Originally posted by rdrakken

Originally posted by dave6660

I'm really looking forward to the day this happens.

I agree that the genre would be better off if it was just the computer nerds and dungeons and dragons types.

 Computer nerds and D&D types are the cause of the MMORPG market being what it is.

EQ became the "standard" because all the D&D nerds flocked to it making it far more popular than the games that most of you are screaming for...Asherons Call "sandbox", Anarchy Online "modern and different"..then came DAoC and the nerds flocked to it, a EQ clone...another D&D style game and the die was cast for the genre. WoW, Warhammer and most other major MMOs are all cloned from EQ.

If you look outside the box that EQ created, the Asherons Call and Anarchy Online players...they fall outside the mold that is the EQ type. They are more action oriented and Sci-fi fans, sword and sorcery/holy trinity is overdone, overrated and vastly limiting.

You're taking what I said a bit too literally.  I should of said "die hard rpg fans".  It has nothing to do with the themepark vs sandbox holy war.

That was a small market though.  So they expanded to try to attract the action, RTS and FPS crowds.  Mix all those genres and play styles together and pour it out into the steaming mess that is todays mmorpg genre.

Honestly, how much "rpg" is left in todays so called "mmorpgs"?

Originally posted by lizardbones

This is not 1983. The environment is not the same as it was then, especially for MMORPG. It takes 10 million dollars at a minimum to build one. The market is not going to get supersaturated when it costs that much. Not only that, most of those 'fail' MMORPG are still running and still collecting money. That's not something that happened in 1983. The money isn't leaving the MMORPG genre, so there's probably not going to be a crash. If anything, there are more people than there ever have been playing MMORPG.

If there is a crash, you won't see Indie developers rise from the ashes. It's not going to suddenly cost one million dollars instead of ten million dollars to make an MMORPG. Take a look at the Indie MMORPG right now, and that's pretty much what you're going to see if there's a crash in the MMORPG genre, only worse. If the Indie developers are writing something you want to play right now, they're not going to write something you want to play if the entire market for MMORPG crashes.

That doesn't mean that the current crop of MMORPG are the best ever. We're just not headed for some kind of crash.

The business cycle always has booms and busts.  To think there won't be another crash is naive.  Most economist thought the same way about the housing market not too long ago.  Nobody ever expects it until it happens then the 20/20 hindsight makes the warning signs obvious.

The video game industry is due for a good shake up.

Originally posted by rdrakken

Originally posted by dave6660

I'm really looking forward to the day this happens.

I agree that the genre would be better off if it was just the computer nerds and dungeons and dragons types.

 Computer nerds and D&D types are the cause of the MMORPG market being what it is.

EQ became the "standard" because all the D&D nerds flocked to it making it far more popular than the games that most of you...

Nah, I disagree.

EQ did not create 'the standard'. It set the blueprint for WoW to follow but on it's own it would not have dictated such a narrow game design in the way that we have seen... it was popular, but not THAT popular. On it's own it would never have triggered the cash grab we have seen. That can only be put at the feet of WoW.

With no WoW we would have seen a lot more diversity post EQ, and if EQ2 had still only performed as well as it did the MMORPG gaming space would have looked very different now.

It was the mainstream (the non nerds that all of a sudden latched on to the 'new' fad and wanted to use their shiney new internet connections for something) and the cash they brought that has defined the genre. Just because EQ was copied by WoW you cannot say it was responsible for creating the gold rush that has strangled the genre for the last decade or so.

You are blaming the wrong game, and blaming the wrong user base.

Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 

---

Originally posted by gieger808
I have questions though. How is it that they don't know they are making bad games? Aren't they paying attention? Why aren't they smart enough to see that the WoW effect* can't be dupicated?

---

They may not be getting WoW numbers, but they are making money. That seems to be good enough for them.

 

Good or bad is subjective. Metacritic scores and sales are not. No one thinks they are making bad games just because you think so.

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by gieger808

They homogenized the genre in an attempt to attract as many people as possible.

~and thusly there is no really difference between one or the other anymore.

The only thing that satisfies now are the indie or risky projects that go out on a limb to be different.

Different != good. How many indie projects fail?

Plus, are AAA games really the same? The first Dead Space is fresh and different. The first Bioshock is fresh and different. The first borderland is fresh and different.

---

Originally posted by gieger808
I'm talking about the death of niche gaming. Sandbox, pvp, pick your poison. The idea that you need to pick a style, and do it well has all but disappered.

---

Theres already a thread for debating sandbox vs themepark.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/317478/Sandbox-vs-Themepark-Discussion-Thread.html

Actually it has the feeling of 1982-1983 with regard to video games.  This was when the crop of third party atari games and poorly made first run games pretty much gave video games a bad name.  Everything fell to sequals and knock-offs and the innovation lacked.  People just thought the cash would flow in forever -- then everything crashed.  Things were pretty bad for video games for a while and it took Nintendo including a silly robot just to get NES into the stores.  But things worked their way back again.  Problem is the USA lost the market.  Seems so very similar to the MMOs today.  It is 1983 all over again.  But 1985-1986 wasnt that far away then.  I predict we will get out of this but we will have a few dark years doing it.

