I suppose I count for the boycott too; not from any sense of moralistic outrange.

I just don't like their games.

Originally posted by xBrando

The title says it, what MMO really made you look twice and say, "Hey, this is a game of its own."

Its not an average MMO, questing, making money, and raiding. Its diffrent from all the others, but amazing at the same time.

Which MMO would you say is most set apart from the others, but great at the same time?

World of Warcraft.

Before you flame me, consider.. every game is designed for a specific niche. WAR is an RvR game. AoC is a PvP game. EVE is a space combat/economy game. LoTR is an RP game.

There's only ever been one game that has encompassed all playstyles and that is World of Warcraft.

Hi. I'm Teflon, and I solo in MMO's.

I'm not sure "why" I do it per se; the egotist is me wants to say it's because I don't like being limited by other peoples ineptitude but that's a partial truth that I'm sure we've all experienced at some time or another while being forced to resort to PUGs to get something done.

I like single-player games; and I like to be the protagonist in those games. I don't like to feel like I'm the Robin to someones Batman. I want my achievements to be just that.. my achievements rather than "I was there too!".

I don't like logging on and spending half of my play-time scratting around looking for groups.

All that said, I can understand why people would ask why I don't just save myself the monthly subscription and go play a single-player offline game and well, that's a complex answer so you'll have to forgive me if it's a bit hard to decipher.

When I play offline games, I feel like I'm playing in an isolated snapshot of someone's imagination; a shard of consciousness that, be it ever so detailed, is little more than a compartmentalised artistic vision that has been abandoned and left to drift. It's a flower that has been cut from a stem; it has a finite beauty, it won't last.

MMOs just have a different feel. The other players, the constant patching and tweaking.. even the drama and politics; I don't actually care about any of it, but just knowing it's there has an impact.

I forget, but I'm sure I read somewhere that drug addiction was now considered "a disability" these days and hence, falls under discrimination law.

I'm sure an enterprising lawyer would be able to argue that video game addiction was enough like drug addiction to warrant the same consideration in law.

Though latest studies might put a crimp in that argument;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7746471.stm

Originally posted by Jesabelle 

So what do you think makes an MMORPG successful? How would you go about releasing your own MMO if you had a production team and a team of good designers on your hands?

I would say that the formula for a good and successful MMO is:

1. A good and recognised IP.
2. A solid developer with previous MMO experience.
3. Low system requirements.
4. A good launch with stable servers.

These will get you box sales and a solid playerbase at launch, but that's fairly easy. Retaining the subs past the first couple of months is the hard part, because many developers seem to completely miss out on the importance of:

5. Depth

Simply put, if you want people to keep playing your game (and paying your subs) then you need to provide a depth of gameplay that engages people and galvanises them to want to log on. WoW does this very well by catering to most mainstream playstyles; you have the hardcore raiding, the casual grouping, the PVPing, the solo questing/grinding and the time consuming (and often useful) crafting.

None of these elements is particularly outstanding; most have been done (and done better) in other MMOs, but the fact that WoW has all of them in the one package is what makes it a very attractive MMO to play for anyone who enjoys the freedom of choice.

For example; most people would not have two subscriptions to two different games on the basis that one of them is a great PVP game and the other is a great PVE game; the majority would plump on the game that has very good, but not great PVE and PVP.

I've played many of the new MMO's and have felt that they have lacked somewhat in the depth department; I try to remember that WoW was also lacking when it was first launched but one can't escape from the notion that if MMO's want to compete with WoW, they need to step up because they're not competing with the "just launched" WoW, but the current well-developed one.

I suppose it's a good thing that people are still willing to play a game with a graphical engine that is 4+ years out of date; it at least proves that the majority of gamers can look past the gimmick and shinyness and still focus on the quality of the gameplay.

Hopefully that will, (along with the recent spate of failed/failing MMO releases) encourage new MMOs in development to turn out higher quality products.

I think I'll aim for neutrality; hopefully there'll be a roleplay server.

