Funny, I had almost the exact same impression of LOTRO as those mentioned.  It is a good game, but I was bored after a few months, wasnt even to 50 yet either.  Hard to put your finger on "whats wrong" a lot of times.  Lack of depth, as some said, is a good way to put it.  Lack of sandbox elements is a big one for me.  In general, the only console games Ive ever been into were the ones that had some sort of sandbox element or some kind of "free mode", where you could just wander around.  Questing/grinding just feel way too linear and repetitive. 

Sovren1, its interesting how a lot of developers are starting to say similar things.  You gotta think that eventually, one of them is gonna step up and really break the mold.  I mean, these companies can only spend so much time trying to reproduce WOWs success before they realize that its not going to happen.  At that point, even the newest MMO crowd will be tired of the same old crap and will be ready to ditch the genre.

But, I can understand where theyre comming from.  Its a pretty big risk, considering that most of the more "innovative" MMOs end being a niche game at best.  Still though, if someone could come up with the right type of MMORPG, with ENTERTAINING gameplay, it would have mass appeal. 

As others have said, the uber template isnt a product of skill based systems, its a product of poor balancing.  You see the same thing in class/level based pvp games.  Uber fotm classes that half the people play until they get nerfed, then they move to the next fotm class.  A good, balanced skill based system really would have tons of possibilities. 

Skill based.  Much more freedom to create the character that I want to play, rather than just finding the class thats the best fit. 

Id agree with a lot of the comments posted here.  Just wanted to add that I think the MMO "grind" is caused by a few different things:

1)  Too much of a focus on character advancement.

      I know some people enjoy this one, but for me its a big problem.  Many MMOs have nothing to do except level/advance your character, either through repeatedly killing mobs or burning through generic quests that really have no effect on the game world.  If the game does have some sort of player driven, dynamic content, its generally reserved for endgame.  So, youre basically forced to "grind" your way to the fun stuff.  Even then, there might be a second ladder to climb.  Now, your at the level cap, but there are additional pvp/pbe abilities or gear that you have to grind out before you can stand a chance with players who have been there longer.  This was the big issue for me in DAOC.  PVP was a blast.  I could sometimes spend a few hours in the lower level battlegrounds with out even glancing at the clock.  But, if you wanted to get to "big boy" rvr, you had to grind through 50 long, boring levels worth of pve.  And, at that time, you couldnt /xp off or /rp off to stay in the BG's.  Eventually, I just gave up.  There was no way I was going to pay someone $15 just so I could waste time trying to get to the fun stuff.

2)  Boring, MMO style gameplay

   We're talking about this in the other thread, but it fits into this topis as well.  IMO, MMO gameplay has an identity crisis.  It cant decide if its going to be turn-based and strategic or real-time and twitchy.  Obviously, it will end up some where in the middle, but I dont feel like we've seen the right blend yet.  Take LOTRO for example.  A class like the burglar has a good amount of skills, but it still doesnt feel all that strategic.  Once you know how and when to use each skill youve pretty much got it mastered.  Theres no real chess match there.  You follow your recipe, the mob follows its recipe, then some one rolls the dice.  That, gets boring.  Too much of the encounter is out of your hands as youre VERY limited by your characters abilities.  This results in the game becoming extremely predictable.  Just by looking at a mob/encounter you know whether youll get through it or not with out too many variables.  Theres no amount of quick movement or great aiming that will save you once youre in over your head.

3)  Bad AI

   This one doesnt need much explaining.  Retarded mobs make encounters VERY static and predictable.You know that you need to pull a certain way, or heal a certain way, or dps a certain way.  The mobs dont really do anything different from what they did the last 1000 times. 

I dont know if anyone has the answers to these yet.  Well, Im sure many developers do, but whos going to give them money to produce a game that breaks too far away from the mold?  If I was developing an MMO (haha) Id adjust things a little:

1)  Too much of a focus on character advancement.

   Go with a skill based "sandbox" style game.  The advancement curve would be fairly flat, ideally, just long enough for you to really figure out you character and the game.  The major focu here is on the "end game", which is player driven.  Im not going to go into that here, because thats a whole other "sandbox" thread.  But, the point is to get players into the fold fairly quickly, so they can actually become part of the community, rather just another noob that has 6 months of grinding left before he can play the game.  Gear would have a minimal effect and would not be level restricted.  NO uber gear that doubles the power of your character.  End game armor would look great, but wouldnt be more effective than other top end armor.    As far as end game pvp/pve abilities go, Id have them in some form, but they wouldnt effect gameplay.  Youre character might gain some kind of status/title or access to restricted items and housing.  Even appearance mods could be worth the time for some people.

