A lot of people are trivializing this, or misunderstanding where the fear is coming from. Let me explain how I see it.

Take an example from these forums. You've probably read a few threads about people who complain that death penalties nowadays are too lenient, or maybe they want full corpse looting in their world pvp. You might shrug them off, or you might flame them and tell them that most people don't want that kind of game. It's true, games that are really challenging and punishing have become niche, and most people don't want to lose experience and gear when they die. The market shifted from those niche games, like UO, to more accessible games for more casual players, like WoW.

That's all well and good, if you're not one of those niche players who wants the UO experience. Those old school gamers now have to cling to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online, because there aren't as many developers or publishers who will make or fund games for a smaller market, when you've got this cash cow of casual players staring you in the face.

This has all already happened. the marginalization of the will of the older, more hardcore gamers.

The fear of these Facebook games is that these kinds of players (people who we don't even consider gamers) are going to be the main market that developers and publishers aim to please, and we are going to become the niche, the marginalized, the too-hardcore-to-warrant-attention crowd. We are going to become those same people we dismiss on these forums because they cling to archaic game mechanics and old school styles of entertainment. 

Originally posted by Czargio

 A lot of people are trivializing this, or misunderstanding where the fear is coming from. Let me explain how I see it.

Take an example from these forums. You've probably read a few threads about people who complain that death penalties nowadays are too lenient, or maybe they want full corpse looting in their world pvp. You might shrug them off, or you might flame them and tell them that most people don't want that kind of game. It's true, games that are really challenging and punishing have become niche, and most people don't want to lose experience and gear when they die. The market shifted from those niche games, like UO, to more accessible games for more casual players, like WoW.

That's all well and good, if you're not one of those niche players who wants the UO experience. Those old school gamers now have to cling to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online, because there aren't as many developers or publishers who will make or fund games for a smaller market, when you've got this cash cow of casual players staring you in the face.

This has all already happened. the marginalization of the will of the older, more hardcore gamers.

The fear of these Facebook games is that these kinds of players (people who we don't even consider gamers) are going to be the main market that developers and publishers aim to please, and we are going to become the niche, the marginalized, the too-hardcore-to-warrant-attention crowd. We are going to become those same people we dismiss on these forums because they cling to archaic game mechanics and old school styles of entertainment. 

True, maybe the UO flavor isn't what the masses want. However, what about a game based on social functionality, player ownership, and player business. Yet involves no combat?

I made a post about this in the pub, but I'll highlight a little on what i'm saying here.

Think about a game where you can be what ever you want to be. Want to run a pool hall and charge players in-game currency to play? Want to create an arcade and charge players again IGC to play? Want to be in a cover band, and perform in the local night club?

Take SWG's social functions combine them with game play similar to sims, with a more hands on feel. You might have the next big blockbuster. All it would take would be AAA design and shimmer, a few easy to obtain licenses, music and old arcade games  possibly clothing. And you have a game that has never been done before.

If a game like farmville is popular there's no reason a game like that wouldn't be.

I think rather than approach the issue with imagination they are admitting defeat. That's just my opinion though.

There is media for the mass market and there is art, which is not for mass market. Building a virtual world and make it work like in games like Eve and forgotten games like Asherons Call is a piece of art. A virtual, breathing world which is not too far of a real world.

Games like Farmville and WoW are just money machines designed to cater to the lowest denominator. They have little innovation, sophistication more than the latest action flick by Michael Bay.

So yeah, alot of people are playing Farmville and WoW and alot of people are eating at McDonalds and watching Transformers XX. That does not mean either of those are actually high quality or evolvement of the genre. It just mean they cater to the masses.

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Czargio

 A lot of people are trivializing this, or misunderstanding where the fear is coming from. Let me explain how I see it.

Take an example from these forums. You've probably read a few threads about people who complain that death penalties nowadays are too lenient, or maybe they want full corpse looting in their world pvp. You might shrug them off, or you might flame them and tell them that most people don't want that kind of game. It's true, games that are really challenging and punishing have become niche, and most people don't want to lose experience and gear when they die. The market shifted from those niche games, like UO, to more accessible games for more casual players, like WoW.

That's all well and good, if you're not one of those niche players who wants the UO experience. Those old school gamers now have to cling to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online, because there aren't as many developers or publishers who will make or fund games for a smaller market, when you've got this cash cow of casual players staring you in the face.

This has all already happened. the marginalization of the will of the older, more hardcore gamers.

