current MMOs no instances Awesome! very simplistic animation Again, SWG had better animations than any other game I've played, including WoW. harsh death penalties Awesome! long wait times for everything Oh no, socialization! I'm melting! lots of downtime See above very few quests I'd rather have very few boring, crappy quests, than a whole bunch of boring, crappy quests. Is WOW anything like that now? Nope. Unfortunately not. MMOs have come a long way. A long way down. |
|