Nice vid! .. and must say, I do like the idea of meaningful solo content. It was one of the things that I miss most from the original SWG and also one of the very few things that I loved about Tabula Rasa .. I do hope that they make the content scale in difficulty and allow you to either solo or group depending on your preference.

Would love the prospect of logging on whenever I felt like it and being able to do something more meaningful than just grind.

Originally posted by John.A.Zoid 

Well I don't own a 360 as I only play PC and there were ALOT of things I didn't like about the game and it isn't my GOTY but what I'm syaing is the PS3 is the lackluster version because of the PS3. That said I don't see why they shipped a game with such a poor combat system and porly animated characters that crashed all the time on my PC.

Well, as you'll see from my post above; many of the things I found unsatisfactory were issues with the game itself, not the platform. I can say that safely as I've seen complaints about the exact same topics from people playing on the PC and Xbox too.

Originally posted by Midnitte

I believe most of the problems affects the story, as your able to skip significant pieces of the story such as going directly to Rivet City to find info about your dad as opposed to actually going to Three Dog first.

This was part of it, yep.. you could actually skip 3 stages in the main quest by just wandering into Vault 112 and finding Dad without ever meeting Doctor Li, Three Dog or Moriarty.

The second dodgy part was the physics engine; NPCs can randomly fall to their deaths from high ledges; sometimes when you shoot a target they fly off as though tossed from an extremely powerful catapult, and some of the bits and bobs designed to show off the engine (the domino bit in the grocery shop) were unreliable and often didn't work.

Some of the dialogue and quest design was a pile of plop too.

Oh! I almost forgot the power-armour-wearing paladin NPC who would randomly steal things from the "secure" containers in your house.

So yeah, opinions differ as opinions are wont to do; but F3 was a disappointment for me.

Originally posted by John.A.Zoid

Everyones making a deal with Microsoft for exclusive downloadable content because Microsoft are paying developers extra for it and sony is not. Developers arn't fanbois.......

Fact;

- The PS3 is harder to code for, costs more money to develop for and takes ALOT longer.
- The PS3 doesn't have the graphical power to look better then the 360 and the only reason Sony games can look soo good on their console is because they have a better first party who doesn't use Unreal Engine 3.

So what do you expect? The PS3 has the smallest install base and isn't worth putting the extra time in to developing for because they don't make the money back through sales. The 360 is much cheaper and sells far many more units than the PS3 because people are buying it and not the PS3.

So blame Sony for lying about the power of their console and blame Sony for not creating a console that is easy to develop for and blame Sony for having a $400 console thats far more expensive than anything else out there.

If this is the case, then Fallout 3 should have been a Microsoft exclusive. That would have annoyed me, (because I own a PS3 and hence, wouldn't be able to play it) but I'd have accepted it.

By releasing the game on the PS3 then announcing that they were going to add DLCs to convert it from the release version (an open-world with a restrictive level cap and linear terminating main quest) into an open-world with a non-restrictive level cap and open-ended main quest.

Except of course, for PS3 users who don't get DLCs.

One should also mention that the game contains significant game-affecting bugs (presumably on all formats). These are the reasons that I'm not voting Bethesda for GoTY. The game just doesn't deserve it.

And I'm very pleased that you're happy with your Xbox. I'm very happy with my PS3 too; if you want to have a console bashing war, I'm afraid you'll need to look elsewhere as I frankly couldn't give a monkeys what other people think about a console that I'm happy with.

Originally posted by John.A.Zoid 

Don't blame Bethsda that the PS3 isn't as powerful as the other systems and takes twice as long to code for.

Yarr, 'cos Bethesda making a dirty back-room deal with Microshaft to screw the PS3 players out of forthcoming downloadable content and game-altering changes is most definately a coding issue.

They just couldn't get that "IF Dirty Microsoft Offer Bribe THEN Tell 'em to bugger off" code right.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Fallout 3... easily the best game this year.

I own a PS3, so Bethesda sure as heck ain't getting my vote this year!

