A prime example of this is the evolution of questing. Camping mobs in EverQuest got boring after awhile, and instead of finding ways to improve the combat experience, the next game added linear quest-lines to give focus to the players and attempt to keep them engaged doing the same boring thing. Turns out, that got repetitve and boring after awhile. The next step was merely ramping up the experience gain to streamline progression and attempt to keep people interested. This streamlined effect is fairly noticible nowadays when you look at the circular zone design EverQuest had and contrast it to more modern MMOs, where it is literally point A to point B to point C, etc.

I'd love to see more gameplay layers return to the MMORPG. I'd love to see very limited carrying capacity, where it is essential that you carry supplies such as a torch, or food and water, where running out of supplies would have dire effects on your gaming experience. I'd love to see parties less about using renewable resources such as mana for restoration, and have to share consumables as the need arises. In short, I'd love to see more to MMOs than just avoiding red circles on the ground.

Not only did EQ have day/night cycles AND weather, but, depending on whether it was day or night, different monsters may be out and about in some zones.

I loved this.  It definitely made the world seem more like a world, and it was cool.  But I suppose Devs scrap it for the same reason all the water in the new mmo worlds is 6 inches deep, even the oceans.  They are cheap.  They are lazy.  And they wouldn't know fun if it bit them in the ass.  

Lack of onrails themeparks. Yeah, unfourtunately that is what a lot of us are hoping for but for some reason the devs are keep pushing out that very thing. I guess it is just more profitable to create a shortlived ThemePark rather than a solid sandbox which retains more people.

What we need is one big sandbox which proves that you can create a profitable triple A sandbox title. And no, Eve is not it. Spaceship/spreadsheet, FFA PvP where you are a ship will never attract a large selection of people. Not that 400k subs is bad but considering the total MMO playerbase is 10-15 million, it is not a very big part, and a lot of people in Eve have multiple accounts. More so than in other MMOs.

Originally posted by Amathe

Not only did EQ have day/night cycles AND weather, but, depending on whether it was day or night, different monsters may be out and about in some zones.

 

I loved this.  It definitely made the world seem more like a world, and it was cool.  But I suppose Devs scrap it for the same reason all the water in the new mmo worlds is 6 inches deep, even the oceans.  They are cheap.  They are lazy.  And they wouldn't know fun if it bit them in the ass.  

Yeah Kithicor Forest or something.  Anyone could run through during the day without hassle.  At night you better have a SoW and stick to the edge of the zone.  Good times lol.  :D

Originally posted by Kaisen_Dexx
I remember when I first started playing Dragon's Dogma. I was amazed and invigorated by the limited carrying capacity, and the real sense of danger just travelling had (especially at night). Unfortunately, later on, you became powerful and supplied enough that the world became almost trivial, with the exception of a few bosses. The sad part about that is the fans (and later the developers) have decided that the answer to that was Fast Travel, as opposed to fixing the root of the problem. And it sounds like the next game in the series will feature fast travel. That severely disappoints me, especially because it parallels what I saw happen with the MMORPG genre. As opposed to figuring out why said mechanic was broken or boring, they created systems to streamline and bypass those mechanics. This removed a lot of potential complexity and layered gameplay elements that has created the feeling of staleness and stagnation.

 

A prime example of this is the evolution of questing. Camping mobs in EverQuest got boring after awhile, and instead of finding ways to improve the combat experience, the next game added linear quest-lines to give focus to the players and attempt to keep them engaged doing the same boring thing. Turns out, that got repetitve and boring after awhile. The next step was merely ramping up the experience gain to streamline progression and attempt to keep people interested. This streamlined effect is fairly noticible nowadays when you look at the circular zone design EverQuest had and contrast it to more modern MMOs, where it is literally point A to point B to point C, etc.

 

I'd love to see more gameplay layers return to the MMORPG. I'd love to see very limited carrying capacity, where it is essential that you carry supplies such as a torch, or food and water, where running out of supplies would have dire effects on your gaming experience. I'd love to see parties less about using renewable resources such as mana for restoration, and have to share consumables as the need arises. In short, I'd love to see more to MMOs than just avoiding red circles on the ground.

What you are talking about is virtual world MMOs and those are, unfourtunately, more or less extinct. You got some indy-devs creating sub-par virtual world MMOs but those are just simply bad.