The fear of these Facebook games is that these kinds of players (people who we don't even consider gamers) are going to be the main market that developers and publishers aim to please, and we are going to become the niche, the marginalized, the too-hardcore-to-warrant-attention crowd. We are going to become those same people we dismiss on these forums because they cling to archaic game mechanics and old school styles of entertainment. 

True, maybe the UO flavor isn't what the masses want. However, what about a game based on social functionality, player ownership, and player business. Yet involves no combat?

I made a post about this in the pub, but I'll highlight a little on what i'm saying here.

Think about a game where you can be what ever you want to be. Want to run a pool hall and charge players in-game currency to play? Want to create an arcade and charge players again IGC to play? Want to be in a cover band, and perform in the local night club?

Take SWG's social functions combine them with game play similar to sims, with a more hands on feel. You might have the next big blockbuster. All it would take would be AAA design and shimmer, a few easy to obtain licenses, music and old arcade games  possibly clothing. And you have a game that has never been done before.

If a game like farmville is popular there's no reason a game like that wouldn't be.

I think rather than approach the issue with imagination they are admitting defeat. That's just my opinion though.

 

I was thinking about this the other day as I was playing Fallen Earth on my gaming rig and my wife was playing Farmville on her laptop.

What if the 2 merged together (Social Networking-Facebook/Myspace and MMO/Virtual World). Sort of like SiMs Online but more player control, sort of like Second Life but less player control (porn) and not as clunky.

A Facebook/MySpace Online. FaceSpace Online! Where, instead of people creating their own personal "Page", people/players can create their own World/Instance and can visit other peoples "worlds". Again much like we see in 2nd Life.

I hate to admit it, but one of my most favorite and fun things I enjoyed doing was going to Social Events in SWG. Talking with others, dancing, looking at how they have designed their house/guild hall.

That in itself was player created content at its finest.

I bet that we see more Social Networking type MMO's coming in the future. Ones that are not so much geared towards pewpew hack-n-slash as they are to OMGHi2U2!

Originally posted by jeah0000

FARMVILLE IS NOT AN MMO, WHY IS BEING DISCUSSED. WHO HIRES THESE MORON COLUMNISTS ALL THEY DO IS WRITE GARBAGE. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, however I don't read the article as being about Farmville, I read the article as saying Farmville has MMO developers in an uproar.

Originally posted by Czargio

 A lot of people are trivializing this, or misunderstanding where the fear is coming from. Let me explain how I see it.

Take an example from these forums. You've probably read a few threads about people who complain that death penalties nowadays are too lenient, or maybe they want full corpse looting in their world pvp. You might shrug them off, or you might flame them and tell them that most people don't want that kind of game. It's true, games that are really challenging and punishing have become niche, and most people don't want to lose experience and gear when they die. The market shifted from those niche games, like UO, to more accessible games for more casual players, like WoW.

That's all well and good, if you're not one of those niche players who wants the UO experience. Those old school gamers now have to cling to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online, because there aren't as many developers or publishers who will make or fund games for a smaller market, when you've got this cash cow of casual players staring you in the face.

This has all already happened. the marginalization of the will of the older, more hardcore gamers.

The fear of these Facebook games is that these kinds of players (people who we don't even consider gamers) are going to be the main market that developers and publishers aim to please, and we are going to become the niche, the marginalized, the too-hardcore-to-warrant-attention crowd. We are going to become those same people we dismiss on these forums because they cling to archaic game mechanics and old school styles of entertainment. 

This.

80 million players beats the WoW subscription base eightfold. You can bet Blizzard and every other game development company is paying attention to the kind of revenue stream Farmville is generating. And in every industry, where the money is tends to be where the development goes.

Originally posted by PyrateLV

O

 

 

I was thinking about this the other day as I was playing Fallen Earth on my gaming rig and my wife was playing Farmville on her laptop.

What if the 2 merged together (Social Networking-Facebook/Myspace and MMO/Virtual World). Sort of like SiMs Online but more player control, sort of like Second Life but less player control (porn) and not as clunky.

A Facebook/MySpace Online. FaceSpace Online! Where, instead of people creating their own personal "Page", people/players can create their own World/Instance and can visit other peoples "worlds". Again much like we see in 2nd Life.

I bet that we see more Social Networking type MMO's coming in the future. Ones that are not so much geared towards pewpew hack-n-slash as they are to OMGHi2U2!

