I'll cast a vote for Vanguard, too. It was (and I assume still is) brilliant. Anyone could craft, since it had its own advancement track, there were full sets of crafting equipment and tools, crafting quests with crafting-related rewards, terrific gear that resulted from crafting at pretty much every level of the game, an interactive crafting process in which you had to react to problems, and on and on and on. My personal favorite, though, was that it was actually a crafting system, which makes it very different from most MMOs, which tend to feature more of a "harvesting and mass-production" experience.  In Vanguard, you can take a work order from a taskmaster, they'll give you the supplies you need to make the items they want, you craft them, you get the experience for crafting them, and, if you did a really good job, you got rewarded for it.

Some games out there like a Tale in the Desert may focus more specifically on crafting, especially on community-involved projects, but I still remember Vanguard's crafting system fondly after more than a year of absence from the game. I wish more titles would look at what Vanguard did with their crafting system and outright steal from them. It could only help an industry that seems fixated on the whole "harvest for X hours, push Craft button, go afk" mechanism.

For the record, I've played a Saga of Ryzom and pre-NGE SWG, both of which had pretty involved crafting, but I found Vanguard's entailed a lot less tedium. SWG definitely had the advantage when it came to creating really unique gear, and some people really love the whole harvesting aspects of crafting; for those people, Ryzom or SWG would probably be a better choice. For people who primarily enjoy the actual crafting of items more than the collecting of parts, though, I just don't think Vanguard has an equal.

Plus, if we [lifetimers] buy the Adventurer's Pack for those goodies (shared banking between characters, more character slots, et cetera), we do get the expansion for free. It pretty much breaks down so that nobody's going to get both things for free, but pretty much everybody inside Turbine's distribution area will have the option to get one of the two for free. The argument could be made that non-lifetimers have the better deal, since they won't need to spend anything at all if they don't want the Adventurer's Pack, but that pack has a lot of quality-of-life stuff in it that I'm pretty eager to get my hands on.

I looked at Fallen Earth, but in the end, the FPS combat just wasn't for me. I've never enjoyed FPS games of any type and, while I saw from your review that you're not a fan of them either, I don't think that's a hurdle I'm going to be able to get over. I hope the game does well, though. I think the post-apocalyptic theme is tremendous terrain for an MMO, and the more variety there is, the better it is for everybody.

Originally posted by ozmono

I remember reading about one about a year maybe even longer ago. It was a sandbox game and had an impressively large list of ambitious features but ofcourse it had no finacial backing. It was just someones dream but it got my imagination and hopes going well enough for me to remember now.

Frontier 1859, probably. I followed and participated in the forums there for quite awhile, but it just never seemed like any progress was made finding financial backers. The guy behind it had gone as far as he could on his own, and I think it's been at that point for at least four years now, maybe longer. It's really a shame, too, because it was much more than a "cowboys shooting Indians" thing, it was a chance to build an alternate history of the world, almost a roleplaying-sim hybrid, where players got to re-live the experience of settling the west, or of being one of many native peoples.

The game even pitched something called a "conscience inventory," where the actions you took had consequences that basically went on your permanent record; the more trains you robbed, crops you ruined, or even days you went without paying off your debt to the mercantile, the more certain it was that you'd be caught and strung up. Since permadeath was mentioned in early discussions, getting executed would be problematic for people looking to be criminals, though exciting while it lasted. The whole project was very ambitious, and very, very different. That difference, when combined with an untested theme, probably scares the heck out of potential investors.

frontier1859.com/mmorpg/

I think it'd work. Many MUDs used (and continue to use) remort systems that allow one to level up to the cap, then start over at the first level again with access to new skills, a new race, a new class, or even a combination of the three. There have been all sorts of variations on the theme; some MUDs require you to navigate massive labyrinths first, some require a certain number of gold coins, some allow unlimited access to entire tiers of classes/races, while others only allow specific remort paths (soldier > warrior > blademaster, koboold > orc > troll, et cetera).