2)  Boring MMO style gameplay

  I guess you are pretty limited by the technology.  But, Id like to see gameplay tilt more towards one direction or the other, either more strategic or more twitchy.  If its more strategic, then obviously, there would be less focus on movement and more on having a good number of skills/spells and counters.  Great strategy or the ability to adapt on the fly should give you chance to go in over your head and come out on top.  If the game is more twitch based, then reflexes and reactions would play a huge part, with the "dice rolls" adding that little bit of your character into the mix.  Think along the lines of oblivion, can be very twitchy, but your character does have an effect on things.  Although, with the right type of character (archer with stealth, speed, and acrobatics) you can twitch your way through some tough encounters.  Whether its strategic or twitch based though, gameplay should never come down to two characters just taking turns, smacking each other in the face, letting their gear/stats decide the fight.

3)  Bad AI

   Again, I guess youre limited by the technology.  PVP, however, does a good job of covering up, since you can just fight each other and forget how retarded those mobs are.  For pve, I think dynamic mob spawns more random encounters can help.  The mobs might be just as predictable when youre fighting them, but at least you dont know whats comming around the corner.  

Id rather not see an MMO that has the potential to replace WOW.  Why?  Because the genre needs more innovation and diversity, not 50 MMOs all trying to copy the big guy.  

LOTRO is a good game, or maybe a great game if pve is your thing and youre really into the lore.  But, for some of us its just too much of the same old thing. 

Non of these mmos (LOTRO, WAR, AOC, TR) is a WOW killer, but theyre all gonna take their slice of the WOW pie...

This arguement is really pretty simple.

1)  DAOC had a good size population at its peak

2)   WAR has MUCH more hype surrounding it that DAOC did

3)  The MMO market is MUCH bigger than it was 5 years ago

4)  Theres little to no competition in the pvp market right now

Not very hard to add those up.   Plernty of us are tired of the same old  grinding/questing pve crap and are ready tojump into any decent pvp centric mmo.

I think mmo's are going in the right direction as far as class design goes.  Most classes look more like hybrids now and actually have a good amount of skills juggle.  There are still dps/healing/utility classes, but the lines are a little more blurred and you generally have more that just a few buttons to mash.

But, its still not there yet.  MMO gameplay seems like its hung up some where between turn based strategy and real time fps.  We obviously dont want either extreme for most mmo's, but we do need something more challenging and dynamic.  PVE really compounds the problem since youre combining repetitive gameplay with retarded, static AI .  PVP does a decent job of covering up the situation, since you do need some amount of awareness and reflexes to react to other players.

So, who knows what the solution is.  Better AI will definately help, but we still need some big innovations in gameplay.  Oblivion style gameplay in an mmo is probably several years away.

Right, a pvp centric mmo will never work.  What we need is another pve centric mmo with slow, boring, repetitive gameplay,  a lack of any form of community, and massive, endless time sinks.  Oh wait...we already have about 400 of those out right now.   Maybe someone should make a pvp centric mmo...

This really isnt an issue.  As others have said, the numbers posted for lotro sales are NOT worldwide sales.  So, who knows exactly how big their numbers are. 

Second, WAR and LOTRO are aimed at two completely different crowds.  LOTRO is a pve mmo for casual players.  In general, those gamers that play less than 15 hours per week, are really into  the IP, and are only really interested in pve.  If you fit that bill youd probably love the game.  I had fun for a little while, then I remembered why I dont like pve...But, it is a good game, they just followed too close to the WOW strategy.  Not saying its a WOW close, just that its too similar to the same old same old for some of us.

WAR, on the other hand, has some good things working for them.  Combine a completely dried up pvp market (atm) with the fact that mythic is known for their RVR and youre going to peak some interests.   They still have a lot of questions to answer,  but if they can, at the least, make some fun RVR, they'll have plenty of subs.  You gotta think that most DAOC vets will be interested, not to mention every other pvp fan that is bored stiff with the current crop of mmos.  And, I think theyre gonna take a nice chunk of the WOW crowd.  Most of the WOW players that I know are waiting for WAR. 

I wouldnt expext anything close to WOW sub numbers, and I dont think you'd want that.  But, if theyre in the 300,000-500,000 range, thats pretty d@mn successful. 

Somnulus, I agree completely. 

Skill based systems give you MUCH more freedom to build the class that you really want.   Of course, the system needs a pretty wide range of skills and needs to be well balanced to prevent "uber" templates.  And, I think a skill based template works much better with a sandbox style game where theres more to do than just questing/grinding.  This way, someone really can be just a crafter, or just an explorer, if thats what they choose.

Personally, I like the fact that you wouldnt always know what build someone had or exactly how powerful they were.  Adds a little bit of mystery and more of a challenge to pvp. 

MMOs will improve...eventually.  They have to.  The new generation that came in with WOW will end up in the same boat as the rest of us, sick of the same grinds, slow gameplay, and lack of a dynamic world. 

Personally, I prefer a good skill system.  I really dont see any advantage to a class/level system, other than them being easier to design and balance.  And thats really the biggest knock against skill systems, that theyre unbalanced and can always be reduced to one uber build.  But, thats not  an inherant flaw with skill systems in general, rather its just the result of a poorly designed skill system.