 

I can see the SL comparison, but I would much prefer the world be one theme while your own creations have their place in it, think real life, in a SWG type of environment. In SL it was really off putting to go from a fantasy zone to a sci-fi,then into as you put it, porn LOL. I'm thinking a thriving city possibly even vehicles or mass transit (metro-buses).

Customizable vehicles, is another route of uncharted dev territory. Mechanic as a trade?

I'm just saying they've never truly fleshed out the virtual world at this point, and they're already giving up. It's slightly bothersome tbh. Especially in Kosters case, if anyone would create something along those lines, I would think it would be him.I guess that won't be happening.

Originally posted by PyrateLV 

I was thinking about this the other day as I was playing Fallen Earth on my gaming rig and my wife was playing Farmville on her laptop.

What if the 2 merged together (Social Networking-Facebook/Myspace and MMO/Virtual World). Sort of like SiMs Online but more player control, sort of like Second Life but less player control (porn) and not as clunky.

A Facebook/MySpace Online. FaceSpace Online! Where, instead of people creating their own personal "Page", people/players can create their own World/Instance and can visit other peoples "worlds". Again much like we see in 2nd Life.

That would have been Metaplace. You didn't show up. :)

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Lidane

Originally posted by RavingRabbid

There is no "war" between social games and regular console or MMO's imo. I play Castle age, happy Island, vampire wars, and Starfleet commander on the facebook in the morning, but its only for about 10-20 min  tops. Console and MMO's give me far more depth and content than the social games by far.

 

Yeah, this.

I play both Mafia Wars and Cafe World on my Facebook every day, but that's only for just a few minutes each at a time. They're time wasters, and give some variety to the whole Facebook experience. They're the equivalent of playing Minesweeper or Solitaire on your computer at work to make the day go by faster. That's about it. On the other hand, if I want a more in-depth gaming experience, I'll fire up a game console or my PC and log into an MMO.

I really don't understand all the hand-wringing and whining about games like Farmville. They're social games that attract people who wouldn't otherwise play games. They enhance the Facebook experience, which is good. None of that means that they're going to replace MMO's or kill all gaming as we know it. It's just a different facet of gaming.

 

I think that's probably true from a player's point of view, but the war isn't over players and where they spend their time. The war, if there is one, is over money. Obviously, games need money in order to be made. With the success of social games like Farmville, which can be made at a literal fraction of the cost of making a AAA title, more and more investors are looking toward that side of the market.

Think about it this way: If you could make a pile of money by either a) investing a lot and taking a large risk or b) investing a little and taking a much smaller risk, which one are you going to do?

So, do virtual worlds have something to fear from the success of Facebook and other social games? Of course they do. it's not that people are afraid no one's going to play the AAA games, it's the fear that no one's going to fund the AAA games.

First, Howdy Raph!  Thanks for making my best gaming experiance (also my first).

I don't thing the MMORPG genere will disappear but we have seen drastic changes alter the whole.  Upward progress was being made in Sandbox style games.  Methods of adapting content had much to go but was happening.  Then WOW changed the entire ball game from the side of the investors.  WOW made its splash with less then the standard sandboxxer and showed managers and investors more bang for thier buck for less.  Demographics aside. The fear here is that we might see another WOW level effect to the genere.  WOW pretty much killed developement of heavy world sims for simple combat engines.  Quicker turnaround on investments done with less managment of servers and development resources.  Just milk that cow until she goes dry or drops.  Item shops and TCG's just prolongs this state but not my much.  Community building is totally off the table and is only a issue for trouble shooting.  Let the forums handle that or in this case the base Facebook.

Its all strange as tech is going up up up, standards and qualities sink further down down down.

"How can we milk the reubs for the same amount but for less investment?"

Originally posted by Raph

Originally posted by PyrateLV 

I was thinking about this the other day as I was playing Fallen Earth on my gaming rig and my wife was playing Farmville on her laptop.

What if the 2 merged together (Social Networking-Facebook/Myspace and MMO/Virtual World). Sort of like SiMs Online but more player control, sort of like Second Life but less player control (porn) and not as clunky.

A Facebook/MySpace Online. FaceSpace Online! Where, instead of people creating their own personal "Page", people/players can create their own World/Instance and can visit other peoples "worlds". Again much like we see in 2nd Life.

 

That would have been Metaplace. You didn't show up. :)

Make the game I'm talking about above and I'll show up:). Pretty please?

