Trending Games | Guild Wars 2 | Firefall | H1Z1 | World of Warcraft

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,852,171 Users Online:0
Games:733  Posts:6,227,029
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System Req: PC | Out of date info?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!

13 Pages First « 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 » Search
244 posts found
  ignore_me

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/04/11
Posts: 2034

3/29/13 10:07:55 AM#181
Originally posted by Muntz
Originally posted by ignore_me
Originally posted by Livnthedream
Originally posted by ignore_me
Originally posted by Quirhid
Originally posted by GGrimm

Your average MMO player is quite ignorant and those crying about WoW-clones are worse. I wouldn't put much trust in what they say. Afterall, customer is nearly always wrong.

This statement is the inverse of truth.

Not quite. The customer has shown repeatedly that they say one thing and do something else. They rarely actually know what they want until they are told, or atleast have the "choice" presented to them.

Go ahead and make that assumption that the consumer is not able to determine what will be a satisfying product. What you will have is a venture with no ability to use feedback outside of the source. You will make something that could be rejected, and the reason would be that you isolated your opinion away from the dirty masses.

The very problem though is in the title of this thread - sandbox. In all of the time I've been on this site no one person can come up with a definition that 2 people can agree is accurate. How as a developer to you create a sandbox product by listening to the customer? I'm not saying you shouldn't listen to your customers but when it comes to a sandbox game I'm not sure what your listening to. 

While I agree with what you are saying, Chairman Mao there was saying something that was offensive beyond the scope of the theme park/sandbox argument. Even if you make a theme park, having the attitude that you know better in all cases is a pitfall reserved for the foolish. Because I have read Quirhid's posts I know that that person is intelligent, so I find the espoused egotism to be worrisome.

Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011

  Vesavius

Old School

Joined: 3/08/04
Posts: 7151

Players come for the game, but they stay for the people- Most Devs have forgotten this.

3/29/13 10:14:27 AM#182
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aelious
What devs think are important goes into every design decision in regards to a game. Sure, every company head talks up their game and that will never change. It doesn't mean it's not valid or going into the game they are talking about. Maybe SoE thinks that a lot of people will have fun playing a game like some of us here want, even if it means you won't.

What they think is important. What they say in public .. not so much. Did any dev ever say "P2W"is important in public? How many actually do so?

Again, this is not about exactly whether SOE is saying things you like or not .. you probably should judge the game when it comes out.

I usually don't pay attention to devs saying X is important or Y is important. Only hard facts matter (like the X system of game Y plays like this). Better yet, show me in a youtube video.

 

Good lord Aelius... rule number one... never take SOE at their word.

Judge them by their actions, never ever their promises. They will *always* tell you what you want to hear.

  LauraFrost

Novice Member

Joined: 1/20/13
Posts: 91

3/29/13 10:24:49 AM#183
Originally posted by Quirhid
You talk like player created content is good.

You're right, a lot of people here think "Player Created Content" is cool, but it isn't. We've tried it in several occasions and in particular City of Heroes.

 

Player Created Content will not save a horrible game, it might even kill it. If actually the player created content is something like Neverwinter Foundry or CoH "create a dungeon" feature.

 

However, if what they mean by player created content is the idea that other players interaction would create some sort of a "content" (tradeskill, towns, farming, harvesting, digging, tunnels, walls...etc) then that's a different story.

 

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19541

3/29/13 10:34:48 AM#184
Originally posted by ignore_me
 

Go ahead and make that assumption that the consumer is not able to determine what will be a satisfying product. What you will have is a venture with no ability to use feedback outside of the source. You will make something that could be rejected, and the reason would be that you isolated your opinion away from the dirty masses.

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2409

World > Quest Progression

3/29/13 10:50:55 AM#185
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by ignore_me
 

Go ahead and make that assumption that the consumer is not able to determine what will be a satisfying product. What you will have is a venture with no ability to use feedback outside of the source. You will make something that could be rejected, and the reason would be that you isolated your opinion away from the dirty masses.

