Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

So Im just an average MMO consumer, and as it stands, it doesnt even look like theres any other viable options on the market right now? Or am I missing something? Or is it just that MMO's are in a proverbial dark age???

I'd say we're coming out of the dark age into one where there is a bit more diversity and greater longevity in what is coming out. It seems like when we look back at this period in time years from now, League of Legends and World of Tanks will be seen as two of the most prominent MMOs in leading that change. LoL released prior to this mess of mediocrity but it didn't really seem to be taken seriously until a year or two later. 

You do know that LoL is a MOBA and not an MMO right?

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

So Im just an average MMO consumer, and as it stands, it doesnt even look like theres any other viable options on the market right now? Or am I missing something? Or is it just that MMO's are in a proverbial dark age???

I'd say we're coming out of the dark age into one where there is a bit more diversity and greater longevity in what is coming out. It seems like when we look back at this period in time years from now, League of Legends and World of Tanks will be seen as two of the most prominent MMOs in leading that change. LoL released prior to this mess of mediocrity but it didn't really seem to be taken seriously until a year or two later. 

You do know that LoL is a MOBA and not an MMO right?

Yes. And many around here would argue that WoT isn't an MMO either. However, most online gamers aren't interested in or concerned with what label is assigned to each title. In the past few years, MOBAs, ARPGs, ActionFPSs, MMORTSs and other variations have gained a lot of traction and added a lot more diversity to the MMO market.

We can sit here in our circle of entrenched veteran MMO gamers and argue labels all we want, but the reality is that the MMO platform has expanded to be much more than level-based class-restricted RPGs.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

So Im just an average MMO consumer, and as it stands, it doesnt even look like theres any other viable options on the market right now? Or am I missing something? Or is it just that MMO's are in a proverbial dark age???

I'd say we're coming out of the dark age into one where there is a bit more diversity and greater longevity in what is coming out. It seems like when we look back at this period in time years from now, League of Legends and World of Tanks will be seen as two of the most prominent MMOs in leading that change. LoL released prior to this mess of mediocrity but it didn't really seem to be taken seriously until a year or two later. 

You do know that LoL is a MOBA and not an MMO right?

Yes. And many around here would argue that WoT isn't an MMO either. However, most online gamers aren't interested in or concerned with what label is assigned to each title. In the past few years, MOBAs, ARPGs, ActionFPSs, MMORTSs and other variations have gained a lot of traction and added a lot more diversity to the MMO market.

We can sit here in our circle of entrenched veteran MMO gamers and argue labels all we want, but the reality is that the MMO platform has expanded to be much more than level-based class-restricted RPGs.

 

 

MMORTS games are MMOs. They are the only real MMOs around post WoW. EvE is basically and MMORTS in nullsec for instance. MOBA's are not MMOs.

Originally posted by yewsef
MMO Consumer eh?

Well, as for me I see no MMORPG title currently worthy to be called an MMO or an RPG. So, get busy doing sonething else until one designer manage to convince a publisher to make something new and different from the quest-driven theme park junk we've been forced to play the past 8 years.

So, there is no hope prior to 2014.

Just from the top of my head: Vanguard, Ryzom, Xsyon, Haven & Hearth, Eve, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Unchartered Waters Online, Mortal Online, Darkfall -  none of them a typical WoW clone. I'd call them MMORPGs.

Originally posted by Painlezz

As others have said here and elsewhere:

 

You got your start in "A" mmo which was super amazing and new and nothing had ever been like it before... Then you moved onto "B" mmo which was new and improved graphics and a new world.. not as good as the first experience probably but still enjoyable!

And now you're left with nothing enjoyable.

It is no different than drugs or sex.

Sex, you do normal position and last a minute or two at first.  Then you start switching up positions and trying new things.  Eventually you've got stuff stuck up your ass and two women in tight leather beating you with belts and sh*t.