Frankly, I wish MMOs would take that concept from MUDs. I'm terribly tired of the whole raid/pvp thing. Remorts pretty much allow you to use the same content over and over in a new way with the same character, all while providing the player with continued advancement and growth. It's definitely not something that'd appeal to everyone, but I have to believe there's a corner of the market open for a new (or, in this case, very old) endgame strategy.

Originally posted by thorwood

I prefer PvE games.

All the hype says Aion is a pvp game.

This is my reason, too; I don't enjoy pvp at all. Not every game is for every player, and this one isn't for me. I don't "hate" the game because it's pvp-focused (pvp folks need games too), but the emphasis on player conflict is the only barrier-to-entry I need to stay away from it. Given the massive cultural attraction to pvp-based endgames in the east, however, not to mention the dearth of such games in the west, I'm sure Aion will do just fine without me.

It probably sounds crazy, but I finally got so tired of the current crop of MMOs that I went back to MUDding.  I began my online gaming with MUDs, so it's not as tough a transition as it would be for someone who'd never played one (going from graphics to text can seem jarring), and I'm finding that I'm actually having a really good time. It's kind of nice recognizing the names of the majority of players, seeing areas added with some regularity, having typos in room/object/mob descriptions fixed quickly, and all sorts of other perks that come with something run privately as a hobby instead of publically as a business; with no need to bring in huge numbers of players in order to stay alive, you can do pretty much anything you want.

It's also nice [for me] to go back to a game with a remort system, since I've never really enjoyed raiding or pvp. With remorting, there are endless levels, so there's always room to improve your character. Plus, it's free, and not the microtransaction "free," just plain ol' free. The hardest part of MUDding is sorting out the good MUDs from the bad ones. With over 1000 of the things available, it can take a bit of time to find the right place, and there's definitely a lot of junk out there, but at least there's no download involved. Definitely not a solution for everybody, but it's been a relief to finally step away from the direction MMOs have been headed.

As far as the games I'm wating for, Dragon Age: Origins is the only definite "get" on the horizon for me (though even this depends on how serious EA is about keeping it DRM-free). I'm interested in Star Wars: the Old Republic, but I'm not sure I'll buy it until I hear what their payment model is. I don't do microtransactions games, which is what killed Champions for me. My fear, and one that seems to be echoed on this site a lot, is that MTs are soon going to overtake everything, so I guess I'm glad I found another way to spend my time, even if I had to jump into the wayback machine to do it.

Originally posted by Kyleran

<snip>

Consider EVE university, a great place to start

I agree. Definitely add EVE University to your short list of possible corps. Their whole purpose for existence is getting new players ready for any aspect of the game they might be interested in. Unless someone's declared war on them (which happens a lot), they hold regular classes on a variety of things, and even have scholarship programs (they'll give you ISK for displaying mastery of skills after taking classes in that area). If someone has declared war on them and you want to get involved, they'll get you outfitted for tackling in no time.

Unlike a lot of corporations, there's no long-term commitment, either; you can "graduate" whenever you like and move on to another corporation, pirate band, anything you want with no hard feelings. If you like it and decide you want to stay, you can even become an instructor. As it turned out, EVE Online really wasn't the game for me, but E-UNI made me think it was for about six months (enough so that I'm here posting about them about a year after I left the game). If they could do that for a solo-loving, tree-hugging carebear like me, just imagine what they could do for you!

[This message paid for by the Society for Enhanced Education Come SEE what you can do! Void where prohibited by CONCORD.]

Originally posted by Wolfenpride

lotro

their are boars in fucking angmar

angmar for christs sake!! o_O

Not anymore. They revamped the area last year and removed all the boars except for one named mob (Grimgore). Still, the game definitely has more than its fair share of porcine pals. There were so many at one point that they added a quest in Evendim as an inside joke that tasked you with finding all the boars in the zone within 30 minutes; it was the only zone in the game that didn't have any.

Originally posted by Ihmotepp

<snip>

 

I think you are right. I played EQ, didn't care for Asheron's Call.

Asheron's Call won, all games today are being made solo friendly.

