In my opinion the facelift strategy has already worked well in MMOs.

EVE - Trinity: www.eveonline.com/download/videos/Default.asp (the video sums it up pretty nicely I think)

Of course, in EVE there cannot be an argument over adding new classes but CCP has been adding new content and new features all the time anyway.

If Blizzard learned a lesson or two from that maybe Cataclysm will succeed.

 I can understand why Sony created EQ2.  It's actually very simple:

All games run on an engine.  There is only so much that any given engine can support.  No matter how cutting edge that engine may be to begin with, there will come a time when it just can't be pushed any farther.  The graphics look dated.  New mechanics can't be added.  And on top of that, the original programmers moved on to other things, their replacements since moved on, and maybe even THEIR replacements as well.  Which leads to a point where nobody even understands the code enough anymore to change things without requiring a complete overhaul from top to bottom -- something that would actually take less time and money starting from scratch with a new engine.

SOE wanted to update the look of EQ with bleeding edge graphics.  Unfortunately, in the process they actually pushed it too far and reached a level where most computers couldn't even begin to dream of running max settings.  Even today -- five years later -- most machines can't max out EQ2.  The reason for this is actually due to the dead ends that they  forced themselves into by trying to do too much to begin with.  For example, we now have multi-core computers being commonplace, but SOE can't implement support into EQ2 without completely rewriting the engine.  They put themselves in too much of a corner.  Ironically, EQ2's graphics look way, way more dated than WoW's even though WoW runs great on almost every computer out there.  

That's an example of where Blizzard did it right, actually.  They set the entry threshold for the engine very low, relying more on style than on gee-whiz features to make the game look how it does.  Over time they have been making tweaks to the engine to make the game better looking.  WotLK included a new ice shader.  Cataclysm will have a new water shader.  We've also seen blob shadows give way to real shadows and even ambient occlusion.  Where EQ2 went berzerk with bump mapping (at a time when most computers didn't even have enough video RAM to handle twice as many texture maps), WoW has waited.  Now they not only have the option of bump but also normal mapping or even parallax mapping.  I'm honestly shocked that they've never added normal or parallax as it would make the game look so much better.  But that's not the point of this post.

What I meant to say from the start is that over time player expectations rise to a point where a game's developers can no longer meet those expectations with the original technology.  At that point they have no choice but to release a new engine.  Most of the time, a sequel makes the most sense for this.  If done right it could bring new customers into the fold without losing old customers.  Sony messed up by pushing too far.  Square and ArenaNet will hopefully learn from what SOE did wrong.  It's very, very rare for a developer to do what we saw with EVE Online, releasing a whole new engine as a free update.

I should have pointed this out:

http://www.enb-emulator.com/

The fact that they've got it working to the degree that they have and been collectively focused for all these years is nothing short of a triumph.

ive been playing  MMOs for years now   and I get sick and tired  of games being so narrow and overly combat oriented.

Im looking for a game that you feel like your in an alternate universe,, very organic  with  lots of player choice and freedom   not stuffed into a maze  with one vending machine quest after another 

Good read.

The comment about a martial arts game reminded me of something i'd like which is a game completely steeped in a particular real world mythology e.g Chinese/Japanese/Korean or Norse or ancient Greek. The classes, mobs, magic, gods would all be consistent with that so it would be part educational as well as a game. The mythology wouldn't just be the backdrop either it would interweave with the game e.g in the classical one the gods would be actively involved in the world with, for example, lots of quests involving Zeus wanting to have sex with various princesses. The Chinese one might revolve around Chi and dragons. Potentially it could be the same game with different regions based on different mythologies.

 You know, every single time I read one of Garret Fuller's articles, I get about half-way through and say, "Lord, this man is physically incapable of writing."  It's not like I think his ideas are wrong, or that he's bad at what he does... but I cannot bring myself to finish a single article.  The awkward wordings, the mildly wrong grammar, the occasional typo... it just all adds up to a giant headache for me.  

Might just be me, I don't know.

EDIT: I really think the information in the articles is of the highest quality, and my only unpleasantness is some weird mesh of his writing style and me, not the writing itself.  I feel it important to clarify that in case of future quotes.

