Gamespy:  MMORPG Remorse: 5 MMORPGs that would've been better off as single-player experiences

There's some significant names to that list of MMORPGs Gamespy laid out.  And further adds to my longtime complaint that MMORPGs more and more are essentially Single Player RPGs that just so happen to require an internet connection.

Massive

Multiplayer

Online

Role Playing Game

Thinking devs out there have lost what that means, especially the "Multiplayer" portion.  I know for a fact from experience some on that list can take you from Lv 1 to Max Lv without ever having to work with anyone.  Also, games that allow multiple characters per server further destroy any reasoning to even be part of a community, because with multiple toons, you can be totally self sufficient and not require the services of another.  It kills any chance of a true, player run game economy.  Even the "Massive" aspect has been under assault with all the attempts to seperate and devide the player community.  Very heavy instancing, PvP relegated to complete sideshows like a red-headed stepchild.  But it's been that way for years now.

I agree.

I also do not have the time to play the multi side of mmo's anymore. Life, Family, Work. So, it's kind of like an illusion that I'm still one of the cool kids!

I don't really play MMO's & go solo instead since i barely make it online, though I stay longer once I get to play. 

Of the five games, three of those games are pretty much total crap, so it's not really a fair article. With that said, I think both SW:TOR and DCUO are fun MMOs. I love a good single player RPG but I'm not disappointed in either of those two titles.

As you can see developers have been listening to the loudest complaints since let's say EQ1 and that's the reason why this genre is what it is today. Yes I know it sucks being a minority compared to when some of us have started in this genre when we where a majority in this genre.

People complained about not enough solo content.

People complained about camping.

People complained there weren't enough quests.

People complained the genre was to complex or to overwelming.

People complained about to much reading.

People complained about balance "why is class X stronger then class Z"

I could go on, but serieusly we all should have seen this coming way way back already, and yes I feel it's a shame that this genre turned out so incredible limited, but it is what the majority wanted and here we have it.

the games have been systematically dumbed down and leaned out into pure fucking garbage.

With the complaints leveled here already it's clear that this is really just a thempark vs. sandbox discussion in disguise.

This whole "themeparkization is killing mmos" debate is very narrow minded.

For all the talk so far about how great community is, there are far too many sandboxes that use community as an excuse to deliver really bad gameplay, and make it exceedingly hard to feel like you're part of a narrative.

We need to get out of these themepark vs. sandbox mindset, because both are inherantly flawed.

Well VOWs and in some cases sandboxes aren't really about dev defined narratives. I am not reading a book after all. EvE certainly feels like being part of a narrative, minus the player and corp names which are just annoying.

Originally posted by Reklaw

As you can see developers have been listening to the loudest complaints since let's say EQ1 and that's the reason why this genre is what it is today. Yes I know it sucks being a minority compared to when some of us have started in this genre when we where a majority in this genre.

People complained about not enough solo content.

People complained about camping.

People complained there weren't enough quests.

People complained the genre was to complex or to overwelming.

People complained about to much reading.

People complained about balance "why is class X stronger then class Z"

I could go on, but serieusly we all should have seen this coming way way back already, and yes I feel it's a shame that this genre turned out so incredible limited, but it is what the majority wanted and here we have it.

Limited? The genre solves all these problems you listed with new features and hard work. It is the way to go.  In fact, the future is the combination of MMO with SP RPG features or vice versa. Small group, co-op & pvp content on demand!

I have more fun with the genre 100x more than when UO & EQ first came out.

That list can probably be expanded a lot too.

In a few more years I will not reconize this genre.  The name "mmorpg" will just be an antique from a former era.  Any game that connects to the internet will have an "mmo" in front of it, MMO Madden 2015.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Well VOWs and in some cases sandboxes aren't really about dev defined narratives. I am not reading a book after all. EvE certainly feels like being part of a narrative, minus the player and corp names which are just annoying.

I agree that there can be more narrative in these games than those that are pre-defined by quests.

The problem is it's very inaccessible, and requires a lot of work to find. Some introverted types may never find it at all.

Of course the industry loves making MMOs for a reason: you can get a monthly subscription for your single-player game or you can have a cash shop in your single-player game ... and sometimes you can have both!

After all, someone needs to pay for the marketing campain. :)

Originally posted by Larsa

Of course the industry loves making MMOs for a reason: you can get a monthly subscription for your single-player game or you can have a cash shop in your single-player game ... and sometimes you can have both!

After all, someone needs to pay for the marketing campain. :)

Yet the playerbase seems to think that publishers/developers want to spend way more to make a game an mmo and have players quit within only 3 months as some sort of bassackwards money grab.

Originally posted by Sythion

Originally posted by Cuathon

Well VOWs and in some cases sandboxes aren't really about dev defined narratives. I am not reading a book after all. EvE certainly feels like being part of a narrative, minus the player and corp names which are just annoying.

I agree that there can be more narrative in these games than those that are pre-defined by quests.

The problem is it's very inaccessible, and requires a lot of work to find. Some introverted types may never find it at all.

I disagree. I am a huge introvert. Although I am also a huge nerd so I can construct my own individual narrative quite easily and I can literally see the story in my mind. FYI, my dragons are far more visually awesome than crappy WoW graphics.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Sythion

Originally posted by Cuathon

Well VOWs and in some cases sandboxes aren't really about dev defined narratives. I am not reading a book after all. EvE certainly feels like being part of a narrative, minus the player and corp names which are just annoying.

