I'm trying out something new for me, its called Mortal Online. Its been out for couple of years, although from what I hear they aren't adding new content but they are fixing the current content. Its a First person, with mounts etc and has a lot of pvp, pve has been added to it also. It might not be a fantastic game, infact from what I read there are a lot of unhappy people with Mortal online, likely to be trolls but I will sure find out my self after the trial. For the past few weeks I have been looking to try out new/current MMOs which are different from the usual common ones such as Rift, swtor and ofc WoW.

If you want my advice don't ask or look for opinions of a game which you are thinking of trying, just take a look for your self and it might be the one for you, if not then try another game and again :)

She's discussing a feeling / experience that she see's in the gaming circle she loves to be a part of.. What's wrong with making articles on those thoughts?

But the answer to her question is simple...

In the old days we knew back then that 99% of your game is your interface.. Not sure if these generation of developers know this, or can control it... Too much artsy fartsy in control of development and not much good work for interface/playability.

Sadly games are not just story.. But yet they are, if you catch my drift. They have also been linearized into boring tasks that make it seem like work more than entertainment due to satisfying the needs of the companies owners support/design requests.

So to answer the question is easy, games today just suck :D

Eventually there will be a game that is released that changed the genre as a whole?

Yes.. well not change it... return it to its core roots.. With new IP though of course. And end the "bad" linear design that strips fun from games.

nice post

is time to back to skyrim, torchlight etc.. let the experts work in the next gen :)

I will give most new games a try.  I played tsw for 3 months, there was a lot I liked about it the story lines and the combat,  the main problem with tsw was the grind for the aa wheel and the fact you had to repeat all the content every 3 days.

Then I gave swtor 6 months, actually played 3 of those the other 3 they got my money for free.  SWTOR failed in so many areas.

I tried the beta for tera, and instantly hated it. GW2 made by Anet and I would never give them a chance. Same for rift tried the beta tried it 3 different times after it went live, rift is just not for me.

TESO I am at a wait and see on that one.

Trying something new for me is easy, actually finding something new that I like is hard.  I have went back to EQ2. 

Originally posted by Suzie_Ford
trying something new isn't always a bad thing.

Yet, if it isn't really, really similar to their Old Favorite (whatever that is), they will surely complain.

I've never seen a population more prone to trying to drive with attention so firmly focused on the rearview.

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Suzie_Ford
trying something new isn't always a bad thing.

Yet, if it isn't really, really similar to their Old Favorite (whatever that is), they will surely complain.

I've never seen a population more prone to trying to drive with attention so firmly focused on the rearview.

To that point, there is one of the dilemmas. If it is not close to the Favorite Old Game, then people nitpick it apart and go back to the FOG. If it is close to the FOG, then why should they bother playing it? I imagine someone who needs a doctorate in psychology could have a field day with that.

And it is a matter of who is spending the money, regardless of whether they are a majority or a minority. I think most gamers are casual gamers who have limited time and resources for gaming. So they stick with what is familiar.  Then you have the more intense gamer who is competitive and spends their resources (time and money) on a game. For these people the early levels / low skill points are merely a means to get to the end game, whatever it is. Whether through subscription or the badly named Free 2 Play stores, they will spend those resources to get to the point they want.

Considering how many opinions exist on what a good game is (and I will point out that WoW, the most successful game may in fact not be a 'good' one - opinions vary) I do not  think it is necessarily viable to design a game that will try and appease both styles. People do try, but I am not sure how successful anyone really has been.

Even artists have to eat (we do not like to starve to death) and so the game has to somehow make money. It is all part of the equation. In the end though the point about trying something new is a good one. WoW and EQ were both new at one point in their lives.  To that end, I think a free (really free) trial should be available for games from the outset.

I have to wholy agree with what others here have said about TSW. The game itself, bar the combat, was great, I liked the whole detective side of it, the story, the atmosphere, etc. But yes, the combat was horrible. Or is horrible rather.

During beta I was telling myself that 'this is just beta combat, they will improve it' over and over as I played, always hoping they would upgrade it.

Just another (Infinate supply of these) example of a game that did ONE thing great yet failed everywhere else, or did a LOT great but failed so badly in one area that the game is 'trash' inmy mind.