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

 Because people can easily play them along with their dedicated game? How many people do you think actually play the same lobby game continuosly? You dont, right?

 

Edit: It's pointless that you keep brining up your "no so MMO" MMOs because they are different types of games.  They could draw not only from people who play the games we're talking about here but also from players uninterested in the games we're talking about here.

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19541

3/29/13 11:01:55 AM#186
Originally posted by Aelious

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

 Because people can easily play them along with their dedicated game? How many people do you think actually play the same lobby game continuosly? You dont, right?

 

we are talking about "satisfying product" here ... there is no need for dedication, or any continuity. No one says you can't be "satisfied" for a fun 2 hour play-session and then go do something else.

 

  Livnthedream

Novice Member

Joined: 3/20/13
Posts: 582

I like this planet, YOU get off!

3/29/13 11:09:40 AM#187
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aelious

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

 Because people can easily play them along with their dedicated game? How many people do you think actually play the same lobby game continuosly? You dont, right?

 

we are talking about "satisfying product" here ... there is no need for dedication, or any continuity. No one says you can't be "satisfied" for a fun 2 hour play-session and then go do something else.

 

Not really since its generally not satisfaction that drives those games. Its generally the skinner box and various other conditioning techniques.

http://chroniclesofthenerds.com/nerdfight/

Y U NO FLIP TABLE?!?!?!

  FromHell

Novice Member

Joined: 11/10/12
Posts: 1338

3/29/13 11:13:51 AM#188
Originally posted by LauraFrost
Originally posted by Quirhid
You talk like player created content is good.

You're right, a lot of people here think "Player Created Content" is cool, but it isn't. We've tried it in several occasions and in particular City of Heroes.

 

Player Created Content will not save a horrible game, it might even kill it. If actually the player created content is something like Neverwinter Foundry or CoH "create a dungeon" feature.

 

However, if what they mean by player created content is the idea that other players interaction would create some sort of a "content" (tradeskill, towns, farming, harvesting, digging, tunnels, walls...etc) then that's a different story.

 

not talking about player created LEVELS , more about creating tasks, and non combat activities, e.g.

- player bounties

- betting

- casinos

- different minigames, racing, fishing

- open world housing

- decorating your stuff, owning a place for trophies, owning land

 

this is where most MMOs failed, and the first one to do this right will be a smashing success

 

 

btw SWTOR failed because it did implement ZERO from the beta feedback more than a year later

 

all other recent theme park releases will fail too, except Secret World, because they have great story and puzzles on top the usual kill x treadmill and it's a cool niche title and will housing sooner or later

Secrets of Dragon´s Spine Trailer.. ! :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwT9cFVQCMw

Best MMOs ever played: Ultima, EvE, SW Galaxies, Age of Conan, The Secret World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2X_SbZCHpc&t=21s
.


.
The Return of ELITE !

  GrumpyMel2

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/24/09
Posts: 1813

3/29/13 12:00:57 PM#189
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aelious

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

 Because people can easily play them along with their dedicated game? How many people do you think actually play the same lobby game continuosly? You dont, right?

 

we are talking about "satisfying product" here ... there is no need for dedication, or any continuity. No one says you can't be "satisfied" for a fun 2 hour play-session and then go do something else.

 

Sure and Online Poker is a fairly popular product, as is posting to Facebook and YouTube and playing Madden Football and the next release of Battlefield, but it's all a little bit outside the scope of the discussion don't you think?

This site and the discussion being referenced is centered on the future of MMO's....not Online Entertainment in general. It's rather difficult to classify something that features maybe 12 players playing together in an environment at a time as "Massive" multiplayer.

If you are really going to stretch the definition that far then you have to start considering all sorts of other things like Online Poker and Battlefield and Xbox Live games that can be playered cooperatively and Facebook Games or Fantasy Football leagues managed online  as falling under the definition of "MMO's".

But neither those nor MOBA's, which inargueably are popular, are what's under discussion here or were what was being referenced in the talk the OP posted at PAX. They are talking about where they think MMO's (e.g. hundreds or thousands of players sharing a single, persistant environment) are headed.