Originally posted by jiveturkey12

Seriously, WoW sucks now, everyone is aware of this, even the YOGScast guys are disgusted with Mists of Pandaria. Every other game known to man from EQ2 to Lotro has gone F2P which means no respectable person would actually play them past the trial (Im looking at you LOTRO).

 

So I go on Steam, MMORPG, hell even cruise some forums, and basically the options for MMO's are as followed:

Guild Wars (Which we can automatically rule out because its more of a Co-op RPG than anything with no massive player interaction)

EVE, which isnt a bad MMO by any means but not something most MMORPG fans can get into unless you like sci-fi themes and being in a ship the whole game.

And last Rift, which again not a bad game, but ive played it enough (Around 100 hours) and dont really feel the need to pick it back up again.

 

So Im just an average MMO consumer, and as it stands, it doesnt even look like theres any other viable options on the market right now? Or am I missing something? Or is it just that MMO's are in a proverbial dark age???

 

EDIT: On a side not I just want to say WoW has been dead since BC, and they just REZ and pissed on it with lich king, but now even the most hardcore of fans have dropped it, just to be clear on what I meant.

If you think that there are only 3 MMO's on the market right now, then you really need a new hobby.  There are a ton of varied and very well done MMO's out on the market right now.  If you like MMO's then there's something out there that you will enjoy if you open your mind up a bit and admit that there are more than 3 o_O.  

If you have actually put forth an effort (which I don't think you have), and you still are not able to find a game you enjoy...  find a new hobby.  Because despite the fact that there are some good MMO's on the horizon, the cycle will continue for you and you will probably be back here complaining about how you don't like next set of MMO's.

Originally posted by Cuathon

MMORTS games are MMOs. They are the only real MMOs around post WoW. EvE is basically and MMORTS in nullsec for instance. MOBA's are not MMOs.

Please don't use the "real"term.

As I see it is how many players you actually can see at the same time a deciding factor here. For a game to be a "massive mulitplayer ORGP" there should be more than 5 other people around.

The question is then how many people it should be... 50? 100? 200? I don´t really have a good answer for that but while instances do make the games feel less massive it still isn´t fair to just say that any game with any instances aren't MMOs. Heck, even Archeage have 2 instanced dungeons...

Anyways, if you want to say that a MMOs isn't a "real" MMO we need a good definition of what a real one is. The number of players that can be in the same zone (not counting instanced towns like in guildwars) should be a good measurement.

No, I wouldn't say you are an "average MMO consumer", as evidenced by the fact that the market continues to grow, year after year.

I feel bad for you, that you have so many "deal-breakers" in your criteria for what you'd consider a game worth even just TRYING.  Every MMO I've ever played has features that I just flat out didn't like at all, but I can still enjoy them for what they are.  If even half of my disliked features were deal-breakers, I wouldn't have a game to play, either.

I suspect there's NOTHING any MMO developer will be able to pull out that will break past your wall of cynicism.  I think it might be time to look for another hobby.  It's a great opportunity to maybe look for a hobby that's healthier, which probably includes any hobby that doesn't involve drug abuse.
 

Originally posted by Jot_Vau

Sounds like there is no hope for you. I would find a new hobby if I couldn't find 1 MMO on this site to have fun with.

That's the best bet.  After I retired from Eve in November of last year, I've left the mmorpg hobby more or less.  I've given a few games a try (not expecting to like them) but never made it past the first couple days.  Even the frequency in which I try new games is becoming less and less.

I still troll the forums for a laugh and to see what games are in the pipe but I don't anticipate buying another box or paying for a sub for at least a couple years.

It was fun while it lasted but all good things must end.

Originally posted by Larsa

Originally posted by yewsef
MMO Consumer eh?

Well, as for me I see no MMORPG title currently worthy to be called an MMO or an RPG. So, get busy doing sonething else until one designer manage to convince a publisher to make something new and different from the quest-driven theme park junk we've been forced to play the past 8 years.

So, there is no hope prior to 2014.

Just from the top of my head: Vanguard, Ryzom, Xsyon, Haven & Hearth, Eve, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Unchartered Waters Online, Mortal Online, Darkfall -  none of them a typical WoW clone. I'd call them MMORPGs.