Originally posted by VortexZ

 You know, every single time I read one of Garret Fuller's articles, I get about half-way through and say, "Lord, this man is physically incapable of writing."  It's not like I think his ideas are wrong, or that he's bad at what he does... but I cannot bring myself to finish a single article.  The awkward wordings, the mildly wrong grammar, the occasional typo... it just all adds up to a giant headache for me.  

 

Might just be me, I don't know.

Yet, you continue to read his articles? Do you have stock in an aspirin company? ^^  I usually enjoy his articles.

 He has great points that he makes regularly.  It's just something about the writing style... I want the information, I really do!

... and I tripped and hit the doorknob with my face.

Dunno, maybe I'm just weird like that.

i was saying WAR needed a 3 faction system since i got into closed beta

once the game released i was sadly proven correct.

bring me daoc2!

a multi faction ninja styled mmo would rock faces.

Originally posted by VortexZ

 You know, every single time I read one of Garret Fuller's articles, I get about half-way through and say, "Lord, this man is physically incapable of writing."  It's not like I think his ideas are wrong, or that he's bad at what he does... but I cannot bring myself to finish a single article.  The awkward wordings, the mildly wrong grammar, the occasional typo... it just all adds up to a giant headache for me.  

 

Might just be me, I don't know.

 

How on Earth, can you stand to read ANY gaming forum?

Originally posted by Thrawl

One game not mentioned in transition right now that was not mentions would be DDO. The decision to go from a monthly subscription only to having a choice between that and microtransactions is an obvious attempt to save a game that has low player base numbers. The question is will the new 'facelift' give a breath of fresh air to the game or simply keep it limping along to its inevitable end? One thing is sure, DDO is out in an ocean capsized and can do one of two things - sink or swim.

Yes, I expected to see this new business model as an example in this resurrection article. It was the first thing I thought of when I read the theme of the article.

As for facelifts....Vanguard anyone? Such a waste of potential.

First off, I agree a new DAoC would be a hit.  It still had some of the best pvp I have had in a long time, although they would need to tone down the crowd control and stealth, both of which were too overpowered.

I also agree with another poster, that AC1 would also benefit from a sequel.  That game still is a fun play even with the very dated graphics.

As SOE, they shot themselves in the foot when they tried to trump Blizzard with a very buggy, high requirements EQ2.  If they had taken their time and released it 6 months later they would have had a far better chance.  Just another in a long line of bad decisions by their clueless leader.

I am Asian that play both Asian and Western mmo, but the martial art mmo have never appealed to me.

Even to Asians there are good martial arts and bad martial arts games, marital arts simply mean a bit more to Asians which might affect how many play it, but generally a sucky game is a sucky game martial arts or not.

Martial arts remains a small niche since people focus so much on martial arts they lose sight of gameplay (alot of asian developers do this).

DAoC was the only game I ever enjoyed PvP in, normally I won't PvP, but it was really good in that game.

I hope they don't come out with a DAoC2 though. The magic that was Mythic is gone, they have grown fat and arrogant and anything they would produce would be a mockery to their earlier triumphs.

DAoC was more than the game, it was the result of their passionate developers and staff. DAoC2 without Lum or Sanya, or any of the original team who put everything into it would be a train wreck.

I'd rather they just never contemplate DAoC2.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

First off, I agree a new DAoC would be a hit.  It still had some of the best pvp I have had in a long time, although they would need to tone down the crowd control and stealth, both of which were too overpowered.

I also agree with another poster, that AC1 would also benefit from a sequel.  That game still is a fun play even with the very dated graphics.

As SOE, they shot themselves in the foot when they tried to trump Blizzard with a very buggy, high requirements EQ2.  If they had taken their time and released it 6 months later they would have had a far better chance.  Just another in a long line of bad decisions by their clueless leader.

AC did have a sequel. Asherons Call 2. Between Microsoft and Turbine they managed to mess it up so badly that they ended up closing it(right after Turbine sold a lot of us the expansion pack for AC2...)

As for SOE, the less said the better. I place them right up there with EA in terms of poor management decisions, missed/lost opportunities, and down right corporate evil.

UO - continues adding on, profitable, but I have no interest in playing.

EQ - ditto.  Kept my interest for years, though.  I tried it during one of their free recruiting campaigns, but it was so user unfriendly still, I didn't have the will to relearn how to play after so many years away from it.

EQ2 - disaster - took the worst parts of EQ and made them even worse.  Random rare mobs with random rare drops is just stupid.

