Trending Games | World of Warcraft | Dragon Age: Inquisition | EverQuest | WildStar

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,905,150 Users Online:0
Games:757  Posts:6,292,765
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

General Discussion Forum » The Pub at MMORPG.COM » POLL: The MMO Conundrum

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search
65 posts found
  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:07:04 AM#21


Originally posted by Loktofeit
I chose new but I disagree with your longevity assessments as the newer MMOs haven't had a chance to prove their longevity. 

I am basing that on the usual play a new game for 3-6 months and then move on cycle that many players seem to follow. Yes, there is usually a core base of players that stick with a game past this and I agree time will tell.

New games have a player at max level in short order compared to older games that took literally years to get to the top tier of the game. This is good for end-game people, but new games don't seem to offer much to keep end-gamers playing for very long.

My whole assumption could be wrong in that most players may NOT be looking for years of playing the same MMO. Perhaps to them, 2-6 months is plenty long for them. Maybe that is the goal of new games as well. I don't know. I certainly hope it is not the new way of thinking, but I could very definitely be wrong.

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:14:50 AM#22


Originally posted by Zorgo
What if I want to make a new age mmo which has longevity?

I would really like to see this game :)

For me, new-age MMOs are what narriusseldon likes to point out:
Lobby based instanced raid/PvP games.
The games that have lost the MMO feel to them. The ones that many players now find borefests.

I really would like to a your new-age MMO with longevity :)

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:17:44 AM#23


Originally posted by Paradigm68

Originally posted by AlBQuirky
You want to make an MMO. You start a company with other people's money since you did not win the lottery.

Now you have 2 choices with varying risks.
1) Make an old time MMO. (Not as popular, but may have longevity)
2) Make a new-age MMO. (More popular, but may be short lived)

Which path do you go down?

(Let's not go down the buzzword paths of "innovative", "new", "revolutionary" and the like. Remember, you have investors to answer to.)



Whats my motivation, make a great game or make money?

That's the conundrum, isn't it?

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  DamonVile

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/22/05
Posts: 4909

1/27/13 11:24:28 AM#24

Most of the old school mmos only had 200-400k subs. We like to think they were great and will outlive all these crappy new mmos but, these crappy new mmos still retain more people than they ever had long after the game hoppers move on.

A failure to gamers in todays market is still far beyond anything the only devs even dreamed of. The best way to " make money " is appeal to the asian market. North Americans have way higher standards and game jump any time something new comes along. Even if you did make an old style mmo it would suffer the same fate. The next new big thing would take most of your subs.

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:31:27 AM#25


Originally posted by Lithuanian
Depends on how do we describe "old time MMO" and "new time MMO". Is Lotro, WoW - new time MMOs? Or is Istaria old-time MMO?

In this situation (if I am to answer to investors), I would go for almost any MMO that could make money. I think, there is high probability users would buy (subscirbe, cash-shop) something innovative, something new.

Voted "new time", though it would be nice if OP explains what imn his eyes new and old time MMOs means.



That's a good point and I will try my best to describe what I mean by "Old Time" and "New Age" MMOs.

Very generally speaking...
Old Time
"You're in our world now." EQ's famous marketing line. Old time MMOs, in my opinion, had worlds where players made their fun in many varied different ways. There were no epic stories with a definite end to them. End-Game was not even a concept. Instances were hardly ever used. Leveling took time. Time that encouraged sociable aspects to MMOs.

New-Age
Games that have players reaching max level in a matter of weeks (2 months, maybe) "and then the real game begins." These games are all about the end-game, not the journey. Many times they have epic stories that have an epic ending. Instances are heavily used to "keep things fair" and facilitate the epic stories so they don't interfere with the other players.

I hope that helps a little bit about how I am differentiating between the two.

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:44:19 AM#26


Originally posted by DamonVile
Most of the old school mmos only had 200-400k subs. We like to think they were great and will outlive all these crappy new mmos but, these crappy new mmos still retain more people than they ever had long after the game hoppers move on.

A failure to gamers in todays market is still far beyond anything the only devs even dreamed of. The best way to " make money " is appeal to the asian market. North Americans have way higher standards and game jump any time something new comes along. Even if you did make an old style mmo it would suffer the same fate. The next new big thing would take most of your subs.



Good points. Old time MMOs did have numbers in the hundreds of thousands (if they were lucky) with not much for competition.