I could  go on and on listing reasons why I dont like class/level systems, but since thats pretty much all we have right now its kind of pointless. 

More than likely, I think you'd break that list up into different catagories, choosing one from each.  Something like this:

PVP or PVE

Class/Level Based or Skill Based

MMO style, Turn based combat or FPS influenced combat

Hardcore character progression or Casual character progression  (How steep is the level curve and how big is the power gap?)

Linear or Sandbox  (probably wouldnt be at either extreme, but would lean MUCH more in that direction)

Roleplay/Social or Combat/Action (would definately be some middle ground here)

IMO, going down the least and choosing one from each catagory would really narrow a game down to the niche area.  You might not find an MMO with EVERY feature you want, but youd likely find one that had the important feature on your list. 

I also think this is one of the biggest issues with MMOs, shallow gameplay.  Almost everything is about the "progression" of your character:  class, level, gear...It seems like very little effort is put towards creating fun /challenging gameplay.  Sure, when you first jump into an MMO it seems a little over whelming and takes a while to learn your class, especially if you're playing a more skill heavy class.  But, usually by the mid-high level range, you have the class figured out and you know what skill to use in any given situation.  At that point, your character keeps progressing, but at far as player skill goes, youre about as good as youre going to get.

In most MMOs, it seems, the only real skill involved is coordinating with a group.  Even then, it usually comes down to a simple  pattern of abilities that you repeat over and over, maybe throwing out and odd one here or there when the group picks up an add or something.  This, in addition to slow, turn based combat, is what keeps most gamers from jumping into the MMO market. 

So, whats the answer?  I dont think going full on MMOFPS would be the best solution for every MMO (would probably be better than what we have now) but there has to be some kind of happy median.

IMO, MMOs do need to go in more of a niche direction.  I dont think we'd want them to go so far that theyre all one-dimensional, but they do need to be more focused.  If you make an MMO to satisfy ALL types of players, youre just going to end up with a mediocre MMO that doesnt really do anything well.   I really doubt that anyone will duplicate what WOW did.  They already opened up the market and brought in new gamers who, once they leave WOW, will be in the same boat as the rest of us who are bored with the same crap.

The pvp/pve types are the easiest example.  A good pvp game needs to be designed around pvp from the beginning, you cant just tack it on down the road.  Im not a hard core pvper, but I bet most pvpers will agree that a great pvp wouldnt have any pve.  Right from the start you'd be playing the game you want to play, not grinding your way to 50 just to get to the fun part.  This was the major flaw with DAOC, pvp was lots of fun, but you still had that horrible pve grind before you could get to the fun (battlegrounds aside).

Its a similar situation with pve games.  A good pve game doesnt need ANY pvp.  Why should it?  Youre more than likely interested because the game has great pve, not because it has some half a$$ed pvp tacked on at the last minute.  You dont even need a specific example for this one, since most MMOs with pvp are really just pve games with some kind of pvp tossed in as an after thought.  

Of course, this doesnt mean you cant still have MMOs that mix different play styles together, since there are players who enjoy this.  But, right now that part of the market is way too big. 

At this point, Id settle for any new MMO that has a good skill based system, a "flat" advancement curve, and relatively challenging gameplay.  Im just not into the current crop that are more focused on advancement than fun gameplay.  Seriously, thats the single biggest thing that keeps most mainstream gamers from trying MMOs, slow/boring gameplay. 

Originally posted by Brenelael

First off I only read th first 4 pages of this post so if someone already said this I'm sorry.

 

Every one seems to be drawing a line between "Sandbox" and "Linear Storyline" in games like they are mutually exclusive. This is NOT the case. You can have a sandbox game WITH linear story lines. The difference is that in a sandbox game there would be many different linear story lines and whether or not the player chooses to take part in any particular story line is totally up to them. In this way there would be a certain amount of structure for people that want that but it isn't forced on everyone equally. Oblivion is a good example of this. In Oblivion there are linear story lines for all the major guilds and factions and another for the main quest. The major difference is that whether or not you participate in any given story line is totally up to you. You can actually play Oblivion to the max level and never participate in a single story driven quest line if you choose to do so. Total freedom of choice is what makes a game a sandbox and not whether it has story lines or story driven quests. You can have it both ways.

 

Bren

 

Yea, Id have to agree.  More of a "sandbox" style game with some linear blended in would be my choice.  Make the linear, story driven quest lines available, just dont make them the focus of the game.  If someone doesnt want to do them, fine, there should still be PLENTY of tools for player driven content.  I think, many of the things they were trying to do with SWG were pretty close to the mark.  Create a world, lore, cities, all of that, then give the players lots of tools for creating content.

I know its not an MMO, but GTA is a good example here.  You have many hours worth of storyline, but you also have a living, breathing world to explore and interact with.  Most of the fun in that game is just going out and findind something to do. 

Most annoying thing about MMOs...

They keep regurgitating the same old ideas and format.  Class/level system, massive grinding, boring/easy gameplay, lack of player driven content and lack of a dynamic world...