I agree that there can be more narrative in these games than those that are pre-defined by quests.

The problem is it's very inaccessible, and requires a lot of work to find. Some introverted types may never find it at all.

I disagree. I am a huge introvert. Although I am also a huge nerd so I can construct my own individual narrative quite easily and I can literally see the story in my mind. FYI, my dragons are far more visually awesome than crappy WoW graphics.

Originally posted by Sythion

With the complaints leveled here already it's clear that this is really just a thempark vs. sandbox discussion in disguise.

This whole "themeparkization is killing mmos" debate is very narrow minded.

For all the talk so far about how great community is, there are far too many sandboxes that use community as an excuse to deliver really bad gameplay, and make it exceedingly hard to feel like you're part of a narrative.

We need to get out of these themepark vs. sandbox mindset, because both are inherantly flawed.

Let me get this out of the way right now.  Between the Themepark vs Sandbox debate, I'm firmly in the favor of Sandbox.

That being said, this thread isn't about that.  It's about how MMORPGs have been trending heavily towards the Single Player side of the house.  Remember, we're talking about Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games.  This isn't Neverwinter Nights with its multiplayer capability.  This isn't Baldur's Gate with multiplayer.  We are talking about a genre that originally was about getting with a sh*tload of people and playing the same RPG in the same big world as everyone else.

I challenge you to show me in my initial post how this is a Sandbox vs Themepark thread.  This is about the "Massive Multiplayer Online" part of MMORPGs.

This genre, as has been pointed out by many in this forum, and in this thread's initial post, an article at Gamespy, are some nasty examples of MMORPGs being really SPRPGs.  Again, a few of these titles, especially SWTOR as No.1, are very significant or prolific genre titles.

Originally posted by Jakard

Of the five games, three of those games are pretty much total crap, so it's not really a fair article. With that said, I think both SW:TOR and DCUO are fun MMOs. I love a good single player RPG but I'm not disappointed in either of those two titles.

It doesn't matter if you think some of the titles are total crap.  What does matter are these games are really Single Player RPGs masquerading as MMORPGs.

Originally posted by Larsa

Of course the industry loves making MMOs for a reason: you can get a monthly subscription for your single-player game or you can have a cash shop in your single-player game ... and sometimes you can have both!

After all, someone needs to pay for the marketing campain. :)

And what is wrong with a FREE single player game with a cash shop?

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Larsa

Of course the industry loves making MMOs for a reason: you can get a monthly subscription for your single-player game or you can have a cash shop in your single-player game ... and sometimes you can have both!

After all, someone needs to pay for the marketing campain. :)

And what is wrong with a FREE single player game with a cash shop?

Nothing.

The issue is that in America, F2P versus P2P is very simila to community college vs college. At least in terms of the brand (I personally think ppl from CC are retards but the branding stigma is very similar between the two; I do not t hink F2P games are crap).

The issue with F2P games is that it gives the user a CHOICE. Choice is BAD.

Choice is bad simply because with the ability to spend $$$$, ppl go way overboard and then start screaming "I need to pay 1000 to win at this game".

-____-

Completely agree especially with The Old Republic. This is just more more preoof how devs abuse the mmorpg genre just for the money. Those ips are great ips but as single player games I think except FFXI which was an awesome mmo.

Originally posted by Warmaker

Originally posted by Sythion

With the complaints leveled here already it's clear that this is really just a thempark vs. sandbox discussion in disguise.

This whole "themeparkization is killing mmos" debate is very narrow minded.

For all the talk so far about how great community is, there are far too many sandboxes that use community as an excuse to deliver really bad gameplay, and make it exceedingly hard to feel like you're part of a narrative.

We need to get out of these themepark vs. sandbox mindset, because both are inherantly flawed.

Let me get this out of the way right now.  Between the Themepark vs Sandbox debate, I'm firmly in the favor of Sandbox.

That being said, this thread isn't about that.  It's about how MMORPGs have been trending heavily towards the Single Player side of the house.  Remember, we're talking about Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games.  This isn't Neverwinter Nights with its multiplayer capability.  This isn't Baldur's Gate with multiplayer.  We are talking about a genre that originally was about getting with a sh*tload of people and playing the same RPG in the same big world as everyone else.

I challenge you to show me in my initial post how this is a Sandbox vs Themepark thread.  This is about the "Massive Multiplayer Online" part of MMORPGs.

This genre, as has been pointed out by many in this forum, and in this thread's initial post, an article at Gamespy, are some nasty examples of MMORPGs being really SPRPGs.  Again, a few of these titles, especially SWTOR as No.1, are very significant or prolific genre titles.

Originally posted by Jakard

Of the five games, three of those games are pretty much total crap, so it's not really a fair article. With that said, I think both SW:TOR and DCUO are fun MMOs. I love a good single player RPG but I'm not disappointed in either of those two titles.

It doesn't matter if you think some of the titles are total crap.  What does matter are these games are really Single Player RPGs masquerading as MMORPGs.

Well essentially you can't have this talk without bringing up fundamental theme-park design as it stands today. As the focus on single-player activity is a direct result of what these games have focused on. Questing and pre-crafted content/experiences.