Quest hubs, as main source of advancing your character, is the main "feature" which dealt the main blow to virtual worlds. Instead of exploring and adventuring to advance your character you simply go to NPC with glowie on head and then go to glowies on map, completely by-passing exploration and adventuring.

GW 2, instead of getting rid of that, simply made the quest hubs mobile and not needing to click on glowie to get the quest but everything else is pretty much the same. It is cleverly hiding the quest hub but it is still there, just disguised and called "dynamic" quests.

I think the genre has reached a dead end and instead of going back and finding another way, it is just keep bumping their heads into the dead end, which are meaningless quests, and finding new ways of giving you meaningless quests.

The concept of creating a virtual world where you need to explore and find your place in it and figure out how to be successful is, I guess, considered a failed model by triple A devs. Why I am not sure but I guess they didnt feel SWG, EQ 1, AC and UO were profitable enough. They seem to go more for a model where they have big initial sales, like non MMOs, and then some bonus profit from a few months of subs. and/or selling trinkets in the cash shop.

The genre has become big bussiness and there is apparently no big bussiness in virtual world MMOs...

Originally posted by Theocritus

Originally posted by dave6660

Originally posted by Torgrim
Most MMOs have day and night cycle.

Yes but how many of them actually utilitize it for something other than aesthetics?

      EQ was the only one I remember where the night/day cycle really mattered...There were certain zones where you didn't want to be at night for example......

A handful of others did too.  FFXI used day / night and weather effectively.  I think Vanguard did too but it's been a long time since I played so I don't remember much about it.

---

Originally posted by Rydeson
... not just a small tone change..  I love how EQ racials made a difference in sight.. Oh well, that was the good ole days..

---

Indeed. FYI for others. Back in the day, infravision was a major advantage; and ultravision was even moreso. But today, even the most blind Erud can see better and farther at night than dark elves (ultravision) back in 1999/2000/2001. LAME!

Originally posted by Yamota

Quest hubs, as main source of advancing your character, is the main "feature" which dealt the main blow to virtual worlds. Instead of exploring and adventuring to advance your character you simply go to NPC with glowie on head and then go to glowies on map, completely by-passing exploration and adventuring.

GW 2, instead of getting rid of that, simply made the quest hubs mobile and not needing to click on glowie to get the quest but everything else is pretty much the same. It is cleverly hiding the quest hub but it is still there, just disguised and called "dynamic" quests.

I think the genre has reached a dead end and instead of going back and finding another way, it is just keep bumping their heads into the dead end, which are meaningless quests, and finding new ways of giving you meaningless quests.

The concept of creating a virtual world where you need to explore and find your place in it and figure out how to be successful is, I guess, considered a failed model by triple A devs. Why I am not sure but I guess they didnt feel SWG, EQ 1, AC and UO were profitable enough. They seem to go more for a model where they have big initial sales, like non MMOs, and then some bonus profit from a few months of subs. and/or selling trinkets in the cash shop.

The genre has become big bussiness and there is apparently no big bussiness in virtual world MMOs...

No that is innovation. They no longer need teh old idea of a virtual world. They are brave enough to take risk and do something different.

And it makes a better game, so much the better.

Dynamic quest .. hiding the quest hub .. is another way to make questing seemless.

The point is this .. the fun part of the gameplay to many .. is combat and the meta game surrounding it (AH, gear optimization ...), and not a scavenger hunt of where the quest item is. If people like to hunt for items, spoiler sites would not be so popular, and add-ons that point the way would not be so popular.

Quests are just excuses to kill things.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Yamota

Quest hubs, as main source of advancing your character, is the main "feature" which dealt the main blow to virtual worlds. Instead of exploring and adventuring to advance your character you simply go to NPC with glowie on head and then go to glowies on map, completely by-passing exploration and adventuring.

GW 2, instead of getting rid of that, simply made the quest hubs mobile and not needing to click on glowie to get the quest but everything else is pretty much the same. It is cleverly hiding the quest hub but it is still there, just disguised and called "dynamic" quests.

I think the genre has reached a dead end and instead of going back and finding another way, it is just keep bumping their heads into the dead end, which are meaningless quests, and finding new ways of giving you meaningless quests.