 

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2409

World > Quest Progression

3/29/13 12:08:14 PM#190
Originally posted by Vesavius
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aelious
What devs think are important goes into every design decision in regards to a game. Sure, every company head talks up their game and that will never change. It doesn't mean it's not valid or going into the game they are talking about. Maybe SoE thinks that a lot of people will have fun playing a game like some of us here want, even if it means you won't.

What they think is important. What they say in public .. not so much. Did any dev ever say "P2W"is important in public? How many actually do so?

Again, this is not about exactly whether SOE is saying things you like or not .. you probably should judge the game when it comes out.

I usually don't pay attention to devs saying X is important or Y is important. Only hard facts matter (like the X system of game Y plays like this). Better yet, show me in a youtube video.

 

Good lord Aelius... rule number one... never take SOE at their word.

Judge them by their actions, never ever their promises. They will *always* tell you what you want to hear.

 

Yeah I've heard the railing about SoE's "LIES!!!", some of which are warranted and some that are not.  I have the ability to be really excited about possibilities without getting devastated if they don't work out.

 

I'll be fine

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2409

World > Quest Progression

3/29/13 12:10:59 PM#191
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Aelious

Of course consumers can determine what will be a satisfying product. Otherwise, why would lobby co-op MMO be so popular?

 Because people can easily play them along with their dedicated game? How many people do you think actually play the same lobby game continuosly? You dont, right?

 

we are talking about "satisfying product" here ... there is no need for dedication, or any continuity. No one says you can't be "satisfied" for a fun 2 hour play-session and then go do something else.

Sure and Online Poker is a fairly popular product, as is posting to Facebook and YouTube and playing Madden Football and the next release of Battlefield, but it's all a little bit outside the scope of the discussion don't you think?

This site and the discussion being referenced is centered on the future of MMO's....not Online Entertainment in general. It's rather difficult to classify something that features maybe 12 players playing together in an environment at a time as "Massive" multiplayer.

If you are really going to stretch the definition that far then you have to start considering all sorts of other things like Online Poker and Battlefield and Xbox Live games that can be playered cooperatively and Facebook Games or Fantasy Football leagues managed online  as falling under the definition of "MMO's".

But neither those nor MOBA's, which inargueably are popular, are what's under discussion here or were what was being referenced in the talk the OP posted at PAX. They are talking about where they think MMO's (e.g. hundreds or thousands of players sharing a single, persistant environment) are headed.

 

+1

I have a lot of fun playing Nitro on my iPhone, doesn't have anything to do with my feelings about MMOs however

  Yyrkoon_PoM

Novice Member

Joined: 9/27/12
Posts: 150

3/29/13 12:11:22 PM#192
Originally posted by FromHell

 

not talking about player created LEVELS , more about creating tasks, and non combat activities, e.g.

- player bounties

- betting

- casinos

- different minigames, racing, fishing

- open world housing

- decorating your stuff, owning a place for trophies, owning land

 

this is where most MMOs failed, and the first one to do this right will be a smashing success

 

 

btw SWTOR failed because it did implement ZERO from the beta feedback more than a year later

 

all other recent theme park releases will fail too, except Secret World, because they have great story and puzzles on top the usual kill x treadmill and it's a cool niche title and will housing sooner or later

Problem with betting and casinos is the 18+ nature (atleast in the US) ... no company would realistically allow player run ones as they become a legal nightmare.  Companies skirt gambling with lootchests and black lion chests but casinos would pretty much require the game be 18+.

  Drakynn

Novice Member

Joined: 3/02/08
Posts: 2051

3/29/13 12:19:16 PM#193

sandbox =/= good/great

Sandbox games can be just as crappy as any other form of game in any genre.

I AM looking foward to more variety in the types of MMOs and MMORPGs to choose from instead of the one formula with slight variations we have been getting but don't beleive an industry shift to Sandbox style automatically will amke MMORPZGs revolutionary or that th enumbe rof good  MMORPGs released will magically increase.

