Originally posted by nomatics856

Dont Single player rpgs now have DLCs, Expansions etc? Most single player RPGS now a days are bigger and have more content then a majority of mmorpgs today.

They also have coop play with groups of people. The only reason SWTOR was called an MMO (which it is not) is to have an excuse for a monthly fee. It's Diablo, essentially, and Diablo has no monthly fees.

Originally posted by darkhalf357x

Originally posted by SignusM

Originally posted by SEANMCAD

Originally posted by SignusM

Originally posted by SEANMCAD

Originally posted by precious328

Originally posted by nomatics856 

So why do people still play these games? Single Player rpgs have way more social interaction nowadays then these so called mmorpgs, better and more story, more dialog, no need to pay to play every month. Etc etc etc.

If you're talking about socializing with NPCs, then you are correct.

In all fairness single player games are not much better than our MMO selections, just different.

Single player games have great graphics and great experience for the 1 hour of content they have.

MMO have 6 hours of content but less so on the graphics and experience...:)

 

swear to god TV advertisers are behind all this, they are trying to get us to go back to TV

At least, unlike SWTOR, the things you do  in singleplayer games impact the game world and change it.

for the 1 hour of game play.

I joke not when I say that the ONLY reason I play MMOs is because they typically have more long term content and larger world than a single player game. I dont play MMOs to socialize

That's because the gameplay is all padded. How many hundreds of "kill 10 rats" quests have you done? To me, that's not content, that's a chore.

Thats like saying how many people can you shoot in Call of Duty ?  The fact it being boring or a chore is up to the person playing.  Its all how the 'kill 10 rats' mechanic is delivered... some cover it better than others which is why Story/lore is key.

No. It's not. People are saying that the single benefit of SWTOR being an MMO is that there's more content are advocating quantity over quality. MMOs are longer because they're designed to keep you paying, so any worthwhile content or quests are padded with hundreds of useless "get me 5 ears" quests. If SWTOR had been singleplayer, it would have been universally loved, but it tried, and failed, to be an MMO, so it gets ridiculed.

If the entire point of SWTOR is the singleplayer content, it should have been singleplayer. Currently as it is, nothing my character does in the solo quest matters because the game world doesn't change. In Kotor 1, after certain quests or certain decisions, cities would be destroyed, NPCs would be dead. In SWTOR... the world stays the same the whole time. It's NOT a good MMO or singleplayer game.

Originally posted by bossalinie

Originally posted by SignusM

No doubt in my mind, and I ddon't see how anyone could say this game wouldn't have been much better as a singleplayer game.

Thankfully, you are not everyone.

Nice rebuttal. Tell me, what does SWTOR gain from being an MMO? It seems to only lose. THe singleplayer portion is much worse than it could have been, because nothing you do impacts the game world.

Originally posted by buegur

I play and pay because I'm having fun, when that stops I'll quit playing. The game has me feeling like I'm a real hero and the Voice questings are a blast. I like the different classes (25lvl Gunslinger, 25lvl Counciller, 34 lvl Commando). With the crafting and space stuff there is enough content to keep me busy. When I reach max level with enough alts I'll probably quit the game if there isn't anything more to do than dungeon crawl or raid. I mostly play grouped with a friend and really like the game that way. 

None of what you just described pretains to MMORPGs. What you described is a coop dungeon crawler, of which there are dozens. Most people pretty much agree that SWTOR should have been a singleplayer RPG with optional COOP. But EA wanted it to have a monthly fee so they could sucker people and drag out the content.

No doubt in my mind, and I ddon't see how anyone could say this game wouldn't have been much better as a singleplayer game.

Originally posted by Creslin321

SWTOR is widely known to have poorly implemented MMO-aspects and is not representative of every MMORPG in existence...question answered.

It's perfectly in line with how MMOs have been going since WoW came out. Each MMO has been easier, more streamlined, and solo focused than the last. Games like WoW  with its dungeon finder and phasing, LotRO with its instancing, they're more like Diablo than real MMOs.

Originally posted by EduardoASG

The games are focusing on the psychological needs of the players in diferent ways than before..