The concept of creating a virtual world where you need to explore and find your place in it and figure out how to be successful is, I guess, considered a failed model by triple A devs. Why I am not sure but I guess they didnt feel SWG, EQ 1, AC and UO were profitable enough. They seem to go more for a model where they have big initial sales, like non MMOs, and then some bonus profit from a few months of subs. and/or selling trinkets in the cash shop.

The genre has become big bussiness and there is apparently no big bussiness in virtual world MMOs...

No that is innovation. They no longer need teh old idea of a virtual world. They are brave enough to take risk and do something different.

And it makes a better game, so much the better.

Dynamic quest .. hiding the quest hub .. is another way to make questing seemless.

The point is this .. the fun part of the gameplay to many .. is combat and the meta game surrounding it (AH, gear optimization ...), and not a scavenger hunt of where the quest item is. If people like to hunt for items, spoiler sites would not be so popular, and add-ons that point the way would not be so popular.

Quests are just excuses to kill things.

LOL! Ok...I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in many posts, but now I am convinced you are completely clueless as to what a MMORPG is. You are asking for lobby games and console-like games. Quick fun, easy access. Although all MMORPG's offer these features in marginal amounts...they are NOT built around these concepts...or meant to be anyways...hence, why it is a different genre from lobby games and console games. MMORPG's are meant to be worlds for players to explore, interact, and take at their own pace...with MANY options to participate in and enjoy.

But...eh, why bother...you are not trying to hear and comprehend what you need to. You just want them to be what you want them to be...hell with everyone else right? Sigh...

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Wow has a night and day cycle.

Swtor hasn't, but its not the only thing that makes it unimersive. Cloned npcs, lack of critters, corridory design, heavy instancing etc..

wow has a 24 hour day/night cycle so you never see the transition from day to night. might aswell not have one.

Originally posted by Psychow

Originally posted by evemaster00

UO had a day/night cycle, Everquest did. I believe even DaoC did? Why is it all the old classics used day and night cycles yet most mmos today don't bother with it?

I wonder if it's because WoW doesn't have one, and wow is supposedly popular, so developers stopped thinking it mattered. I played UO, EQ, and DaoC, and I felt a stronger connection with these games and played these games for far longer than any other mmo i've played. (Except for EVE online, which i've also played for a very long time).

I guess all of the above mmos have one primary thing in common - they are not story driven themeparks. I don't know if EQ is now or not, I haven't played it for a decade. EVE is tthe only one without a day/night cycle, but that's a mute point because EVE takes places in space.

I think now I realize what makes me feel so bored with WoW that i can't stand playing it. It was the first MMO that I know off that sent you down a predetermined path from the start of the game to the very end through a on rails questing system. Que Blizzards constant boasts of subscription numbers, everyone tried to copy them  = Blizzard ruined mmos.

 

You're right. Without stupid Blizzard / WoW the MMO genre would be basking in it's 500K membership of awesomness with only a few released games. It'd have beeen amazing!! Damn you Blizzard!!

well you can only play with 5k players per server so 500k is enough. but i guess you like wow becuase it has over 99999999999 players.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

 

LOL! Ok...I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in many posts, but now I am convinced you are completely clueless as to what a MMORPG is. You are asking for lobby games and console-like games. Quick fun, easy access. Although all MMORPG's offer these features in marginal amounts...they are NOT built around these concepts...or meant to be anyways...hence, why it is a different genre from lobby games and console games. MMORPG's are meant to be worlds for players to explore, interact, and take at their own pace...with MANY options to participate in and enjoy.

But...eh, why bother...you are not trying to hear and comprehend what you need to. You just want them to be what you want them to be...hell with everyone else right? Sigh...

See .. that is the misconception. MMOs are just games. They are not meant for anything, and the devs can take them anyway they want to.

Don't you agree that many MMOs are like lobby games? WOW LFD, LFR raid, Battle ground ....

Don't tell me you don't know that. And if people want to play MMO like that .. why shouldn't they? Would you be happier if WOW is called a lobby game instead? It is just a label, you know.

And i am just making an observation. Tell me it is not true, with a straight face, that many play MMOs like a lobby game. What i want is irrelevant of whether MMOs are becoming more lobby games.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

 

LOL! Ok...I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in many posts, but now I am convinced you are completely clueless as to what a MMORPG is. You are asking for lobby games and console-like games. Quick fun, easy access. Although all MMORPG's offer these features in marginal amounts...they are NOT built around these concepts...or meant to be anyways...hence, why it is a different genre from lobby games and console games. MMORPG's are meant to be worlds for players to explore, interact, and take at their own pace...with MANY options to participate in and enjoy.

