I like the list except how do you not put Champions Online in there and put Eve on the list ? That is really head scratching. Ok so we know you guys have a love for Eve but that game has been out several years now and the potential it had was lost years ago. Ok so you guys may not be big superhero fanatactics but the fact is Champions Online is going to be the best mmo this year. It is going to be super polished at launch,that character customization is very outstanding and gameplay looks great. Good article but that is my only flaw I see.

Originally posted by Samuraisword

EvE Online had potential but without a total revamp and server wipe, which won't happen, it has none.

The real world time based skill learning system is anti - virtual world. How can you have such an obvious link between the two?

At a minimum there needs to be a way for players to skill up faster if active in-game. Having a passive system only is lame.

And as long as CCP sanctions RMT by selling time cards and facilitates trading of them in-game for in-game money aka isk, then EvE Online fails. There is no true risk vs reward since players can easily replace any lost ships and items by buying isk via trading time cards.

Well it seems you do not like the system in EVE and it is perfectly fine. I can understand your points, but do not support them. I like EVE as it is. It offers unique gaming experience to any other MMO in the market today. Skill training is actually very small part of EVE and the difference of having skill at level 4 or at level 5 is relatively small. The real benefit to old timers is that they have more specializations, you might still be as good with specific tasks as they are. Like say, PvP.

About the last point, the beauty of the system is that it does not increase in-game ISK, it just redistributes it. The risk is still there. And I would say that it is a lot more risker to spend your real money on ships than virtual money since making ISK in EVE is pretty easy once you get past the beginning. It is a great boost for newbies, but does very little to help old timers, except to keep them playing. 

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Zorndorf

And I remember very well this person found Warhammer a VERY good game ....

So it is always good to know who put out that list and what you can expect from it.

Yes, I personally enjoyed Warhammer. That said, I also saw and wrote about flaws with the game... Maybe going back to check out some of the things I wrtre aboutt he game might give you more perspective on what it was i actually thought?

Not to pile on, but I decided to take your advice on this one. These are a few comments under editorials from you:

I’m also going to say that if you absolutely, 100% can’t stand the idea of PvP, you probably shouldn’t spend your money on Warhammer Online. It’s an RvR game at its core, and while it does offer PvE elements

The City sieges are the key aspect of the game. Tier control, Locking zones are all about being able to get to the city. The Cities are  PVE instances. The core of the game is PvE marketed around RvR.

The scenarios, battlefield objectives and other RvR elements don’t really bash you over the head with the “my e-peen is bigger than yours, my uber-lewt will ends you”

Without doing PvE to get the gear necessary (wards) to capture the city which is a PvE instance you will not be able to survive the city raid.

Are there still bugs in the game?

I think this would almost be a silly question if it hadn’t been such an issue in the past. Are there bugs? Yeah, I’ve noticed one or two little things. Last night, my map went blank for a minute or two and I had I think one instance of a bullet animation getting hung up, but that’s it and for all I know these won’t even exist tomorrow (little things like that crop up from time to time, but seem easy for devs to squish). Did I see any game breaking bugs? No. In fact, not a single thing that impeded my gameplay in the slightest.
 

One or two bugs?   Sure you qualify this assessment by "your" gameplay provided, but as a journalist you should have gathered information from other players, forums, and beta-testers before sold people on the idea that bugs were not an issue. Morale abilities not firing properly, pick lock not working, and the white lion pet/pathing controls were issues known about for ages, that's just off the top of my head.

Maybe,before you tell someone to go back and research your analysis of something you might want to check the accuracy of them?

The reasons given for including EVE in the list are weak at best, and probably better described as downright bizarre.  Any current released MMO has "great potential" if the developers implement even a fraction of the ideas they throw out. 

Oooh.... walking on stations - so game changing.  That will be such an underused feature it isn't even funny.  Planetary exploration could be a game changer if done right - but will more likely be an alternative resource gathering minigame.

In the end I'll take this list for what it is: a listing of games that have the author hot & bothered. 

Originally posted by Ozmodan

That was a well thought out list, although Global Agenda is NOT a mmo.  Global Agenda, with 10 vs 10 fights make it more a Diablo clone in space than a MMO.

I think a lot of players won't even consider APB to even try it.  While some may like it, I think it will be strictly a niche game.

I agree,putting Global Agenda which is an instanced linear game on the list without including a true sandbox mmorpg like Earthrise is a joke. Earthrise is as close as Fallout 3 as you can get.i mean Fallout mmorpg has not even been seen yet,..lol some people really don't know what they are talking about.

www.play-earthrise.com/images/trailer/video/720.wmv

www.play-earthrise.com/index.php

No Earthrise, FFXIV or Mortal Online, but SGW and STO are?

Do you even look at your own homepage?