 

Achieving, ---- this requires online gaming.

Explorer,

Social, ---- this requires online gaming.

Collector,

Pavlov/reward.

 

From the shown psychological factors, only 2 require online gaming.. thus a game can focus on beeing single player oriented ( with all the plus in terms of development costs and technology used to keep a game playable with xxx players in the same screen or zone area ) while giving limited online aspects that fulfill those 2 points.

Thats what swtor did.. and most games are doing now.. and will go on while its profitable, eventually adapting to our RLs needs.

What swtor did wrong, was hitting hard the Achieving factor to players playing the Republic faction of the game.. and even a bit of the Social factor aswel. And when a player looses those factors or part of them, he realizes he/she is not addicted anymore to an online paying environment and its only supporting the big cow.. Simple as that.

What SWTOR did wrong wasn't specific mechanics being unbalanced. What SWTOR did wrong was call itself an MMO and charge a monthly fee, when its a glorified coop game at most.

Originally posted by SEANMCAD

Originally posted by SignusM

Originally posted by SEANMCAD

Originally posted by precious328

Originally posted by nomatics856 

So why do people still play these games? Single Player rpgs have way more social interaction nowadays then these so called mmorpgs, better and more story, more dialog, no need to pay to play every month. Etc etc etc.

If you're talking about socializing with NPCs, then you are correct.

In all fairness single player games are not much better than our MMO selections, just different.

Single player games have great graphics and great experience for the 1 hour of content they have.

MMO have 6 hours of content but less so on the graphics and experience...:)

 

swear to god TV advertisers are behind all this, they are trying to get us to go back to TV

At least, unlike SWTOR, the things you do  in singleplayer games impact the game world and change it.

for the 1 hour of game play.

I joke not when I say that the ONLY reason I play MMOs is because they typically have more long term content and larger world than a single player game. I dont play MMOs to socialize

That's because the gameplay is all padded. How many hundreds of "kill 10 rats" quests have you done? To me, that's not content, that's a chore.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by nomatics856

I enjoyed SWTORS single player aspect a lot more than its mmorpg aspect, and when playing dungeons and PVP "The group aspect" of the game it just felt dumbed down and not that interesting at all, combat was delayed and frustrating, laggy to all hell, buggy. It made me wonder do people enjoy this? If people wanted their Co-Op fill couldnt they just play a FPS or some free dungeon crawler?

 

I can see if the game was Everquest/ UO where almost all exploration is done in a party or group, strong social interaction with other players, overcoming 80% of the games challenges with other players. You know "Social Interaction", then I  can understand playing and paying for a mmorpg every month.

 

But in Swtor and not just swtor but other current "Next gen" mmos as well I find myself soloing 75-80% of the game and the other 20% of group content is either raids, a few dungeons or PVP, All instanced give me the loot now types.

 

So why do people still play these games? Single Player rpgs have way more social interaction nowadays then these so called mmorpgs, better and more story, more dialog, no need to pay to play every month. Etc etc etc.

1) There are no alternative for good small group content. I can't play SKYRIM with my sons, or friends.

2) I don't know about you. But when I play WOW (also count as a current gen MMORPG), i group almost all the time, including leveling. With LFG tools, there is no reason to solo unless you reallyl want to.

3) People are not playing a game for social interactions. They are doing it for either co-op play or PvP.

4) Many LIKE instance based "balance" e-sport type pvp. See the other instanced pvp thread for why people like it.

 

 

But thats not what MMOs are about. What you described is the Diablo genre. There are tons of alternatives for people like you, that want balanced instanced content with a small group of real life friends. If all of you "MMO" fans just played Diablo clones instead of WoW clones maybe us original MMO gamers could have our genre back.

Originally posted by JuJutsu

SWTOR

...Why?

Originally posted by SEANMCAD

Originally posted by precious328

Originally posted by nomatics856 

So why do people still play these games? Single Player rpgs have way more social interaction nowadays then these so called mmorpgs, better and more story, more dialog, no need to pay to play every month. Etc etc etc.