AC - didn't like it.

AC2 - wasn't bad for the little bit of time I got to play.  Too bad it was so mismanaged.

PS - great game, but a little too repetitive and some design decisions were silly.  For example, I'm driving a frigging tank but the bumper is more powerful than the huge gun?

DDO - awesome game on its face.  Unfortunately, unless you have a good group of friends to play with, it sucks.  You end up playing with people whose only aim is to run through the content over and over as fast as possible.  They blurt out every step you need to take in each dungeon so you never get to experience the content for yourself.

WoW - kept my interest for years, but I got really bored and frustrated with the level 80 play.  Daily quests are a lazy developer trick to pretend they actually added content.  Grinding ever more PvP honor for gear in arenas or battlegrounds isn't an RPG, it's a gladiatorial simulator, which I'm not interested in.  That only leaves grinding dungeons, which take a good guild and too much of a time commitment - it becomes work.

War - disaster - grinding from about 25-40 sucked.  The BGs were so unbalanced, we rarely had enough players on our side, so we rarely won.

EQ, DDO, and War have plenty of cool IP that could be a good basis for a resurrection - if and only if the game itself were developed so that ALL levels were fun to play.  It has to be enjoyable enough that people won't want to get a bot to do their levelling.

I might have to disagree with you on the three realms thing in DAoC being the best PvP. The one large problem with the 3 PvP Realms is that when two factions are larger than the other one, then the two big factions end up fighting over the little one. That turns out to be no fun for the little one, and turns a three realm game into a two realm game... for all intended purposes. I personally like the Aion way of doing things where the third faction is a NPC Realm. This can end up being a spoiler and keeping the two other factions in check with each other. I do not know how Aion will work this, but on paper, I think  it is a better idea for game balance.

Originally posted by LexStriker

I might have to disagree with you on the three realms thing in DAoC being the best PvP. The one large problem with the 3 PvP Realms is that when two factions are larger than the other one, then the two big factions end up fighting over the little one. That turns out to be no fun for the little one, and turns a three realm game into a two realm game... for all intended purposes. I personally like the Aion way of doing things where the third faction is a NPC Realm. This can end up being a spoiler and keeping the two other factions in check with each other. I do not know how Aion will work this, but on paper, I think  it is a better idea for game balance.

 

How is the third faction as NPC idea not the same as every other mmo? Horde, Alliance, Scourge? It's the same thing.

Originally posted by Sanguinia

How is the third faction as NPC idea not the same as every other mmo? Horde, Alliance, Scourge? It's the same thing.

Because the NPC Faction can be programmed to maintain a balance between the two remaining player factions, not allowing one side to overpower the other on a regular basis. In the three player realm design, it is assume that the two weaker factions would fight the stronger one... which may not always be true. From personal knowledge in ADoC, I know this to be a bad assumption. With a NPC faction as the third faction, the developers are able to maintain a more even balance by direct control this NPC faction. Hopefully, this balance will provide a more challenging game for both the player realms... at least more so than the three player realm design.

Originally posted by LexStriker

I might have to disagree with you on the three realms thing in DAoC being the best PvP. The one large problem with the 3 PvP Realms is that when two factions are larger than the other one, then the two big factions end up fighting over the little one. That turns out to be no fun for the little one, and turns a three realm game into a two realm game... for all intended purposes. I personally like the Aion way of doing things where the third faction is a NPC Realm. This can end up being a spoiler and keeping the two other factions in check with each other. I do not know how Aion will work this, but on paper, I think  it is a better idea for game balance.

 

Did you PLAY daoc?...on almost every server (at least when I played the bulk of the time I played pre-atlantis/catacombs) there was one dominant faction and the other two were about even but certainly less populous than the main one.  Yes, this creates a disadvantage, but since the battles were split between Hib/Mid and Hib/Alb, and Alb/Mid, there was usually one-to-three main "battles" going on in different areas at the same time (with smaller groups running around taking towers/ect.)  It wasn't PERFECT, but every system since has been FAR FAR worse.  In fact, there were very few times when one faction on ANY server held all 6 relics.  In fact, I never saw it happen, personally.

WoW, WAR, even Aion.  Nothing comes close to the experience of pvp in DAOC.  If you have never participated in a relic keep siege, you have no idea and shouldn't even open your mouth about daoc.