   Agreed all of these games are worth trying, or if you can get a beta key for Tera (which i did not like but you might) , Unchartered waters is like Eve in the water but you do have an avitar and can do some land missions

I agree with OP

WOW sucked since BC

Rift is too much like WOW

STO, LOTR, WAR, SWTOR, AOC and co all suck

I would like a good space mmo to get my teeth into (Eve and STO are not it btw)

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Cuathon

MMORTS games are MMOs. They are the only real MMOs around post WoW. EvE is basically and MMORTS in nullsec for instance. MOBA's are not MMOs.

Please don't use the "real"term.

As I see it is how many players you actually can see at the same time a deciding factor here. For a game to be a "massive mulitplayer ORGP" there should be more than 5 other people around.

The question is then how many people it should be... 50? 100? 200? I don´t really have a good answer for that but while instances do make the games feel less massive it still isn´t fair to just say that any game with any instances aren't MMOs. Heck, even Archeage have 2 instanced dungeons...

Anyways, if you want to say that a MMOs isn't a "real" MMO we need a good definition of what a real one is. The number of players that can be in the same zone (not counting instanced towns like in guildwars) should be a good measurement.

The measure of MMOness is massively multiplayer.

EvE and most MMORTS games qualify easily. Warring Factions often has only 100 active players a round after Thunderstorm started spending his time on his porn sites and yet it has more 50+ player actions than WoW.

Space Fed oftentimes had 100s of players participating in fights, even fights that did not involve the ultimate weapon endgame.

Not only that but many MMORTS games also fit the world altering and persistence criterias far better than any AAA mmorpg.

Further although you can solo in a sense most players who expect to play the game seriously are incredibly organized. for instance in WF with its only 100 players spread over 4 factions you can expect that large areas around the homeworld possess planets with 15-25 players having colonies there.

Back when it had upwards of 2000 players you had hundreds of players on a planet coordinating defenses and also fleets of hundreds of thousands of ships(50k max per player) launching 20-100 man attacks against large enemy systems.

How many times a month in WoW do you participate in 100+ players actions, with its playerbase of 10000000?

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Cuathon

MMORTS games are MMOs. They are the only real MMOs around post WoW. EvE is basically and MMORTS in nullsec for instance. MOBA's are not MMOs.

Please don't use the "real"term.

As I see it is how many players you actually can see at the same time a deciding factor here. For a game to be a "massive mulitplayer ORGP" there should be more than 5 other people around.

The question is then how many people it should be... 50? 100? 200? I don´t really have a good answer for that but while instances do make the games feel less massive it still isn´t fair to just say that any game with any instances aren't MMOs. Heck, even Archeage have 2 instanced dungeons...

Anyways, if you want to say that a MMOs isn't a "real" MMO we need a good definition of what a real one is. The number of players that can be in the same zone (not counting instanced towns like in guildwars) should be a good measurement.

The measure of MMOness is massively multiplayer.

EvE and most MMORTS games qualify easily. Warring Factions often has only 100 active players a round after Thunderstorm started spending his time on his porn sites and yet it has more 50+ player actions than WoW.

Space Fed oftentimes had 100s of players participating in fights, even fights that did not involve the ultimate weapon endgame.

Not only that but many MMORTS games also fit the world altering and persistence criterias far better than any AAA mmorpg.

Further although you can solo in a sense most players who expect to play the game seriously are incredibly organized. for instance in WF with its only 100 players spread over 4 factions you can expect that large areas around the homeworld possess planets with 15-25 players having colonies there.

Back when it had upwards of 2000 players you had hundreds of players on a planet coordinating defenses and also fleets of hundreds of thousands of ships(50k max per player) launching 20-100 man attacks against large enemy systems.

How many times a month in WoW do you participate in 100+ players actions, with its playerbase of 10000000?