But...eh, why bother...you are not trying to hear and comprehend what you need to. You just want them to be what you want them to be...hell with everyone else right? Sigh...

See .. that is the misconception. MMOs are just games. They are not meant for anything, and the devs can take them anyway they want to.

Don't you agree that many MMOs are like lobby games? WOW LFD, LFR raid, Battle ground ....

Don't tell me you don't know that. And if people want to play MMO like that .. why shouldn't they? Would you be happier if WOW is called a lobby game instead? It is just a label, you know.

And i am just making an observation. Tell me it is not true, with a straight face, that many play MMOs like a lobby game. What i want is irrelevant of whether MMOs are becoming more lobby games.

I don't disagree a lot of people like lobby games. What you are misunderstanding is the difference between MMO and MMORPG. And you continuously push your agenda of making them all MMO lobby games no matter the thread is my point. Especially if they mention anything that has to do with not having them the way you insist on them being. There are plenty of lobby games already...must they ALL be that way? Again, it's what you constantly seem to be peddling.

The thread is about day and night cycle, as well as discussion on them not all being hand held themeparks. If you have nothing of use to contribute to the topic of the thread...just pass the thread by. How hard is that really.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

 

I don't disagree a lot of people like lobby games. What you are misunderstanding is the difference between MMO and MMORPG. And you continuously push your agenda of making them all MMO lobby games no matter the thread is my point. Especially if they mention anything that has to do with not having them the way you insist on them being. There are plenty of lobby games already...must they ALL be that way? Again, it's what you constantly seem to be peddling.

 

How do i "make" anything? And it is obviously not all of them are lobby game. You forget PS2, and Eve?

But don't you think there is a larger point? Many (but not all) MMOs are lobby games because like you say "a lot of people like lobby games" .. and it shows that they are games, not world simulation.

Which is relevant to this thread .. is a day night cycle make a game more fun?

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

 

I don't disagree a lot of people like lobby games. What you are misunderstanding is the difference between MMO and MMORPG. And you continuously push your agenda of making them all MMO lobby games no matter the thread is my point. Especially if they mention anything that has to do with not having them the way you insist on them being. There are plenty of lobby games already...must they ALL be that way? Again, it's what you constantly seem to be peddling.

 

How do i "make" anything? And it is obviously not all of them are lobby game. You forget PS2, and Eve?

But don't you think there is a larger point? Many (but not all) MMOs are lobby games because like you say "a lot of people like lobby games" .. and it shows that they are games, not world simulation.

Which is relevant to this thread .. is a day night cycle make a game more fun?

Quit taking everything so literally. I forgot the word "trying" before the red highlighted part....but shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend...so I thought anyways.

Day and Night makes it more "immersive" for those that enjoy that element...which (IMO) is mainly players who played since the genre's birth (MMORPG's that is) when those features, as well as others,  were a large portion of them.

Sadly...yes...most player's only seem to care about getting their fun now now now. And want stat and leader boards to gloat over and fight to be #1 of...and show off leet gear. ALL elements that already exist in other genres....FPS games or console fighting games. And it's ok to have those kinds of games.....in their own genre/category, NOT in the MMORPG genre calling themselves MMORPG's.

Why people want to keep stuffing features from one genre into another until neither is recognizeable as a unique genre is beyond me. Not saying it isn't a good thing to add features from one to the other at times...but man,  there can be such a thing as too much.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Sadly...yes...most player's only seem to care about getting their fun now now now. And want stat and leader boards to gloat over and fight to be #1 of...and show off leet gear. ALL elements that already exist in other genres....FPS games or console fighting games. And it's ok to have those kinds of games.....in their own genre/category, NOT in the MMORPG genre calling themselves MMORPG's.

Why people want to keep stuffing features from one genre into another until neither is recognizeable as a unique genre is beyond me. Not saying it isn't a good thing to add features from one to the other at times...but man,  there can be such a thing as too much.

 

hmm .. i am not sure what else a gamer should care about. It is entertainment, not ethical or moral issues. And you seem to be very adamant about how a genre should be defined. Why? A genre is just a collection of games. Genre alway changes and evolve. There is no reason why we should stick to the old way.