Great post Malickie!

I don't know why I feel I need to say this, but I play Farmville as well as MMOs and MMORPGs.  I don't regard one as "real" gaming and one as gaming that is not real.

So - what is Farmville.  Farmville is a simulation game where you simulate farming, mostly.   Think of it as more like having an estate or maybe a village.  You start small and build up.  There is some cuteness (the animals on the ferris wheel are cute) and even a little sci-fi stuff. I have  a downed spaceship on my estate.  It's browser based.  You plow land and "farm" with a few clicks.  You buy trees and harvest them.   You acquire animals and you get wool or eggs from them (no killing in farmville).  You can acquire houses, a post office, a pond.    Like other sim games, the game goes on when you aren't there.  If it take two days for your crops to grow, you go back after two days and your crops are grown and you harvest them (a couple of clicks).  Like other games (hmmm?) you acquire both money and experience.  With additional experience you unlock other items.    Yes there's a grind (though blessedly short) - harvesting crops -- doesn't seem all that different from killing monsters or finding rare materials, to me.

The social part -- you go to your friends farms, and help out (couple of clicks) -- you weed, you fertilize.  Your  friends give you gifts (a tree, a mystery gift) and you give your friends gifts.  Occasionally an event happens -- example, the game tells you that a lonely calf wandered onto your "farm" and can you find a home for the calf?  If you choose (always your choice) you let it post on Facebook and your facebook friends can get a calf for their farm.

Now, let's decontruct what's going on.   Facebook plays in a browser, no setup, and you can play it anywhere.   It's a classic, make it pretty, build a place,  kind of game -- You are putting the pieces  together, that's all, but people tend to make their farm their own, like you do with the "making a home" part of any game that has housing.  It's competitive in the sense that you try to make a nice place, but that's it.   No one interferes with your fun.  There's no combat, and no killing and we all enjoy each other's places.   But remember, there's leveling and you acquire in-game money..  You don't have to spend "real money" but yes, I've spent a litte money on facebook. 

Facebook feels just as "real" to me as any other game I've played.  It doesn't feel cheap or shoddy.  It's simple by design, and it's designed to be played in little bits of time.  The "time passing when you aren't there" is a nice feature.    I can't see what the fuss is about -- more people playing games then before so gaming isn't elist?  I don't get it.

Here's another facebook related story.  I have a cousin who told me about Kingdoms of Camelot, another facebook game.  It looks a bit like Travian, or even Civilization, a strategy, command and conquer kind of game -- played in a browser.    It's an RTS, real time strategy game, and though you start simple, the game looks reasonably complex to me.  My cousin does not consider herself to be a "gamer", but she wants to try something a little harder, the game places in a browser,  she doesn't have to buy anything, and so she and her hustband are going to try it.    That's an example of a person who, if I would have told her that she might have enjoyed a RTS game -- she would have never believed me, and now she's giving it a try. 

It you don't game -- the path to gaming -- it's so hard. -- special consoles, really good PCs, long learning curve, and no one like you seems to be doing it.  If you want to play a game with people, well, as we know,  there's a lot of people I would consider "mean" online -- we are all supposed to learn that when you get in an online world, don't expect kind and helpful people and 'watch your back".   Now - some people might like gaming if -- they could start small, no extra equipment required, you can play in little bits of time, and, for games where there is some person interaction, you only interact with people you know, nice people.  That, and you can find things to do that don't involve combat, though there is some combat type stuff if you want that.  Honestly, who in the gaming industry could object to this?  To me, it seems like a win all around.

I also know people who have been in both the "conventional" gaming industry and the "social" gaming industry.  They don't seem to see this big distinction, and they don't think it's a bad thing.  why should I?

Originally posted by Raph

Originally posted by PyrateLV 

I was thinking about this the other day as I was playing Fallen Earth on my gaming rig and my wife was playing Farmville on her laptop.

What if the 2 merged together (Social Networking-Facebook/Myspace and MMO/Virtual World). Sort of like SiMs Online but more player control, sort of like Second Life but less player control (porn) and not as clunky.

A Facebook/MySpace Online. FaceSpace Online! Where, instead of people creating their own personal "Page", people/players can create their own World/Instance and can visit other peoples "worlds". Again much like we see in 2nd Life.