Except they're not, at least not by the standards of solo players. Every game that's "solo-friendly" is only solo-friendly to the level cap, at which point it's all about groups. There's no reason for a solo-gamer to stay once they reach that level cap, and there's no reason for groupers to play until the endgame because the pathway there wasn't designed for them. It's not really good for either extreme, only for the people who don't really care one way or another. It's definitely a weird model.

It's too bad that MMOs cost so much to make these days. I'd almost prefer it if developers just picked a style of gameplay and ran with it, instead of trying to do everything for everybody. As long as grouping provides huge benefits over solo play, your average solo player will feel like a second-class citizen; as long as solo play comes anywhere near the effectiveness of grouping, your average group gamer will feel like it's too hard to find a team and that the game gives you no reason to do it anyway. Everyone loses.

It all makes me nostalgic for the first big wave of MMOs, particularly Everquest and Asheron's Call. EQ was all about grouping, Asheron's Call was all about soloing, both had plenty of players, both were specialized in providing content for their respective player types. I couldn't stand EQ, but a lot of people loved it. Asheron's Call is the measuring stick by which I measure all other MMOs, but people who played EQ hated it. And it was totally fine, because each playstyle had a home. These days? We're all sharing the same neighborhood, and that means compromises. To paraphrase an old adage,  "You know you've reached a successful compromise when neither party is pleased with the outcome," so kudos to the MMO industry for reaching a successful compromise.

Putting soloers and groupers together in the same game sometimes seems about as sensible as storing ice cubes in a microwave with exposed wires. If I've learned anything about the whole "solo versus group" thing after seeing daily topics on the subject on every MMO forum that's ever existed, it's that the two sides are never going to agree, and neither side really wants to. Each just wants to expound upon their own reasoning for playing the way they do, they don't really have any interest in understanding why anyone else plays differently. These threads always end up at the "I'm right and you're wrong" stage, and most of them start that way in the very first post. Nothing is ever learned, nothing is ever accomplished; it's all a bunch of chest-pounding, with the occasional lynch mob thrown in for flavor.

Don't bother arguing with any of this, because I'm right and you're wrong.

<pounds her chest>

Someone get a rope, some torches, and a few pitchforks.

Now let's all get back to bitching at one another about RMTs!

Originally posted by jimsmith08

Has there ever been a game which has both RMT and a monthly sub? It seems like game suicide to me that such a decision would be made. Perhaps it will simply be cosmetic items, or like guild wars where you can buy adventure or skill packs?

Another poster mentioned several games that do this, but left out an important one: FreeRealms. SOE is conditioning the next generation of online gamers to accept the subscription/micropayment model as the standard. The primary target for that game is the 10-14 age bracket, and FreeRealms will be the first MMO for nearly all of them. I'm sure most regular posters have seen enough "Was your first MMO your favorite?" posts to realize that someone's first MMO experience typically has a large influence on how they perceive the genre from that point forward. If FreeRealms is as successful as SOE believes it's going to be, the gamers it's producing will shape the western marketplace in 4-8 years. It kind of scares the bejeezus out of me.

"A Tale In the Desert" is about the most different I can think of, but I'm not sure it's different in the way you're wanting. There's no combat in the game at all, and it's very dated in appearance. Despite the fact that I generally enjoy crafting and it's very crafting-oriented, the game never really clicked for me. Even so, you just have to respect what they've done with the thing. It's totally unlike anything else on the market.

Originally posted by thafireball

...If by costume restrictions you are referring to the item mall costumes enhancements then you must have skipped the part where they said if you can buy then you can earn it in the game.  Jeeeez people...READ THE WHOLE DAMN THING.

I think you misread the statement (not trying to flame you here, just clarifying). It says "Any micro-transaction that has a game effect can also be earned in the game through play." The key phrase was "a game effect," and, unless they're using unusual definitions of those terms as they apply to MMOs, that means things like stat bonuses, weapons/damage bonuses, potions, or any object that would change your character's performance. Costume skins do none of those things, and the line about aesthetic items was a separate bullet point. They will be selling aesthetic costume options, and it seems very unlikely that those costume options will be made available via gameplay. None of the City of Heroes/Villains costume packs (sold out-of-game) were ever made available by any other means.