If you're talking about socializing with NPCs, then you are correct.

In all fairness single player games are not much better than our MMO selections, just different.

Single player games have great graphics and great experience for the 1 hour of content they have.

MMO have 6 hours of content but less so on the graphics and experience...:)

 

swear to god TV advertisers are behind all this, they are trying to get us to go back to TV

At least, unlike SWTOR, the things you do  in singleplayer games impact the game world and change it.

Originally posted by Pilnkplonk

It' s because all those so called mmos are trying to be single-player rpgs with monthly sub or a cash shop attached.

When you ask "Why mmorpgs are still around" I'll answer "mmos are not still around". What the big devs are trying to sell us is single-player rpgs with just enough mmo and coop features to be able to hit us for a sub. The "proper" mmos are crummy half-finished "labours of love" that are almost umplayable due to lack of proper funding.

It's a clear case of tail wagging the dog, in this case the devs dictating to players what they should play and that's why I don't play any mmo at the moment. Nothing they offer interests me in the least. I'd rather play a proper srpg such as Skyrim than a patchwork mutant such as SWTOR or mr. plasticman which is WoW.

The next gen of mmos might finally break this stranglehold, but at the moment there really is no reason to play any mmo currently out.

 

I agree on all counts.

People nowadays are calling Guild Wars and League of Legends MMOs. The title officially means NOTHING, and its just an excuse to attach a monthly fee.

Just joind the most active LotRO server. It's just as anti social and overinstanced as I remember. Hard to find anyone who wants to group.

Since WoW came out the MMO market has been getting worse and worse, more singleplayer focused with each iteration.

At this point, I'd steadfastly refuse to acknowledge instanced games like SWTOR as MMOs. It reminds me more of Diablo than anything else.

The things that made MMOs interesting - the innovation, the massive amounts of players, the seamless  virtual worlds, focus on socializing and community building, immersion, are all long gone. The last true MMO to release from a big company was Vanguard.

Originally posted by GreenHell

Originally posted by djmtott

WoW is to MMOs what Twilight is to movies. Both should be burned and forgotten. If WoW were to vanish I guarantee your other MMOs would start to innovate and improve.

I doubt it. If WoW were to vanish it would just be replaced by one of the many games it has "influenced". Those 10 million people are not going to suddenly want a sandbox or something all that different from what they have now. I'm sure TOR subs would get a huge boost.

Most of those 10 million aren't aware that the MMO genre exists. WoW attracts non MMO gamers. If WoW went away they'd go back to their RTS games, their day jobs, whatever. WoW has casual appeal. Do you think the people that play Wii Sports would suddenly start playing immitations if Wii Sports went away? They'd probably just go "whatevs" and stop playing the Wii.

There are of course some people who were turned onto MMOs by WoW that would seek out others, but that number is much MUCH smaller than the number of people who just aren't MMO gamers, they're WoW gamers.

Also, Vanguard isn't a sandbox. It's a themepark game, in the original sense. It's heavily EQ influenced, as WoW was, except Vanguard focused on socialization, immersion, and challenge, rather than cooky Family Guy jokes and casual play.

Originally posted by djmtott

WoW is to MMOs what Twilight is to movies. Both should be burned and forgotten. If WoW were to vanish I guarantee your other MMOs would start to innovate and improve.

Pretty much this.

I'd keep Vanguard, DAoC, and Darkfall.

Originally posted by Thrage

Why Darkfall?  That game is awful.  Let it rot, I say.

What? It's probably one of the most innovative and interesting MMOs out right now.

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by SignusM

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by SignusM

DAoC, EQ, AC, SWG, UO, they all had massive amounts of innovations and improvements. WoW had none. 

 

Do you remember what questing was like, before WoW? 

Yes, fun. Quests were actually quests. They had variety, they were optional, finding them was usually fun in itself, and the quests were all done in such a different way that it was difficult to become bored with them. Most of them were long, epic, heavy on story that actually mattered to the game world, and gave you a meaningful reward at the end.
 