 

That would have been Metaplace. You didn't show up. :)

OMG! OMG! OMG! Raph Koster replied to my post. Ill never wash my computer again!! /nerdswoon

LOFL!  j/k man. Nice to see ya. :D

Anyway, I showed up and think Metaplace was interesting, but I never really got into it. On your website, you stated that it failed because "  it didnt get enough traction". I wonder why that is.

It is a Facebook/Myspace Online so to speak.

 Did it not get enough Advertising/Exposure? Could it not compete with Facebook/Myspace? Was it ahead of its time? Was it because it was a Flash 2d program and was "behind the times"?

Thats why it didnt hook me. I dont play Farmville and Im not really that into Facebook/Myspace socializing. I like to socialize in a World, not some web page. Thats why I play Fallen Earth and SWG and other MMO's.

What I think of as the future of "Social MMO's" would be more of a SWG meets Facebook (3d interactive virtual world) instead of a Facebook meets UO (Browser based 2d web page)

SWG was a great Social Virtual World, but didnt have enough player content. Metaplace had alot of player content, but didnt feel like a real Virtual World.

Maybe you should re-work/re-do/re-build Metaplace into something really "Next Generation". Not just some slightly more advanced Facebook/Myspace or another copy of WO.oW.

I know you of all people can do it if anyone can.

I just want to say...that was one of the most epic writings I have seen on this website.

Originally posted by Raph

I haven't seen any numbers for Aion subscribers broken out by territory. Does it have millions in NA/Europe?

LOTRO's what, a million or so?

That really is not "rising tide for everyone" sorts of results. Better, but 2-3x improvement in 7-8 years?

More telling, only two examples?

The marketshare has been increasing every year. What's that saying?

Despite the publishers best attempt to bore us to death with WoW clones, the market is still increasing.

DDO just announced a 500% revenue increase. The money is there. You just have to know how to get it. Creating WoW clones won't do it. You think creating Farmville clones will?

Hey, at least when this doesn't pan out the company won't be out millions of dollars. I'm kinda glad to see the WoW clone publishers moving on to the "next big thing".

 This whole discussion is such a load of crap.

There are a multitude of markets out there for computer games, some of which have only recently been exploited, e.g. FarmVille. However, the audience for this type of game appears to be very different to traditional MMOs. Saying FarmVille will kill WOW is a bit like suggesting people would stop drinking wine when cola was invented. FarmVille simply expands the market for computer games; it doesn’t change the existing market. As long as there's someone who wants to play games like WOW, games like WOW will continue to exist.

I feel much of this controversy can be attributed to investors who've tried to make a fast buck with a WOW clone, found it was harder than they though and are looking elsewhere to invest. So here's their bright idea: I'll invest in a market with virtually no barriers to entry and masses of existing competition. The product I'm going to invest in will be cheap to make but may well have an extremely short lifecycle and may never generate much revenue even if it's a success. Good luck with that.

As for the traditional MMO market, developers are either going to need significant investment to turn out far more professional and diverse products or gamers will need to start accepting that games will be released as very much a work-in-progress. With investors looking to chase the social game dollar, I can see that later being more likely. Global Agenda very much fits this profile. It’s a professional and highly polished game, but it lacks a significant amount of content which players of older and bigger games (e.g. WOW) have come to expect. Instead the content is being delivered over time. It's almost as though the initial release allows investors to test the water and gauge whether the product will be a success, before more money is ploughed into developing the game to its full potential. What all developers needs to ensure they deliver is immersion, because this is where traditional MMOs 'should' excel. If FarmVille is a snack, WOW is a 3-course meal.

I also think the number of competitors in the MMO market needs to - and will - be reduced significantly. There are way too many MMOs out there at the moment, most of which are almost identical. Because of the commitment these games demand, originality is the key to success because offering more of the same just isn't going to convince some guy who's invested 500 hours in WOW to switch to your clone for less of the same. Most movies only require a commitment of about 2 hours of a person's time, yet there are only a few in the cinema at any one time. MMOs require hundreds of times this amount of commitment to be enjoyed to the full, yet there are dozens of them being release and all competing at once. I have to add, it personally saddens me to know that there are hundreds of hard-working game developers out there pouring their efforts into games which you, me and the cat know are 100% without question going to be a piece of crap and fail HARD. I'm sure most of these guys and gals know it too, but they need the money. I guess their work must just be the definition of unfulfilling.