Originally posted by UNATCOII

Part of the problem -- and I'll say most of the problem in general -- is that the devs are players themselves. They spend their development time hosting (or being a member of) raid guilds. So from that focus, they'll see little else and prioritize raiding development.

Similar thing with WoW, one of the developers (the one responsible for game balance, character classes, combat, items and PVP) was also well publicised to buff his preferred classes (lit. the ones he played) to the eyeballs.

If I was running a development team, you can bet y'bum I'd give the "class balance" job to a non-gamer.

Originally posted by OMRomero

And as far as consoles go, give me a mouse and keyboard and i'll never touch a PC for gaming again.

I approve of (and second) this statement.

Frankly I'm amazed that no console has gone down the route of fully supporting a K+M control setup. My PS3 has USB ports; I can plug a keyboard and mouse into it, but still can't use them to play games. Just baffling.

There's probably some highbrow and crippling hardware reason why consoles can't be controlled by K+M.

Originally posted by Zarraa

Today we've people reaching raid level in MMO's not understanding their characters limits, skills or spells. We've people who have no idea how to function in a group much less a raid. No understanding of  Rage or off  tanking, building or transfering aggro, parking mobs etc.  But hey it's RAIDING that's killing MMO's.

Let's be honest, there are a fair few people who've been raiding for months/years and still don't know their characters limits, skills or spells. If three years of being in a progressive raid guild taught me anything, it's that raiding is more a matter of repetition than skill.

I can't speak for other games, but raiding on my WoW server declined very heavily once it became possible to achieve gear of (almost) equal power through more casual means like heroic badge farming and PVP/Arena points, which was a solid indication that lots of people weren't raiding because they enjoyed it; but because it was the only way to get good gear.

I'm taking a philosophical back-seat. They haven't confirmed anything yet, so as I see it there's absolutely no reason to condemn them yet. Even if they do decide on a microtransaction model, I'll still give the game due consideration.

The only time I would absolutely rule out a microtransaction game is if the game was scaled to REQUIRE you to buy stuff in order to play the game properly. If it's just cosmetic stuff (like different models for mounts/armour) or timesaving stuff (like double experience for an hour) then I'm fine with it.

If it turned out to be "Pay $100 for a lightsaber that's twice as powerful as anything else in the game" then I'd move on.

As long as I can be a wookie, I will play this game.

I'd prefer to be a wookie droid engineer than a jedi, but if it's a "jedi vs jedi" game then I'll still play it.

But only if I can be a wookie!

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Asians seem to prefer Grinders.

Americans seem to prefer Action and Reward now.

What are European's In to? Every MMO it seams like fails in the Euro market (According to the fourms. the worst place to get data :P)

And everyone else feel free to correct my Blatent Disregard for your playstile.

Im intrested in What you and you think your Nationality Like to play.

Can't really speak for an entire continent, but I prefer an MMO with an immersive storyline and depth.

Most fail (to impress me, at least) 'cos they don't have that and focus on endlessly repetitive grinds or item-ladders.

Originally posted by declaredemer

Immersion MMORPG gamers --deep, complex worlds; customizable characters; and so forth-- are totally neglected by developers.  Why? I do not know.

Oh, that's an easy question!

To make an immersive and complex environment, you need imagination and innovation.

That's like.. hard.

Much easier to stick to making more dragons that drop purples and endlessly tweaking an inherently broken PvP system; you can always just say that the game is balanced around group PvP to explain away the overpowered classes!

Originally posted by shrapnel20

there has been info released on all of those topics, just not in serious detail.

have you read this?

www.mortalonline.com/forums/1405-information-summary.html

and keep it mind there is A LOT of info unlisted in there that has been released over the past few months, scattered about the forums. another thing to keep in mind is that the developers release information to only to the few who frequent the IRC, and what is spoken of in the IRC stays in the IRC.

 

Cheers for the link, it has some interesting information. I'll definately keep an eye on this one closer to the release date.