At some point MMORPG players are going to realize a fundamental truth that MMORPG's are boring.  They will stop killing 10 wolves and turn off the computer.   The majority of MMORPG's will fail and the genre will die out.  Then it will make a glorious return with some real innovative indie games, which will start small and then skyrocket in popularity.  I have foreseen it. 

Originally posted by Xiaoki

 

---

Originally posted by gieger808
I'm talking about the death of niche gaming. Sandbox, pvp, pick your poison. The idea that you need to pick a style, and do it well has all but disappered.

---

So, your argument is that MMORPGs are dying because sandboxes are better than themeparks?

 

Theres already a thread for debating sandbox vs themepark.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/317478/Sandbox-vs-Themepark-Discussion-Thread.html

No, I think you missed the point.

He's talking about doing one thing and doing it well.  As opposed to trying to cram as many features into one game as possible but doing none of them well.

Cool, the doom-mongers made a thread, again.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by GTwander

Originally posted by gieger808

They homogenized the genre in an attempt to attract as many people as possible.

~and thusly there is no really difference between one or the other anymore.

The only thing that satisfies now are the indie or risky projects that go out on a limb to be different.

Different != good. How many indie projects fail?

Plus, are AAA games really the same? The first Dead Space is fresh and different. The first Bioshock is fresh and different. The first borderland is fresh and different.

Of course different doesn't always mean good.  But at least they're trying to come up with new ideas.  Ok so some of them fail but others will succeed.  According to the Small Business Association a new business has about a 50% chance of success after 5 years.  I give them a lot more credit than those who blatently copy the current fad.

Originally posted by Vesavius

 

Nah, I disagree.

EQ did not create 'the standard'. It set the blueprint for WoW to follow but on it's own it would not have dictated such a narrow game design in the way that we have seen... it was popular, but not THAT popular. On it's own it would never have triggered the cash grab we have seen. That can only be put at the feet of WoW. 

 You are flat out wrong.

EQ did set the standard. A standard is whatever it is for that TIME, not ALL time. DAoC was a flat out EQ clone with more options, which set the standard for its time...which WoW then followed to set its standard.

And as for the "it was popular, but not THAT popular" comment...EQ had over 700,000 subs at its peak, more than all western MMORPGs at the time combined. It was the WoW of its time...

Comparison.

EQ = 700k+ subs,

AC1 = 100k at its peak, AO = 30k after its first month and the next 1+ years, ultima online = 300k'ish at its peak

It wasnt until DAoC was released that the western MMORPG world surpassed EQ1s sub numbers and by then, the craptastic limitations brought on by EQ 1 became the norm. Deal with it.

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by Vesavius

The continued push of games into the mainstream and the quest for that money spinning 'broad appeal'...

Yeah, it's crap.

Smaller budgets (with less expectations attached) with more focused target audiences are definitely what I would like to see, but the trouble with that is the stunning lack of tolerance for anything short of perfection from the player base.

They want indie niche sensibilities with AAA size budgets, and the two don't marry well.

To be honest, the genre needs to just die in terms of the mass market and get back to it's nerd grass roots. Get back to the same type of guys that found it in '97-'99.

 

 

 

 

 

Back around 1983 the video game console market crashed in the NA market and many felt it was largely due to:

"there were several reasons for the crash, but the main cause was supersaturation of the market with hundreds of mostly low-quality games which resulted in the loss of consumer confidence."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983

I almost feel like the MMORPG genre is rapidly reaching this same state. Sure, you could argue the quality is not really suffering (at least mechanically) but in terms of variety it certainly seems to be in a downward trend in a flooded market.

The good news is that if it crashes and burns, usually out of the ashes we see a rebirth of originality, so perhaps letting it all fall down and go boom would be the best thing for the genre as a whole.

 

 

 

I hope it happens, it will clean out the market and get rid of all these WoW clne MMOs and random Korean MMOs... not saying I hope the people behind these games to get fired or anything, but like a forest, it needs to burn every once in a while to stay healthy.

I'm still waiting for some indie to make a exploration and hunting MMO. I wanna camp out with my hunting party and fish and run a bait shop. pure PVE no PVP

and i want run my own bait shop gun shop and just build a camp fire. then jump on the ATV and ride someplace new. sounds niche but man I wish.

---

Originally posted by dave6660

---

Originally posted by lizardbones This is not 1983. The environment is not the same as it was then, especially for MMORPG. It takes 10 million dollars at a minimum to build one. The market is not going to get supersaturated when it costs that much. Not only that, most of those 'fail' MMORPG are still running and still collecting money. That's not something that happened in 1983. The money isn't leaving the MMORPG genre, so there's probably not going to be a crash. If anything, there are more people than there ever have been playing MMORPG. If there is a crash, you won't see Indie developers rise from the ashes. It's not going to suddenly cost one million dollars instead of ten million dollars to make an MMORPG. Take a look at the Indie MMORPG right now, and that's pretty much what you're going to see if there's a crash in the MMORPG genre, only worse. If the Indie developers are writing something you want to play right now, they're not going to write something you want to play if the entire market for MMORPG crashes. That doesn't mean that the current crop of MMORPG are the best ever. We're just not headed for some kind of crash.