WoW quests, are tasks to keep you busy. They're the primary way to level up so theres hundreds of them, with stupid gowing marks over every NPC head. The quests are almost all exactly the same, there are glowing magical lines that tell you exactly where to go and what to do, while quest objectives sparkle like diamonds just in case you're dense enough to miss them, and you HAVE to do them. And the worst offense, they made it so soloing was a lot more benefitial than grouping, hamstringing the core of the MMORPG genre.

 

Where DAoC's design gave you options and multiple ways to spend your time, WoW gave you 1. But, because WoW's marketing aimed at nonMMO players, that's what we're stuck with now.

 

I don't disagree with you.  I hate quest-grinding and what its done to the genre.  I could go on and on about it, but that'd be besides the point.  Like it or not, it was a change that WoW brought to the table, and could hardly be called insignificant.  None of the games that WoW supposedly copied had questing, the way that WoW does, and almost every MMO since.

 

Actually, SWG had quite similar questing, and it wasn't very well liked. It's copied not because its a good system, but because it's easy and WoW is popular (more from marketing than from any other reason). Regardless, I understand what you're trying to argue, but when the only semi-unique thing WoW can claim as its own is a NEGATIVE thing instead of positive... eh, issues.

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by SignusM

DAoC, EQ, AC, SWG, UO, they all had massive amounts of innovations and improvements. WoW had none. 

 

Do you remember what questing was like, before WoW? 

Yes, fun. Quests were actually quests. They had variety, they were optional, finding them was usually fun in itself, and the quests were all done in such a different way that it was difficult to become bored with them. Most of them were long, epic, heavy on story that actually mattered to the game world, and gave you a meaningful reward at the end.
 

WoW quests, are tasks to keep you busy. They're the primary way to level up so theres hundreds of them, with stupid gowing marks over every NPC head. The quests are almost all exactly the same, there are glowing magical lines that tell you exactly where to go and what to do, while quest objectives sparkle like diamonds just in case you're dense enough to miss them, and you HAVE to do them. And the worst offense, they made it so soloing was a lot more benefitial than grouping, hamstringing the core of the MMORPG genre.

Where DAoC's design gave you options and multiple ways to spend your time, WoW gave you 1. But, because WoW's marketing aimed at nonMMO players, that's what we're stuck with now.

Originally posted by xpowderx

Originally posted by SignusM

Originally posted by Margulis

They are both theme park clones but RIFT has way more polish and features - plus arguably the best mmo dev team around.

I don't see how anyone could argue that. Their dev team did nothing but release a carbon copy of WoW with half baked features. How is that a good dev team?

And WOW copied from EQI and DAOC. All games take the best and try to make it better. Its too bad WOW is no longer the best! It will go down as EQ did. How many expansions is it for WOW now?

Less than most MMOs. Even indie MMOs have more expansions than WoW.

DAoC, EQ, AC, SWG, UO, they all had massive amounts of innovations and improvements. WoW had none. WoW was just a worse, more solo friendly version of EQ, which is against what MMORPGs are all about.

All WoW clones take from the broken WoW formula and fail to improve it, and WoW did the same. There has been about 1 new feature in the last 7 years of MMO development, public quests, and even those were features in old MMOs in the 90s. WoW is stagnant and has never expanded or innovated on any MMO features, same goes for all its immitators. The truly good MMOs created their own things.

Originally posted by Vhaln

Originally posted by Puremallace

Originally posted by SignusM

So choice between a singleplayer WoW clone, or an even more singleplayer WoW clone... why don't you save money and just play Diablo or something?

 

Has the MMO genre fallen so far that we're comparing two complete WoW clones and trying to figure out which is better? Neither are worth anyone's times.

[Mod Edit]

 

Rift has the best implementation of dynamic event public grouping, short of anything that isn't released yet.  I'm not sure why people knock rifts and invasions so much - Its been a long time since I've seen so much massively multiplay mayhem in an MMO, so IMHO, they serve their purpose well, and it was a lot of fun.

 

Er... not so. WAR, AC, Darkfall, DAoC all had better massive world events. Rift's are, like everything in the game, half attempts at copying other games.