Originally posted by junzo316

<snip>

CoX has costume/power/emote packages that cost "extra".  I guess you can consider that an RMT game, so you've already played one.  I really don't see the problem.  I don't see it as game-breaking.  If you don't want it, don't buy it. 

CoX absolutely did have RMT, but it didn't when it launched. That game is where I learned how much I disliked them. I definitely won't tell you you're wrong to be fine with them; it wasn't my intent to point fingers at you, and you're entitled to your own preferences. If you do want it, do buy it. I've already made the decision not to, however, and it's entirely because of this issue. Rather than just going away quietly, I wanted to express the reasoning behind my displeasure.

In a way, I wish there were an exit survey I could fill out before ever playing the game. Cryptic will never actually know that I did or didn't buy the thing, they'll never know why I didn't buy the thing, they'll just know if they sold more or less copies than they expected to. I'd have liked to tell them that I'd been standing in line to be one more sale, and that RMTs alone were a big enough turn-off to not only cause the cancellation of my pre-order, to not only make me delete all bookmarks associated with the game, but to send me to a gaming forum to express my frustration over it.  Yes, people are always "expressing frustration" on the internet, particularly on forums like this one. If not here, though, where?

Anyway, I didn't want to get into an argument over this. This whole thing just makes me so..so...grrrr!

I hate that they're charging for "fluff." People who are conditionally okay with cash shops usually say, "as long as it's just fluff." To me, fluff is an important part of the game, especially in a game like this. With avatar identities being so important in a superhero game, it just mystifies me that Cryptic would try to monetize it. It's a core component!

It may be that I'm not the target demographic for this particular game: I'm female, and I'm over 30. Then again, Champions was my favorite tabletop roleplaying game by a mile, I've been an avid MMO gamer since 1999 (18 months spent in CoX), I played MUDs for eight years before MMOs were around, I'm one of probably ten women in the world who owns a long-box of  comic books, avatar customization is tremendously important to me, and I posted semi-regularly on the CO official forums. If I'm not the target demographic for this game, I don't know who is. And I deleted my Champions bookmark folder from Firefox this morning.

If RMTs really are the future, I'm taking a trip back to the past; the Mud Connector still has 1119 MUDs listed, and I still have a copy of ZMud around somewhere. I'm sure this comes across as just another RMT rant (lord knows there were 28-page threads on the subject at the official forums), but I look at the landscape of MMOs and upcoming MMOs, and I see the death of something I've enjoyed doing for a decade. That chafes a bit.

You're probably thinking, "Melodramatic much?" Sure, the games will continue, they'll probably even turn record profits, but they won't be the things I fell in love with anymore. Games based even partly on the RMT/cash shop model have to give you reasons to spend your money or there's no income. Those reasons are little reminders, little flags, insidious little nudges around every corner that "if you pay just a bit more, you'll have a better experience!" Of course, in a subscription game, that means "Your subscription fee has purchased a sub-optimal experience. Please enter your PIN number for Big Fun!™" No thank you.

(Editor's Note: I'm not a perpetually cynical or pessimistic person, but this topic really rumbles my thunder!)

2. Outside game changes only: this would include things like server transfers, char name changes, etc.

I don't have a problem with a charge being levied for things that require extra personnel or system resources to handle. I don't like cash shops at all, though, even when they're just selling fluff items. That said, I'm willing to pay a premium subscription fee in order to avoid those cash shops; I certainly wouldn't expect a free-to-play game to go without them. I think there's room for a multitude of payment options, and I hope that continues to be the case. (Richard Aihoshi's articles scare the #$%^ out of me, though).

While I don't have as much free time to devote to games as I once did, I still like the concept of spending time rather than money when I'm playing. I know I'll probably never get the raid content in any mmo, but I also know that my $14.95 (or whatever the price is) gives me access to it if I change my mind. I'm just wired in a way where I like unlimited access. I have an unlimited calling plan on my cellphone, but some people prefer to go with limited minutes because they just want to buy what they know they'll use. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's not the way my brain works. I want to buy a ticket and have access to every ride in the park, I don't want to go to a park and pay for the rides individually.