At most I think it's jsut a shift in which harcore fans of certain styles are satisfied and which are left wanting and complaining on forums.

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19541

3/29/13 12:22:47 PM#194
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

This site and the discussion being referenced is centered on the future of MMO's....not Online Entertainment in general. It's rather difficult to classify something that features maybe 12 players playing together in an environment at a time as "Massive" multiplayer.


 

What? WOW LFD and LFR are not MMOs? DCUO is not MMO. STO story missions are not MMO?

This site do discuss games that are not massive, including WOT, LOL, D3, and many aspect of WOW, STO, DCUO, DDO gameplay.

So?

  ElderRat

Novice Member

Joined: 9/30/10
Posts: 909

3/29/13 12:26:26 PM#195
Originally posted by UOvet
Originally posted by Quirhid
Originally posted by UOvet
Originally posted by Valentina
I don't think themeparks are going to die in favor of sandbox games. We've done that before, the sandbox game basically died out for themeparks. It would be illogical to keep going in the same circle over and over again when they can (and are) making hybrids. One without the other is deficient.

Only because WoW was a fluke that happens every once in a while and people tried to ride the coat tails. They have realized now that isn't going to work. You don't need 10 mill subs anyway, you simply need a consistent playerbase that is going up and not down ala EVE.

What makes WoW a fluke and Eve not a fluke? Maybe they both are flukes, hmm? -Or neither is a fluke...

...does EVE have 10 million subs? You won't see that again..likely. WoW came in at the right time, low barrier entry, with a very solid IP behind it. Look, I was a fan of Blizzard right up untill WoW. I just feel that game brought in a whole generation of crap regarding the players who now run around MMOs to the ideas other companies tried to follow suit.

 

When you go outside tomorrow just asksk someone "What is WoW?" and see what they say. Then you ask them about EVE. I think you'll see where I'm getting. Not sure you can really compare the two. . .

WoW was made for everyone, EVE was not. EVE is an acquired taste. WoW, well my opinion is that WoW is more for non-gamers to get them into gaming. After that they go try other games, and they keep their WoW subs for thier fix on what got them to gaming. Not saying either is bad. I have played many games. EVE is what I keep going back to.  If there were more games with a sandbox feel, with a lot of player interaction, player politics, etc I would go to them.  And many decry gankers in EVE but that is player interaction and has triggered some of what I consider the more "fun" parts of the game. As always, just my opinion.

 

Currently bored with MMO's.

  Iczer

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/10/04
Posts: 104

I want a world in a sandbox ... not a theme park!

3/29/13 12:52:50 PM#196

I gotta agree with ElderRat. I've been in a rut lately, bored with games ... the only game that keeps my interest lately is league of legends. But I am jonsing for an mmo to really captivate me. My roots are from UO in the late 90's and early 2000's and I have been thinking about the games that are available now that I have tried to see if I could find that spark again. I tried, WOW, TSW, Fallen Earth, Wurm, Xsyon, RaiderZ, Tera, UO on a player shard and countless others. None of them have grabbed me and made me want to log in and explore what the game had to offer. Why? This has been really bugging me ... and after reading one of the interviews with the Camelot Unchained guy and thinking back to something that happened as I was playing DayZ earlier in the week I think I figured out what it was.

In the CU interview the guy was talking about how the story should be your story, as the player. Not some scripted series of events that you + 1000's of other players will adventure through over and over but the story you can tell of what happened to you while you were playing today that is unique to you. Its the random nature of those kind of things, the not knowing what or who you might run into today. I recall the enjoyment me and friends had in UO when we would try to dive into the bowels of the Terathan keep and find other players there struggling and help them out. Or find bad people there (PKs) and take them on or hide from them in hope they didnt see us. In all cases it was a blast not knowing exactly how things would turn out. I get the same feeling in EVE online, and its one of the few reasons i still have 2 active accounts after 7 years now ... I never know what the day may bring as I am out and about in the world.

 

Sorry that went on longer than expected.