However, WoW holds onto their numbers because players have invested in their characters. Many have played for over 5 years because why start anew when they have invested so much time in their current MMO? They have guilds and friends they have made through the game. A lot of WoW players leave and try the new games coming out and many of them keep returning to WoW. For all the negatives associated with WoW, it is still top dog. (And I really dislike using it as an example :) )

My point being: Think of building an old-time MMO world with the influx of new players to MMOs and I wonder what would become of that MMO.

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1123

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

1/27/13 11:49:33 AM#27

Why such a binary decision?  Why cant it be a hybrid?  A new MMO (graphics, systems, etc) but old MMO gameplay (virtual world, housing, sandpark elements).

Picking one or the other is just limiting options.

If anything its pretty much proven strict themepark content is unsustainable so sandbox/sandpark is really the only way to go especially if you want/looking for longevity.

Always been curious why this model didnt take off?  Or has it not started yet?

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 11:53:16 AM#28


Originally posted by darkhalf357x
Why such a binary decision?  Why cant it be a hybrid?  A new MMO (graphics, systems, etc) but old MMO gameplay (virtual world, housing, sandpark elements).

Picking one or the other is just limiting options.

If anything its pretty much proven strict themepark content is unsustainable so sandbox/sandpark is really the only way to go especially if you want/looking for longevity.

Always been curious why this model didnt take off?  Or has it not started yet?



Well... I would hope a new game uses better graphics, systems, etc.) while still holding onto old school MMOs ideals. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.

I am talking about the core ideals behind these new systems: Old vs New.

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  jtcgs

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/28/04
Posts: 1843

1/27/13 11:56:51 AM#29
black and white choices are no choice at all.

“I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 12:07:24 PM#30


Originally posted by jtcgs
black and white choices are no choice at all.

I simplified it to keep the "out of the box" thinkers at bay. It almost worked ;)

I was simply trying to illustrate a decision process some game designers may struggle with. When some posters bitch and moan about the decisions some game designers make, I thought it might prove prudent to see what "being in their shoes" might be like.

Sometimes, it works. Sometimes it doesn't...

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

  Loktofeit

Novice Member

Joined: 1/13/10
Posts: 12401

Currently playing EVE, SMITE, ArcheAge, and Combat Arms

1/27/13 12:30:07 PM#31
Originally posted by Paradigm68
Originally posted by Loktofeit
I chose new but I disagree with your longevity assessments as the newer MMOs haven't had a chance to prove their longevity. 

They keep shutting down or going f2p before we can asses their longevity

I think you've let your bias toward F2P cloud your view. If I get what you're saying, it doesn't make a difference if AoC, LOTRO, EQ2, Lineage 2, or DDO are around after ten years because they have already failed your measuring stick by going free to play. Likewise that seems to indicate that if an MMO was released as F2P, then it doesn't count to begin with. Do I understand you correctly?

 

 

"And wikipedia is as accurate as Britannica. Wikipedia is very reliable. You would be hard pressed to find a more reliable source for these kinds of things." -fivoroth

  Quirhid

Elite Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5664

Correcting wrongs on the Internet...

1/27/13 12:31:36 PM#32
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 


Originally posted by Quirhid
It is pure speculation to say that an old school MMO would still have longevity in today's market. These games do not exist in a vacuum.


Well, seeing as the new-age MMOs seem to appeal to players who game jump often, longevity is usually not what new-age MMOs appear to want. They don't build their games for longevity, unless a player enjoys endless, meaningless gear grinds, raids that don't change from one run to the next, PvP for what ever reason the game decides to dictate, and daily quests.

 

Old school MMOs, those bore-fests you hate so much, actually cultivated longevity. When TSW, GW2, Rift, Tera, AA, SW:TOR and the rest hit 10+ years of being around, I may change my tune. UO is still around - 15(?) years running. EQ is still kicking - 13(?) years running. I count 16 games listed on this site still up and running since before the new millennium. That is about 16 games running for over 12 years each.

Like I said, maybe time will tell a different story, but for now, I like my assumption :)

The grind was same in the old and new. Only in the new, the grind is at the end. And you haven't really given chance for the new games to prove their longevity.

Again. Speculation. You have no basis for your argument.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  McGamer

Novice Member

Joined: 7/24/05
Posts: 1035

"Fear leads to Anger, Anger leads to Hate, Hate leads to Suffering" -Master Yoda

1/27/13 12:32:56 PM#33
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

You want to make an MMO. You start a company with other people's money since you did not win the lottery.

Now you have 2 choices with varying risks.
1) Make an old time MMO. (Not as popular, but may have longevity)
2) Make a new-age MMO. (More popular, but may be short lived)

Which path do you go down?