And i am a big proponent of using good ideas, and disregard genre boundaries. Look at games like Borderland 1 & 2 .. it is so much fun precisely because it is a mix of FPS and RPG. Look at Dead Space? Not a pure action title. Not a pure horror title but hell of a fun game.

There is no reason why MMORPG should be shackled by its past. Do you think it will be even 1/10 as popular if the EQ camping problem is not fixed? And if it changes a lot .. so be it .. as long as the games are still fun.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Sadly...yes...most player's only seem to care about getting their fun now now now. And want stat and leader boards to gloat over and fight to be #1 of...and show off leet gear. ALL elements that already exist in other genres....FPS games or console fighting games. And it's ok to have those kinds of games.....in their own genre/category, NOT in the MMORPG genre calling themselves MMORPG's.

Why people want to keep stuffing features from one genre into another until neither is recognizeable as a unique genre is beyond me. Not saying it isn't a good thing to add features from one to the other at times...but man,  there can be such a thing as too much.

 

hmm .. i am not sure what else a gamer should care about. It is entertainment, not ethical or moral issues. And you seem to be very adamant about how a genre should be defined. Why? A genre is just a collection of games. Genre alway changes and evolve. There is no reason why we should stick to the old way.

And i am a big proponent of using good ideas, and disregard genre boundaries. Look at games like Borderland 1 & 2 .. it is so much fun precisely because it is a mix of FPS and RPG. Look at Dead Space? Not a pure action title. Not a pure horror title but hell of a fun game.

There is no reason why MMORPG should be shackled by its past. Do you think it will be even 1/10 as popular if the EQ camping problem is not fixed? And if it changes a lot .. so be it .. as long as the games are still fun.

Sigh....why bother.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Sadly...yes...most player's only seem to care about getting their fun now now now. And want stat and leader boards to gloat over and fight to be #1 of...and show off leet gear. ALL elements that already exist in other genres....FPS games or console fighting games. And it's ok to have those kinds of games.....in their own genre/category, NOT in the MMORPG genre calling themselves MMORPG's.

Why people want to keep stuffing features from one genre into another until neither is recognizeable as a unique genre is beyond me. Not saying it isn't a good thing to add features from one to the other at times...but man,  there can be such a thing as too much.

 

hmm .. i am not sure what else a gamer should care about. It is entertainment, not ethical or moral issues. And you seem to be very adamant about how a genre should be defined. Why? A genre is just a collection of games. Genre alway changes and evolve. There is no reason why we should stick to the old way.

And i am a big proponent of using good ideas, and disregard genre boundaries. Look at games like Borderland 1 & 2 .. it is so much fun precisely because it is a mix of FPS and RPG. Look at Dead Space? Not a pure action title. Not a pure horror title but hell of a fun game.

There is no reason why MMORPG should be shackled by its past. Do you think it will be even 1/10 as popular if the EQ camping problem is not fixed? And if it changes a lot .. so be it .. as long as the games are still fun.

Sigh....why bother.

You shouldn't because he is correct.

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Goatgod76

Sadly...yes...most player's only seem to care about getting their fun now now now. And want stat and leader boards to gloat over and fight to be #1 of...and show off leet gear. ALL elements that already exist in other genres....FPS games or console fighting games. And it's ok to have those kinds of games.....in their own genre/category, NOT in the MMORPG genre calling themselves MMORPG's.

Why people want to keep stuffing features from one genre into another until neither is recognizeable as a unique genre is beyond me. Not saying it isn't a good thing to add features from one to the other at times...but man,  there can be such a thing as too much.

 

hmm .. i am not sure what else a gamer should care about. It is entertainment, not ethical or moral issues. And you seem to be very adamant about how a genre should be defined. Why? A genre is just a collection of games. Genre alway changes and evolve. There is no reason why we should stick to the old way.

And i am a big proponent of using good ideas, and disregard genre boundaries. Look at games like Borderland 1 & 2 .. it is so much fun precisely because it is a mix of FPS and RPG. Look at Dead Space? Not a pure action title. Not a pure horror title but hell of a fun game.

There is no reason why MMORPG should be shackled by its past. Do you think it will be even 1/10 as popular if the EQ camping problem is not fixed? And if it changes a lot .. so be it .. as long as the games are still fun.

Sigh....why bother.

No more arguments? You agree that games should be fun to the players, and should not rigidly adhere to what genre it is supposed to be in?