  ElderRat

Novice Member

Joined: 9/30/10
Posts: 909

3/29/13 12:59:41 PM#197
Originally posted by Iczer

I gotta agree with ElderRat. I've been in a rut lately, bored with games ... the only game that keeps my interest lately is league of legends. But I am jonsing for an mmo to really captivate me. My roots are from UO in the late 90's and early 2000's and I have been thinking about the games that are available now that I have tried to see if I could find that spark again. I tried, WOW, TSW, Fallen Earth, Wurm, Xsyon, RaiderZ, Tera, UO on a player shard and countless others. None of them have grabbed me and made me want to log in and explore what the game had to offer. Why? This has been really bugging me ... and after reading one of the interviews with the Camelot Unchained guy and thinking back to something that happened as I was playing DayZ earlier in the week I think I figured out what it was.

In the CU interview the guy was talking about how the story should be your story, as the player. Not some scripted series of events that you + 1000's of other players will adventure through over and over but the story you can tell of what happened to you while you were playing today that is unique to you. Its the random nature of those kind of things, the not knowing what or who you might run into today. I recall the enjoyment me and friends had in UO when we would try to dive into the bowels of the Terathan keep and find other players there struggling and help them out. Or find bad people there (PKs) and take them on or hide from them in hope they didnt see us. In all cases it was a blast not knowing exactly how things would turn out. I get the same feeling in EVE online, and its one of the few reasons i still have 2 active accounts after 7 years now ... I never know what the day may bring as I am out and about in the world.

 

Sorry that went on longer than expected.

You explained in more depth what I was trying to say - thanks.  I am one who wants to go back to the old days.  I amm not saying all games should be that way but just a few for those llike me.  For those who like the current trends in MMO's - you have enough games. Let those of us who like challenges have a couple of our own.

Currently bored with MMO's.

  Arglebargle

Elite Member

Joined: 6/13/07
Posts: 1073

3/29/13 1:09:56 PM#198
Originally posted by LauraFrost
Originally posted by Quirhid
You talk like player created content is good.

You're right, a lot of people here think "Player Created Content" is cool, but it isn't. We've tried it in several occasions and in particular City of Heroes.

 

Player Created Content will not save a horrible game, it might even kill it. If actually the player created content is something like Neverwinter Foundry or CoH "create a dungeon" feature.

 

However, if what they mean by player created content is the idea that other players interaction would create some sort of a "content" (tradeskill, towns, farming, harvesting, digging, tunnels, walls...etc) then that's a different story.

 

Ya know, 90% of player created content is crap.   But 90% of everything is crap.  Sturgeon's Law.  

 

As long as there are ways to filter out the dross and find the good 10%, it's a net plus.  And the more there is total, the larger that 10% will be.

If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  BBPD766

Novice Member

Joined: 8/12/10
Posts: 99

3/29/13 1:35:27 PM#199
Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

I don't think there is much secret here....

 

1) The market is absolutely SATURATED with Themepark games. It's just basic business sense. No matter how much more popular hamburgers are at a certain point you have a better chance of success opening up a Chinese place then becoming the 251st hamburger stand in your small town and having to compete for market share with all those already established hamburger stands. MMO Developers are branching to try different market niche's that don't have alot of competition and sandbox's are an obvious choice. There really aren't that many quality modern sandbox's out there, and Developers are banking on (and I tend to agree with them) there is enough of an audience to support a few of them.

2) Sandbox's can generaly be produced MUCH less expensively then Themeparks. The reason why is that Themeparks require a TON of content in order to be successfull and it takes ALOT of Developer man-hours which translates into alot of dollars to proffesionaly produce that content. Especialy with all the elements like cinematics and voice-overs that users have come to expect from Themepark games these days. With sandbox's, the Developers are producing the toolsets and the world and letting the players be responsible for the lions share of the content. That means fewer dollars required....and MOST IMPORTANTLY....less dollars sunk in up front in Development. That's important because very large amounts of capital investment are really hard to come by these days. Investors that are willing to pony up that much money up front in todays climate expect a very significant ROI....and the big name Themepark releases just haven't been performing well enough to provide it....so nobody wants to take the risk in sinking in the huge amounts of capital it takes for them to be successfull on launch.