---

The business cycle always has booms and busts.  To think there won't be another crash is naive.  Most economist thought the same way about the housing market not too long ago.  Nobody ever expects it until it happens then the 20/20 hindsight makes the warning signs obvious.

The video game industry is due for a good shake up.

---

Nice pun on tribes, blue plate special is an award in the game for disc killing another with a direct hit.

Originally posted by dave6660

That's because it's not.  Greed has been a constant in human history.  Something else changed.

The only thing that changed is developers realized they weren't limited to a few nerds and geeks playing these games, they could have mainstream success and plenty of money instead of a tiny trickle that UO and EQ had.  Money has ALWAYS been the goal of game developers, people are fooling themselves thinking otherwise.

I have a feeling the next big WoW level MMORPG will be the facebook of MMORPG's.  The failure of Sims Online is largely what's holding back  the AAA social games from being made.  But I can see a largley graphical social site/sims builder/corporate advertising/real shopping/cash shop/minigame MMORPG happening.

MMORPG genre isn't going to crash unless it gets too big to support itself.   Too many generic games not enough players to support each one.   

http://www.mogstat.com/ Originally posted by rdrakken

Originally posted by Vesavius

 

Nah, I disagree.

EQ did not create 'the standard'. It set the blueprint for WoW to follow but on it's own it would not have dictated such a narrow game design in the way that we have seen... it was popular, but not THAT popular. On it's own it would never have triggered the cash grab we have seen. That can only be put at the feet of WoW. 

 You are flat out wrong.

EQ did set the standard. A standard is whatever it is for that TIME, not ALL time. DAoC was a flat out EQ clone with more options, which set the standard for its time...which WoW then followed to set its standard.

And as for the "it was popular, but not THAT popular" comment...EQ had over 700,000 subs at its peak, more than all western MMORPGs at the time combined. It was the WoW of its time...

Comparison.

EQ = 700k+ subs,

AC1 = 100k at its peak, AO = 30k after its first month and the next 1+ years, ultima online = 300k'ish at its peak

It wasnt until DAoC was released that the western MMORPG world surpassed EQ1s sub numbers and by then, the craptastic limitations brought on by EQ 1 became the norm. Deal with it.

I am 'flat out wrong'? I should 'Deal with it' hehe, ok, well... if you say so... but before I do, lets look at what you say because you seem to have missed what I was saying entirely in your effort focused on making bombastic statements for people to 'deal with' rather then talking reasonbly

Lets take 'The WoW of it's time' first...

What a meaningless valueless statement that is... By it I assume you simply mean it was the most popular? If so... so what? 

Being the 'WoW of it's time' simply means it was the most popular of a still unpopular genre. It still meant that it was far from mainstream and still restricted to a sub culture. EQ never broke the mainstream. It provided WoW with it's blueprint, but it did NOT set the standard. You need to understand the difference between the two things to understand the point being made.

The success of WoW set the standard, attracted the VCs and the masses, and put the genre in it's creative straightjacket.

700,000+ subs... link to that as fact please, because I have a feeling you are just pulling stats out of your arse. From what I remember, and I don't say it as fact, it only had around 500k at it's peak, which would make your unsupported statements an 'exageration' at best. I also contest that DAoC surpassed EQ's subs, so I will need links for that as well.

*edit*

I was curious so I went looking, and it seems your figures might be skewy. This is a bit old, but it is relevant for the period and particular games we are discussing I guess;

Top Western MMORPG list 2010

http://www.mogstat.com/ 

And from EQ's Wiki entry...

Subscription history

Verant from 1999 to 2001 and SOE from 2001 to 14 January 2004 issued formal statements giving some indications of the number of EQ subscriptions and peak numbers of players online at any given moment.

These records show "more than 225,000" subscriptions on 1 November 1999, with an increase to "more than 450,000" subscriptions by 25 September 2003  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EverQuest 

It would indeed seem that between 2003-2004 the maximum player base for EQ was around 500k, and NO source I can find puts DAoC above around 250k, which contradicts your other point as well.

Have you links to go against these? Because otherwise I might have to decline to 'deal with it' and just disregard your entire opinion as being pretty worthless, based on every assertion you have made being 'flat out wrong'.

I think indie games have gotten a lot of positive attention lately, and do believe that there will be changes from both devs and publishers across the spectrum in reaction to it. Maybe in small ways, hopefully in large ways as well. However, I don't think you're going to see the results immediately. These games take years to develope, good ones at least, and when you say "MMORPG's Today" they're more like the MMO's built from a base of player desires from several years ago.