Aryas

My basic take on all this is that MMO developers are wondering why games like Farmville can get 80 million players when they struggle for 1-5 million. Well, lets take a look at the history of MMOs and see what did what. For instance, EQ never surpassed 1 million players, but was considered a huge success until WoW came out and grabbed 13 million. So for starters, what did WoW do, that no other MMO before or after it did to aquire such an unusual amount of players. It's simple, WoW was made with the younger generation in mind. I'm not talking 13 and up, I'm talking about 7, 8 and 9 year olds play WoW as well as the older crowd. WoW is cartoony, which is what kids like. WoW has simple to use combat and UI and keeps basic concepts of achievement and rewards.

So, what did Farmville do that WoW didn't? It's simple, they made a game that anyone could enjoy, including people in their 50s, 60s, and 70s. I'm 37 and my parents barely ever touched a computer, let alone play a game on one. However, theres probably more elderly people on Facebook for the mere fact of keeping in touch with family. What a perfect marketing tool Facebook is, no? EVERYONE uses it which means if you make a game that everyone can play, your going to have subscribers. However, I'm pretty sure not everyone plays Farmville, cause I sure as hell don't. I just know why so many people do, because it's about all their brain can handle. It's your basic achievement and reward system on an extremely fast and competitive platform.

I'm pretty sure that the concern isn't that virtual worlds are losing their users to Farmville, but that they're losing their investors. What happened when WoW released set a pretty clear precedent for that.

I'm confused. We are calling farmville, mafia wars and the light virtual worlds? These are more like glorified arcade games of days long past. Where people no longer compare high scores in very non-virtual games of pinball and asteroids but now we compare an array of statistics and some graphics. These are more like bejeweled or the myriad of other such products people play on their pc instead of solitare.

The only reason these games are so popular they run on EVERYTHING and take almost zero time to play.

Also, do we really care? Who cares how much money the main stream gets. Since when have MMO players really cared about such things? Being an MMO player has always been a niche thing (at least in the western world).

Sounds like a tin foil hat theory.  Farmville targets a completely different audience then that of MMORPGs.   Farmville might have more users then WoW but it's also a FREE game on the biggest online social network in the world,  Facebook.

Originally posted by Khalathwyr

Great! So, the backlash of this is the so-called AAA developers now decide that they might as well make their games even more shallow and less like worlds (sim-like) to cut even more costs to make them more attractive toward investors. Perfect. Just, perfect. Oh, sure, there may be more logical steps to take in this case, steps that I may even embrace. But if there is one thing this industry has shown me since WoW is that the heads of these companies aren't anywhere near logical nor do they have creativity anywhere in their mindset. They are indeed chasing metrics and there hasn't been any miraculous event that is going to stop them from this pattern of behavior.

If World of Darkness Online and/or Copernicus don't offer up well-rounded world's and instead are more of the same old same AAA offerings of late, then I'm seriously done with this genre of gaming. I'm going to go to Facebook, unblock Farmville and start playing it non-stop. I, and many others, have been begging, kicking and screaming for a return to the depth and variety of gameplay that UO and early SWG offered and have been continuously ignored. Well, if hitching my wagon to Zynga and finally accepting a paper dixie cup full of Aihoshi's Blue Kool-Aid in any minute way screws over the establishment (the AAA P2Pers) and allows me to throw up a parting middle digit, well, in the infamous words of Palpatine..."So be it, Jedi..."

 

I had to laugh at this. It's funny, but sad. I feel the same way really. My wife is obsessed with all those stupid Facebook games, FarmVille, Cafe World, etc... etc... I played them for a few weeks when they first started appearing on Facebook, but as soon as they started with the half a dozen pop-ups advertising all the great crap you could buy to "enhance" your FarmVille experience, I stopped playing.

RMT's are a deal breaker for me with any game. As one of the earlier posters said, game companies and most companies as a whole (Automotive, electronics, cell phones) are just copying, stealing, cloning, whatever you want to call it, the last "hot" idea and trying to suck their 2 cents out of the world. There is no originality, games I played a decade ago, on my PS1 were as engaging (if graphically less stellar) as most things being produced today.

The first Resident Evil was a game that had myself and 2 of my friends skipping school for 2 days to play. Syphon Filter was a twist and turns challenging shooter game. Gran Tourismo was a groundbreaking racing game. Has anything since really pushed the envolope? Or is it the same crap with better graphics? The same can bee said for MMO's, EA Sports NHL, NBA, MLB, NFL series games... improvements, but rarely is anything pushing boundaries.