3) Even though the number of people interested in virtual worlds or sandbox's may significantly less....their customer loyalty is MUCH higher. Patterns show that. The big AAA Themeparks get a big burst of sales up front and then they drop dramaticaly within a few months, as the users have consumed all the content, grow bored and go off to the next new shiny thing. Thier customers are there for the content and once they've consumed it, it's off to something else. They may get a spike of customers again if they have a big new content update, but they don't last long and getting them back is almost like winning a new customer all over again. The sandbox and virtual world crowd are entirely different. Once they decide to join a game, they tend to hang around for years and years and years....often well past what the Developers might have thought the games shelf life was....and with little investments in the game. That long term steady income stream is really, really attractive financialy. The reason again is simple and basic business....it costs MUCH, MUCH more to gain a new customer then it does to keep an existing one. This can be especialy true of MMO's as the operational costs really aren't that bad....especialy if the size of the user base is fairly steady and predictable. That makes keeping a few 100k users for 10 years alot more proffitable then getting 1 million users at start and only holding onto them for a few months.

Personaly I'm happy about all this as I enjoy "sandbox" games and like the creative aspects of being able to participate in a game. I'm sure not everyone feels the same way....but at least you can be happy that Developers are trying out different things rather then giving up altogether...which was a very distinct possibility given how the last few big budget titles have faired. YMMV.

....while i do agree with alot of this post...

1) ..."No matter how much more popular hamburgers are at a certain point you have a better chance of success opening up a Chinese place then becoming the 251st hamburger stand in your small town and having to compete for market share with all those already established hamburger stands."

 

I disagree with this. You're comparing two different things in the same market. Yeah they are both fast food, but the people that want hamburgers will still want hamburgers. You may be able to convince a small percentage of the hamburger crowd to now eat Chinese food, but now you're in a different target market. You dont drive around looking for a Chinese place when you want a hamburger (or vice versa). The way you compete by being the 251st hamgurger stand in your small town is by not duplicating the same marketing theme as the other 250 hamgurger stands. You give them something new and fresh and not a repeat of what everyone else is already doing with hamburgers in the small town. It's still a hamburger joint, but you have to sell it differently than the others to draw the customers in AND do it such a way that they keep coming back. Simply selling Chinese food is no guarantee for a better chance of success than selling hamburgers. All you're doing by opening the Chinese food joint is attracting the Chinese food lover. Although you may attract a few of the hambruger lovers they will still be the crowd that wants hamburgers; and they arent gonna settle for Chinese food to replace that want for hamburgers. 

 

This holds true with games. If you want to make a fantasy MMORPG, you gotta make it different and better than the others and not be the 251st repeat of whats already being sold. Ya dont dont switch gears and make a sci-fi MMORPG for the fantasy MMORPG crowd if that's your target market.

  Drakynn

Novice Member

Joined: 3/02/08
Posts: 2051

3/29/13 1:38:24 PM#200
Originally posted by Arglebargle
Originally posted by LauraFrost
Originally posted by Quirhid
You talk like player created content is good.

You're right, a lot of people here think "Player Created Content" is cool, but it isn't. We've tried it in several occasions and in particular City of Heroes.

 

Player Created Content will not save a horrible game, it might even kill it. If actually the player created content is something like Neverwinter Foundry or CoH "create a dungeon" feature.

 

However, if what they mean by player created content is the idea that other players interaction would create some sort of a "content" (tradeskill, towns, farming, harvesting, digging, tunnels, walls...etc) then that's a different story.

 

Ya know, 90% of player created content is crap.   But 90% of everything is crap.  Sturgeon's Law.  

 

As long as there are ways to filter out the dross and find the good 10%, it's a net plus.  And the more there is total, the larger that 10% will be.

What you say is true given a large enough user base.The 10% good can be enough to kep the majority of the user base satisfied but only if that user base is large enough.

13 Pages First « 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 » Search