Maybe all these developers need to get together and make a game taking the best aspects of each?(Think Tera combat, TSW story telling, GW2 quest system)

Dear Pokket

You really should try Asheron's Call.  It has levels, but no classes, it is skill based.  Some people argue it is not a sandbox, which is nonsense, it is one of the better ones.  You can make your avatar with as many skills as you have skill points to spend which you get on leveling.  Huge world, with all areas relevant.  Pvp where you can doge ranged attacks, and you can wear just about any equipment in the game although heavy armor on a character that has mainly magic skills is dumb.

It is a shame that Turbine does not realize such.  I think a redone AC1 would do well in the current MMO environment.

The toughest part about a new game is finding that mix of cool atmosphere and setting, then building in a combat, crafting and world system that is intriguing enough to hook players to continue with it long term.  WoW handles this by building in metric tons of content and "things to do," but newer games don't have the benefit of huge budget and staff to do this.  For them, it would seem the best tactic is to pick a solid niche and focus on it, rather than try to compete with the other big games in every capacity.  Be fresh and new with the overall idea for the game, but then choose the key focuses of the game system-wise, then execute on them very, very well.  TSW, for me has done that (and continues to build on what they have).

As far as giving games a shot, I think free trials are a good way to get in new players -- ideally, I'd say let people play for free through a starting zone or set of levels, and then go with whatever payment model the company has chosen.  If the company has done their job well, players will be intrigued enough to stay on.

This is all I want:

Well-done sandbox with more than combat-oriented gameplay, but also high quality, action combat.

Essentially what I want is Black Desert.

Been reading your articles for awhile Pokket, and I must say this is by far one of the better ones. 

Given you are just summing up the feelings of a lot of MMO vets (Should just remake UO), it's still nice to hear every so often. With that said, there's only so much that can be said about it and some developers are already catching on: Trion with less emphasis on questing + a extremely impressive housing system, Smedly announcing that EQ:Next would be a sandbox, and Archeage/Repopulation/etc etc

I am interested why it is that MMORPGs are pretty much the only genre that must reinvent itself with every new game (somewhat defying the idea of genre). The only thing where everyone can agree on is that it features "massively-multiplayer" and a somewhat persistent world. Traditionally, it ought to have RPG mechanics (as anything more complex, or real-time wasn't feasible at the time).

All the FPS, racing games, RTS, jump'n'run, shmp and whatnot are pretty much the same as they were since the beginning of time. Their innovation is in comparison a little bit of tweaking here and there, a different weapon reload mechanism, etc.

I think the reason has to do with two main things. On one hand, the genre specifications, like being "online" are no longer exclusive to MMORPGs. On the other hand, technological advances allow almost any kind of game being played online (there are still limits, like massive battles with thousands of players with realistic bullet physics, but you get the idea).

MMORPGs have become a sort of container for all kinds of mini-game collections, and everyone has a different idea on what should be included. Some like "jump puzzles", many don't. There is no reason why you can't have horse racing in a medieval fantasy game, or interior design with 23rd century style designer furniture one some space station. After all, the original idea behind MMORPGs was "virtual world" and in a world you can do pretty much anything, as long as someone puts it in.

With that being said, I sit and wait until the MMORPG genre description begins to break down. People still call some music "Pop Music", but that label is pretty much meaningless but on the most superficial level.

If TSW is hard to understand we are lost as a species.  It might have been new and different but hard to understand, no.  Not unless the human race is 95% retards, oh wait. 

The problem with the gaming industry in general is that companies like to play it safe and produce games that aren't original.  The MMO genre has been completely stagnated by lacklustre milked to death, flogging a dead horse, implementations of the fantasy MMO genre for over a decade and the moment a company produces something 'different' all the simpletons that seem to make up the gaming community start crying, 'Its too hard'..

Its not too hard, you've just gotten used to being fucking spoon fed and given games that are equivilant to a paint by numbers colouring pad with cute little pop ups. 

People not knowing how to add up their progression in the game and, to me, that is a big deal (should I talk more on this next week?).

Games have done away with challenges in game.  Gone are the days of the impossible / incredibly hard to get gear.  The gear that 1-2 people might have on a server.  That gear that the regular players just drool over sitting outside the acution house.

That is how you measure progression.  By incredibly rare and unatainable things.  

• In Everquest this was Level - because Leveling in EQ took years.
• In early WoW this was by raid gear - Vanilla & BC there was visually striking raid gear that only 2-3 people on the server had
• UO -  Player reputation & skill.  There were those few people that could litterally empty your inventory within 5-6 seconds and make off with all of your gear before you knew what happened.