I really liked this article a lot. Jon highlighted a lot of games that I am also excited about as well.....games that are (mostly) looking to be very different to what we have been seeing for quite a while. I particularly like the emphasis on pvp that many of the upcoming mmos are having......and about time too! It will be interesting if these games do really well because then finally all the pvp haters with their "pvpers are only 10% of the market" and "pvp doesnt belong in the mmo genre" comments can finally eat their words and keep quiet......not that they will of course.

These are online games and yet for years we have been seeing games that are really just single player games in co-op mode where we can only effectively play against the computer. Player conflict has been added to these games but only as a side option......a kind of after thought, and as a result pvp has received a bad reputation because it generally never worked out very well. Yet now it seems that games companies are learning from their past mistakes and are designing their games with player conflict in mind from the beginning. It looks like a lot of mmos are heading towards being proper online worlds which players can perhaps change and influence through player conflict and interaction......which is the way it should be being online games and all that. I also didnt know there was a World of Darkness game being made by CCP. Happy thoughts.

Equally though there are some good story driven games coming out too that dont have their emphasis on player conflict. So......a large number of (hopefully) decent mmos focused on player conflict on their way to fill the void in the currently unbalanced pve focused market, and a smaller number of story focused mmos (there are already plenty of them) to keep the players happy who dont enjoy player conflict and competition. It seems to me like everyone has a reason to feel optimistic about the future of mmo gaming.

I think we have a problem here, some people aren't quite sure what the word potential and niche means....

Potential

1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality <potential benefits>

2: expressing possibility ; specifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in “it may rain”)

Niche

1 a: a recess in a wall especially for a statue b: something that resembles a niche
2 a: a place, employment, status, or activity for which a person or thing is best fitted <finally found her niche> b: a habitat supplying the factors necessary for the existence of an organism or species c: the ecological role of an organism in a community especially in regard to food consumption d: a specialized market

Taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

And the writer of this list didn't say... "My Top Ten MMORPG Games with Potential."   He said "My Top Ten Games with Potential."

The operative words in that statement are, MY, and Games.

He could have wrote about single player console games, or even java based flash games played on his I-phone.     And lastly this is the writers oppinion, not the oppinion of the site or meant to be the definative final answer on MMO games.    Some of you are really reading WAY to much into this article.

When I first read this, I was like were is FFXIV? Then I thought about it. We don't know too much about the game to know if it is going to have potential or not. Only time will tell. So, I agrree with everything that the OP said. Great list.

Still when it comes to potential : Potential

1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality <potential benefits>

2: expressing possibility ; specifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in “it may rain”)
 

He does not define potential for: What?    To be innovative in combat , to add new PVe experiences, to expand on it's current theme elements or content, to provide an immersive community, to add in new features of questing, crafting, or economy?

The phrase Potential is what a game could be, is still very vague.

As an example imagine this conversation:

Pete :   Man Sue you have so much potential

Sue:  What do you mean?

Pete; I mean you could be so much more

Sue:  So much more HOW ?

Pete: Just that you have so many possibilities to reach your full potential

Even when making an analysis based on potential, if your intentions are to be clear and not just stir up debate and discussion, you still need to be specific on what potential is  for the purpose of that analysis.

 i  have very big doubt on your list aion will do good for a new game as will do rom 

but the fact is wow will get most of the rest 

why new content will be good enough for most

eve wont break any record 

first person shooter wil do good ,check xfire the second place is always a shooter

so for the rest ,mm unless they are more impressive then wow in term of quality (good luck on that front)

not a lot of game will steal spotlight from wow

1 small exemple compare aion ways to move and wow

in wow you can moove so fluidly in pvp ,like jumpe do a 180 while doing all kind of weird stuff

try doing that in aion lol you get automaticly faced to your opponent lol 

thats just one exemple ,yes wow had 5 year to polish

but it was like that from almost the start you cant polish feature that arent there in any game

the fact is not a lot of game have the bugdet power blizzard has 

and if blizzard ever felt they would loose they would probably had a tournament with money 

wow doesnt have lot of competition yes some game might and i state this again might do good in september 

and its not for the lack of trying AOC,WAR,LOTR,DDO all fairly similar game rpg all of those game together gets what 10% of wow player 

hell  rom does better then all those game put together,and its been what 4 months since release.

Originally posted by Greenie

Still when it comes to potential : Potential

1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality <potential benefits>

2: expressing possibility ; specifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in “it may rain”)
 

 

He does not define potential for: What?    To be innovative in combat , to add new PVe experiences, to expand on it's current theme elements or content, to provide an immersive community, to add in new features of questing, crafting, or economy?

The phrase Potential is what a game could be, is still very vague.

As an example imagine this conversation:

Pete :   Man Sue you have so much potential

Sue:  What do you mean?

Pete; I mean you could be so much more

Sue:  So much more HOW ?