(Let's not go down the buzzword paths of "innovative", "new", "revolutionary" and the like. Remember, you have investors to answer to.)

Sorry but most investors are only going to care about are buzz words, not made-up gaming terms that no one uses.

  Quirhid

Elite Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5664

Correcting wrongs on the Internet...

1/27/13 12:35:53 PM#34
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 


Originally posted by jtcgs
black and white choices are no choice at all.


I simplified it to keep the "out of the box" thinkers at bay. It almost worked ;)

 

I was simply trying to illustrate a decision process some game designers may struggle with. When some posters bitch and moan about the decisions some game designers make, I thought it might prove prudent to see what "being in their shoes" might be like.

Sometimes, it works. Sometimes it doesn't...

Its not a binary choice. You are simply wrong if you think so. And any assessment you make of the issue based on that, will likely be also wrong.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  Goatgod76

Novice Member

Joined: 6/24/06
Posts: 1226

1/27/13 12:39:25 PM#35
Originally posted by Paradigm68
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

You want to make an MMO. You start a company with other people's money since you did not win the lottery.

Now you have 2 choices with varying risks.
1) Make an old time MMO. (Not as popular, but may have longevity)
2) Make a new-age MMO. (More popular, but may be short lived)

Which path do you go down?

(Let's not go down the buzzword paths of "innovative", "new", "revolutionary" and the like. Remember, you have investors to answer to.)

Whats my motivation, make a great game or make money?

Making a great game would make money if it were indeed great. /facepalm

  dave6660

Apprentice Member

Joined: 9/26/08
Posts: 2350

"Next time I see you, remind me not to talk to you."

1/27/13 12:42:55 PM#36
Investors gave me money knowing I had no solid idea for a product and no business plan?  Can I also sell them a bridge I see from my window?

"Why so serious?"
-- The Joker

  Paradigm68

Novice Member

Joined: 1/24/11
Posts: 880

1/27/13 1:26:40 PM#37
Originally posted by Loktofeit
Originally posted by Paradigm68
Originally posted by Loktofeit
I chose new but I disagree with your longevity assessments as the newer MMOs haven't had a chance to prove their longevity. 

They keep shutting down or going f2p before we can asses their longevity

I think you've let your bias toward F2P cloud your view. If I get what you're saying, it doesn't make a difference if AoC, LOTRO, EQ2, Lineage 2, or DDO are around after ten years because they have already failed your measuring stick by going free to play. Likewise that seems to indicate that if an MMO was released as F2P, then it doesn't count to begin with. Do I understand you correctly?

For an MMO that meets my definition, specfically as an immersive world simulator, yes, that precludes a cash-shop.

  darkhalf357x

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/25/12
Posts: 1123

I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?

1/27/13 1:34:01 PM#38
Originally posted by AlBQuirky

 


Originally posted by darkhalf357x
Why such a binary decision?  Why cant it be a hybrid?  A new MMO (graphics, systems, etc) but old MMO gameplay (virtual world, housing, sandpark elements).

 

Picking one or the other is just limiting options.

If anything its pretty much proven strict themepark content is unsustainable so sandbox/sandpark is really the only way to go especially if you want/looking for longevity.

Always been curious why this model didnt take off?  Or has it not started yet?



Well... I would hope a new game uses better graphics, systems, etc.) while still holding onto old school MMOs ideals. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.

 

I am talking about the core ideals behind these new systems: Old vs New.

I see your point now.  I agree.  I still recommend the "old" way games were made which were more immersive (and therfore) more fun for me.

How do you view ArcheAge (based on what you know)?  I think this is a step in this (right) direction.

  Maephisto

Novice Member

Joined: 2/15/12
Posts: 653

1/27/13 2:11:53 PM#39

If you are beholden to investors, which ALL mmo's are, then you would have to go with the modern model of MMO's.  Your MMO would have to cater to the broadest base of players possible without becoming too diluted.

We have yet to see if Kickstarter MMO's can change this. 

  AlBQuirky

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 1/24/05
Posts: 3376

Tomorrow's just a future yesterday...

 
OP  1/27/13 2:52:06 PM#40


Originally posted by darkhalf357x
How do you view ArcheAge (based on what you know)?  I think this is a step in this (right) direction.

Truthfully, I have not been following AA. It seems that the number one talking point about it is the action combat, which I am not a huge fan of. Thanks for asking and I will look further into it now that they have a Publisher for outside of Asia :)

- Al

Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
- FARGIN_WAR

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search