Which is your own personal definition. That 100+ *can* interact with each other can be seen as one condition, but 100+ players engaging in the same action or event is neither a requirement nor a realistic expectation.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Cuathon

MMORTS games are MMOs. They are the only real MMOs around post WoW. EvE is basically and MMORTS in nullsec for instance. MOBA's are not MMOs.

Please don't use the "real"term.

As I see it is how many players you actually can see at the same time a deciding factor here. For a game to be a "massive mulitplayer ORGP" there should be more than 5 other people around.

The question is then how many people it should be... 50? 100? 200? I don´t really have a good answer for that but while instances do make the games feel less massive it still isn´t fair to just say that any game with any instances aren't MMOs. Heck, even Archeage have 2 instanced dungeons...

Anyways, if you want to say that a MMOs isn't a "real" MMO we need a good definition of what a real one is. The number of players that can be in the same zone (not counting instanced towns like in guildwars) should be a good measurement.

The measure of MMOness is massively multiplayer.

EvE and most MMORTS games qualify easily. Warring Factions often has only 100 active players a round after Thunderstorm started spending his time on his porn sites and yet it has more 50+ player actions than WoW.

Space Fed oftentimes had 100s of players participating in fights, even fights that did not involve the ultimate weapon endgame.

Not only that but many MMORTS games also fit the world altering and persistence criterias far better than any AAA mmorpg.

Further although you can solo in a sense most players who expect to play the game seriously are incredibly organized. for instance in WF with its only 100 players spread over 4 factions you can expect that large areas around the homeworld possess planets with 15-25 players having colonies there.

Back when it had upwards of 2000 players you had hundreds of players on a planet coordinating defenses and also fleets of hundreds of thousands of ships(50k max per player) launching 20-100 man attacks against large enemy systems.

How many times a month in WoW do you participate in 100+ players actions, with its playerbase of 10000000?

Which is your own personal definition. That 100+ *can* interact with each other can be seen as one condition, but 100+ players engaging in the same action or event is neither a requirement nor a realistic expectation.

100 is just a number for an example. What the actual cut off is is debatable. Nevertheless MMORTS games involve both more player interaction, and much large sizes of player interaction even when their player base is tiny compared to AAA MMORPG games. And the only AAA sandbox, EvE, has up to 3000 players in a single fight.

Originally posted by Painlezz

As others have said here and elsewhere:

 

You got your start in "A" mmo which was super amazing and new and nothing had ever been like it before... Then you moved onto "B" mmo which was new and improved graphics and a new world.. not as good as the first experience probably but still enjoyable!

And now you're left with nothing enjoyable.

It is no different than drugs or sex.

Sex, you do normal position and last a minute or two at first.  Then you start switching up positions and trying new things.  Eventually you've got stuff stuck up your ass and two women in tight leather beating you with belts and sh*t.

That made my monday LOL

+1

Originally posted by Cuathon

100 is just a number for an example. What the actual cut off is is debatable. Nevertheless MMORTS games involve both more player interaction, and much large sizes of player interaction even when their player base is tiny compared to AAA MMORPG games. And the only AAA sandbox, EvE, has up to 3000 players in a single fight.

 

I'm with Cuathon, there is nothing massive about going in an instance with 4-24 other players and grinding some bosses and gear for an hour (or 2).  The rest of the server is effectively an audiance to my epic-ness. 

Here's an example of a WoW style MMORPG vs a MMORTS:

-1000 joining a WoW style game just means more chat in your world chat.  Since queueing for dungeons and raids is multi-server, and each person is reduced to a role, more people doesn't effect anything.  There are the same ratio of tanks/healers/dps whether there's 50 people or 20,000 people playing...  Let's not even get started on the tunnel that is levelling.

-But in an MMORTS, 1000 people joining means the logistics have changed.  People who feed off the weak have an easier time.  The supply and demand within the markets has changed.  The margins in crafting change.  The logistics for forming a raid become easier because there are more people online (MMORTS don't have LFG cross server systems).  This makes defeating the large raid bosses easier, esp since most MMORTS don't have upper limits to parties/raids.