Pete: Just that you have so many possibilities to reach your full potential

Even when making an analysis based on potential, if your intentions are to be clear and not just stir up debate and discussion, you still need to be specific on what potential is  for the purpose of that analysis.

Potential to be a good game. It wasn't an "official analysis," it was a list written to be fun and to get people talking about the idea of potential within the indusry, however you define it.  I don't know why you're so stuck on this point, other than  to simply nitpick. In each description, I discussed where I felt the particular game's potential was coming from. Seriously man, let it go. Either let go of the semantics and enjoy it for what it is, or don't and stop worrying about it.

Mortal online should've been there & also Warhammer 40k online. There should always be room for scif-fi lumbering orcs

This is a travesty of a list. To include Stargate and Eve but not Jumpgate is a pure strike out, IMO. Where's Champions Online, DC Universe Online, or even Earthrise?

That's 4 highly anticipated games that were excluded for the likes of Stargate (with some of the worst gameplay videos I've ever seen for an MMO) and an MMO that's been out for 6 years now. Swing and a miss.

Jon wood, you and I, have the same taste.

Originally posted by Realbigdeal

I desagree with most of them.

but i real question is why mortal online is not listen? This guy is a carebear or what? Maybe MO are a sell out company. Maybe its because MO was not at E3 so they are not snob enough for them. The communoty at mmorpg.com like mortal online so what the fuck? Comme on guys. Its like they want to try to back down mortal online. They dont want it to be a success, but they want eve to stay even if the game is arleady out.

My biggest question is why eve online and not mortal online. EVE is already fucking out. So go on and put mortal online. This article was not suppose to be about history. While we at it, you should had put ultima online or arsheron call you moron.

I use to like his article, but this time, he failed.

You use the word "carebear" as if it's a big insult, when in fact it means "person using this term is a pre-pubescent who uses PvP games to hide his real life shamefull ass kickings" and then call Jon a moron? Your post was laughable, but entertaining. I give you 1 star out of 10 for effort.
 

Jon, I think you're going to have to add a giant disclaimer of "THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL LIST AND NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF ANYONE BUT ME" at the top, or the kids on the shortbus are never going to figure it out. Even then, they'll probably miss it.

Originally posted by FlaFringe

This is a travesty of a list. To include Stargate and Eve but not Jumpgate is a pure strike out, IMO. Where's Champions Online, DC Universe Online, or even Earthrise?

That's 4 highly anticipated games that were excluded for the likes of Stargate (with some of the worst gameplay videos I've ever seen for an MMO) and an MMO that's been out for 6 years now. Swing and a miss.

Did you read the article? If you had, you would understand why I chose the games that I did. you would also see that I specifically stated that there were going to be games that people disagreed with me on, including the ones you mention ion this rant. If you're going to trash me, trash me, that's cool but it's more effective if you can show that you've read the article you're trashing.

Originally posted by Zorvan

Originally posted by Realbigdeal

I desagree with most of them.

but i real question is why mortal online is not listen? This guy is a carebear or what? Maybe MO are a sell out company. Maybe its because MO was not at E3 so they are not snob enough for them. The communoty at mmorpg.com like mortal online so what the fuck? Comme on guys. Its like they want to try to back down mortal online. They dont want it to be a success, but they want eve to stay even if the game is arleady out.

My biggest question is why eve online and not mortal online. EVE is already fucking out. So go on and put mortal online. This article was not suppose to be about history. While we at it, you should had put ultima online or arsheron call you moron.

I use to like his article, but this time, he failed.

You use the word "carebear" as if it's a big insult, when in fact it means "person using this term is a pre-pubescent who uses PvP games to hide his real life shamefull ass kickings" and then call Jon a moron? Your post was laughable, but entertaining. I give you 1 star out of 10 for effort.
 

Jon, I think you're going to have to add a giant disclaimer of "THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL LIST AND NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF ANYONE BUT ME" at the top, or the kids on the shortbus are never going to figure it out. Even then, they'll probably miss it.

*shrug* It's in the text of the article. If people want to take something out of context without reading the text, that's their perogative. If I wasn't used to getting slammed mercilessly, I wouldn't still be doing this job ;) Thanks for the support though Zorvan.

Game with the most potential ever!

The one that hasn't been announced yet...yep that's right, it can be whatever *you* always wanted...just imagine it...

Overall I thought the article was pretty good in presenting the potential of some of the mmo's.  Some ideas I agreed with some I didn't.  I thought that Fallen Earth should be a little higher on the list  and that the final three were basically a "give me".  I really enjoyed reading about some of the the other more obscure games that have potential, according to the writer.

For me I think one of the mmo's that has the most potential is Force of Arms.  I have been following the game for a while and really like the open ended aspect of the game play and creativitiy in the storyline that has been put into the game so far.