| 2058 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 8:48:05 PM
Originally posted by nomatics856 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 8:39:19 PM
Originally posted by darkhalf357x 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 7:56:41 PM
Originally posted by bossalinie 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 7:16:21 PM
Originally posted by buegur 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 5:12:35 PM
Originally posted by Creslin321 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 5:10:11 PM
Originally posted by EduardoASG 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 5:04:05 PM
Originally posted by SEANMCAD 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 5:02:45 PM
Originally posted by nariusseldon 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 ...Why? |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 4:47:03 PM
Originally posted by SEANMCAD At least, unlike SWTOR, the things you do in singleplayer games impact the game world and change it. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 4:44:40 PM
Originally posted by Pilnkplonk 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. |
|
|
After playing SWTOR it made me wonder why mmorpgs are still around?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/31/12 4:38:47 PM
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. |
|
|
Hypothetical: MMO Cull - what would survive
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/28/12 12:58:56 AM
Originally posted by GreenHell 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. |
|
|
Hypothetical: MMO Cull - what would survive
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/28/12 12:43:30 AM
Originally posted by djmtott Pretty much this.
I'd keep Vanguard, DAoC, and Darkfall. |
|
|
Hypothetical: MMO Cull - what would survive
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 1/28/12 12:42:46 AM
Originally posted by Thrage What? It's probably one of the most innovative and interesting MMOs out right now. |
|
Originally posted by Vhaln 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 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 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 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. |
|