I can think of a lot of terms that have lost meaning, but I don't want to focus on the negative today. There's one term that I think has actually gained meaning:

"<MMO Name>'s  webpage."

When I started Everquest in 1999, their webpage just had a blurb about the game and a place to sign up for an account. Things have changed. Just using LotRO as an example, they have forums, dev blogs, social networking, and an official wiki with gear, guides, patch notes, et cetera. It's a world of difference. Sanya/Tweety may have started it with the Camelot Herald, but other companies have been running with the ball. These days, you get RSS feeds constantly updating you about everything, whereas you used to only know your game's server status by running a traceroute through a DOS prompt.

I like to take my time with things, go at my own pace, read quest text, change my plans in mid-stride if something else occurs to me, et cetera. Raid groups, even normal groups, tend to be very results-oriented; they want to get the prize as quickly as possible, with the fewest disruptions possible. Plus, while I'm almost always a member of a guild/kin/corp/organization in whatever MMO I play, and while I also tend to be very chatty on the guild channel, I prefer doing the combat stuff myself. My real life involves a lot of dependency on other people (I work in a hospital), and logging into an MMO gives me an opportunity to do things for myself, by myself, in a world that's always there and always changing.

Also, the older I get, the less I find I have in common with the majority of people I encounter in MMOs. I'm sort of old school, but not in the "I like hardcore pve/pvp!" way; I'm old school in the "Hey you kids, get off my lawn!!!" way. I appreciate good spelling, I frown upon excessive swearing, I expect a degree of courtesy, I dislike self-entitlement. Either the world has leapt beyond me socially, or I've aged beyond the point of being relevant. Either way, I'm usually happier when I'm just out and about, minding my own business, occasionally crafting stuff up for guildmates. Unfortunately, that means I'm pretty much relegated to being a virtual tourist (moving from one game to another), as there aren't many titles out there with solo-oriented endgames. That's the way the bee bumbles.

I guess this article just shows you can't possibly like everything a writer writes. I normally think Dana's stuff is well-written and worth reading, but this whole article smacked of personal bias, whether or not that was the intent. If it had been about the financial viability of roleplaying servers (or rather, the lack thereof), or any sort of intellectual observation of the culture clash between roleplayers and non-roleplayers, I would've been onboard. The majority of the thing read like a personal attack against roleplayers in general, however. I found it to be in poor taste, and I'm not even a roleplayer myself.

"Most of the so-called role-players don’t really want to role-play; that is their fiction. They want to be victims."

"[Roleplayers are] such a vast minority that they probably couldn’t support more than one guild, let alone an entire server."

"Within five minutes, even the most pious cleric will be on TeamSpeak cybering the Troll if left to their own devices."

"The sick truth is that this kind of role-player does it because they will have something to get high and mighty about."

Another interesting quote: "It’s time to face the fact that no video game, noRPG, let alone MMORPG, has ever truly fostered role-playing."

That's just patently false. I played MUDs for about a decade before coming to MMOs, and there are multitudes of the things out there that require character approval (to make the player's backstory and concept "fit")l before they even let you log in. I stuck to more hack 'n slash stuff, but there are entire categories of  MU* codebases out there built around nothing but roleplaying. Look up MUSH or MUX sometime.

Of course the scenario above wouldn't work in MMOs; MMOs are profit-based, whereas MU*s are owned and operated by hobbyists. Dana's quote doesn't limit itself to MMOs, though. It overreaches with hyperbole, just like the entire first half of the article. The whole thing felt like axe-grinding. The article started by calling roleplaying servers "foul and dark," hurled various and sundry insults at the players themselves, then lauded EVE Online. Congratulations, Dana. You just used better-than-average sentence structure to write a worse-than-average EVE forum post. 

Because you've shown on multiple occasions that you're a better writer than this, I'll cut you some slack and give you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to your intentions. Why don't you do the same thing for some of those "sick, troll-cybering whiners." If they all want to be victims as you suggest, you were just playing into their hands by writing an article like this, and we wouldn't want that.