Sometimes I read through this site, and on my more forgiving days I occurs that perhaps players are just not seeing the forest for the trees when it comes to MMOs.

Comparing the MMO genre to single-player games, just think of how many crappy shovelware games are out there for consoles.  As a percentage of the total number of available games, I'd generally suggest that there are a higher number of decent MMOs than decent console games.

As to the engrossing story in MMOs - developers are rather stuck there.  Games that provide a story have to provide it for everyone - and thus must either be heavily instanced or fall back on the generic questing for most of it.  Consider that single player RPGs are generally only 40-60 hours of play at most (some as low as 20).  You just can't have a stable community-driven experience if people are done with the game in a month or so.  So they all fall back on easy-to-design (repeatable) content.

On the other hand, if developers don't provide a steady stream of quests - a large percentage of the playerbase won't give them a second look because they are simply not capable of making their own fun (as in SWG or EVE or UO).

I do think you're slightly unfair in your comparisons however.  No mass-market product can be as good as a customised PnP setting with a group of friends - looking for the same in MMOs is bound to end in disappointment.

Similarly, not all MMOs are created equal.  To say the genre is failing because WAR and UO aren't the same isn't really taking into account that they were never designed for the same purpose.  I played WAR for a year, and generally had fun with it for what it was - basically an e-sport, a pick-up game of swords-and-sorcery football.  I didn't expect the deep and engrossing experience I had with EVE or SWG and so I wasn't upset when it wasn't there.  (not to say I didn't have problems with Mythic's development - just that I was satisfied with the game for the most part)

The key is that the old, monolithic "MMORPG" title has grown to the point where there are sub-genres within it.  As fashions change and players evolve, certain types of MMO experiences will be more prevalent.  Right now we're tailing off the majority of the WOW model, and many new games are seeking to innovate in small ways to bring a piece of the Warcraft audience to their game. 

It's unfortunate that MMOs take so long to develop, as that strands fans of a particular genre in a very dry spell when their chosen game-play model isn't in vogue (much like in other genres - flight-sim fans for instance) - which is one of the reasons I believe that Fallen Earth seems to be garnering as much favourable reaction among "vets" in this community and others.

I think you're feeling a bit of the stranded feeling at the moment.  In time something will probably come out that is right up your alley - but my only thought would be that until that comes around, if you play a game try to play it for what it is rather than what you wish it would be.

Cheers.

I've thought long and hard about this and here's what I've come up with.

Regardless of a persons first MMORPG, they will say it was their favorite. It's because it was the first time they encountered all the things they seen and it is all entertaining at least once. It doesn't really matter if a previous game did it better or had more features, they'll still see their first game as being their favorite. I personally remember my first days exploring Albion in Dark Age of Camelot. It was a wonder, walking around in 3D, being able to pick up that sword and equip it, seeing people running around all around me. It was a wonder seeing these skeletons walking around. The whole game was a wonder, mainly because it was the first time I seen anything like it. If a person sees all of this again, in another game, after playing the previous MMORPG for 3 years, will that person be impressed still?

The bottom line concerning MMORPG's, is that their too similar and because they take so long to play through, doing things that are too similar is really boring. So the sane course of action here is to play your first MMORPG, and then give the genre a rest until something revolutional comes out to bring you that great feeling of wonder again.

I've played plenty of MMORPG's that technically were better games than DAoC, because they did this feature better, or had all of these great features in one game, or told more of a story, had better graphics, a more informational website, and so on. However, because those games were still so similar to EQ, DAOC, and etc., they brought no wonder, which gave me no reason to really want to explore anything.

Then you analyze why people play the games, some even play titles that are so similar to others, complain about it, but don't leave. I've came up with the conclusion that the first MMO hooks you into this genre. You play that MMORPG for years, get bored, and want to adventure somewhere new. Except that the new stuff only looks different...the game is still the same. So my conclusion is that people play MMORPG's, after their first one, because they're addicted to having something to tie up all of the free time they have in real life. They'd rather grind stupidly on quests or on just mobs, rather than face staring at a wall and having to think of something creative to do with their time. Combine this with the cost of playing a MMORPG, and you have a very cheap way of keeping yourself busy.

That's my theory.

Originally posted by HitechLolife

I don't think anything interests me enough to ever write or even read a forum post that long.

Have you been to college? You write stuff longer than that and on a regular basis. You get used to going in depth about things, so it comes natural.

Originally posted by afoaa

Personally I think we should wait and see about Kotor online because bioware has designed it so it contains 8 different progressive story lines. Bioware know their stuff and how to tell a story in a computer game so there is hope for people that love that approach to games. But we don't know how well it will work in a MMO yet and many MMO players of other orientations will hate it because it will probably be very solo and instance oriented.

I think you must mean SWTOR, and I agree, I think it could well be a treat. However, I think it's more than 8 progressive story lines as there are supposed to be non-linear elements in the plot  for each of the classes, so although a story-driven game it is possible to select the same class from scratch and play it through the game with very different plot outcomes, though obviously it isn't sandbox game.

Originally posted by nate1980

Originally posted by HitechLolife

I don't think anything interests me enough to ever write or even read a forum post that long.

 

Have you been to college? You write stuff longer than that and on a regular basis. You get used to going in depth about things, so it comes natural.

I agree with you on your points. The problems could be cured very easily. Give the players tools to create quest themselves.

I will use Everquest 2 as an example:

Right now you only get quest from NPCs. But why not have a Guild House vendor that has quest that is guild/player made. This way if I need one thousand boiled leather pelts. A player could accept my quest from the vendor then get the pelts, turn them into the vendor and they get their reward. The reward is there for the taking.

This would solve a ton of problems since I can become the DM of my guild, if I chose to do it.

All the tools in every MMO are there, except this one, I think City of Heroes/Villians are the only ones that use this, if I am not mistaken.