Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Crazyhorsek

 

 

 

You bothered too much for nothing. When I said "10 million" it was an example, I didnt even know that WoW had 10 million players right now and I wasnt refering to WoW specifically because I actually play wow from time to time - I always have my WoW account open to dump the frustrations I get from all those "next-best-thing" mmos that keep coming out. I said 10 million out of nowhere, it was in any way related to any game - just for the purpose of being "huge" and how meaningless a huge number can be when brought down to its meaning - which is, and I repeat, for the player MEANS NOTHING. For the player it shouldnt mean anything if the game has 2000 or 20 million players - for the player its irrelevant because it doesnt change, on any circunstances, his game. Unless of course you're some retard that likes to play a game by its numbers so you can tell ppl "the game I play has 20 million more ppl like me playing" - what you want to sound normal? Are you a 12 year old justifying to your parents? The number of players is irrelevant to the player unless it goes below 1000 - below that in an mmo you can feel it... and still depends on the zones... if WoW only had 1000 players and they were all in stormwind at the same time as you, you'd feel the game full of ppl... 

I was not saying "company-wise" I'm saying "player-wise". You really think I'm worried about the finances of some Blizzard or Zenimax? Any of those companies, be Zenimax, Activision, EA can support a zero-profit game btw. They can afford to.

And... I hate sandbox mmos. I like SOME aspects to be "sand-boxy" but I like story driven, lore-driven, quest based mmos with a good narrative and meaningfull pvp - Like DAoC - I'm not a huge fan of WoW but I recognize that unfortunately it is still better than most of the competition.

Take GW2 for instance. They're both crap... but WoW is so much better crap. GW2 is a retarded game wanting to be everything while being good at nothing. Absolutely nothing. Its an empty shallow game, with a shallow ... story - I refuse to call it "lore" and everything about gw2 is.... meh. Its like... fast food with no condiment. Tastes like... actually it tastes like nothing, you just feel the texture, theres no flavour at all. Of course you can always pretend is chicken since it prolly tastes the same way.

Originally posted by Maelwydd

if games become more shandbox, less themepark, more involved, less pointless fluff....you might just be the guy complaining about how your games are being changed by other peoples playstyle.

Only question being how long we deny reality and demand the industry change to suit us?

It's not what you love, that's the problem among gamers. It's this adversarial relationship that every Fanboy contingent insists on promoting (vs. the other(s)).

These are MY games, MINE. Mom, Jimmy won't stop playing with my games!

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Don-Quixote

is above the average gamer and so he's able to understand and appreciate the true meaning of gaming

Illusory superiority drives 95% of the posts on any given message board. No particular fresh insights here.

"No ur wrong"--try to estimate how many replies that entails, exactly.

But you separate out those, and "Ur so rite, me too!"--and you really don't have much message board left.

I wonder if Don understands the manifest ironies of his handle - creating illusory windmills for other people to tilt at...

... perfect!

Honestly, I'm surprised at the (over)reaction of many posters here. It's ok if you don't agree with Larzul's analysis but, for the love of God, focus on the topic and present contra-arguments. What I'm seeing are personal attacks - calling the guy names, even assuming he's a ganker (¿¿??), or coming up with unrelated, out-of-topic contra-arguments that put into question your listening/reading comprehension. For the glory of my mother, please, many of you would be envied by the Salem's witch-hunters.

Ok, the delivery of his message might not be the most appropiate but the substance, in my opinion, rings true. Basically he's complaining about the oversupply of super-casual themepark model mmos that present a regression of systems and mechanics in comparison with early mmorpgs - which were more aligned with rpg tabletop mechanics - due to a way of commercialization that has pretended to cater to all the possible conceivable public - consequently, if you pretend to cater to everyone (including soccer moms, the halo fans, the spec ed kids, the adhd crowd...well, you know what i'm trying to say) the experience is going to result bland, dumb and boring - eventually so even to the so called "casuals". If we look to the mmos released in the last 7 years, we can see that most of them have not meet their expectation, so this model of "catering to everyone through "welfare, handholding, lowest common denominator" mechanics might - hope you appreciate the irony here- not work.

The solution? As the guy suggests, going back to the model of catering to specialized, niche publics. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be an overcasual, disneyland-coloured, consoley game to play along your children, or solo, or casually - ala Guild Wars 2, Rift, post-vanilla WoW...But there should also be an alternative for players that want to expend their limited gaming-time in an immersive, realistic, challenging experience.

Originally posted by Maelwydd

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by Doogiehowser

The guy you quoted earlier was talking about the financial success and you told him it is just in his head. I could care less about your hate for GW2. I am just stating the facts. The world doesn't revolve around your personal likes or dislikes by the way. GW2 is a huge success and that is a fact not an opinion.

 

That statement needs to be read  and remembered by every self important elitist on this site. 

And it also needs to be remembered that people who use this line forget to apply it to themselves just as much. It just so happens that at the moment the existing trend of gaming supports your side...guess what, it's changing. Just remember what you say here because if games become more shandbox, less themepark, more involved, less pointless fluff....you might just be the guy complaining about how your games are being changed by other peoples playstyle.

Nope. Sorry, but I'm not one to pitch a bitch when I don't get my way. Plus, I don't limit myself to one playstyle. I've had fun in both sandbox and thempark games. If the Repopulation turns out to be what it says it will, I'll be in that game enjoying it even though it is nothing like the MMOs I currently play. But if it doesn't, I'll move on and let everyone else enjoy the game. That's what grown ups do. 

Originally posted by FromHell

Originally posted by Doogiehowser

Originally posted by FromHell

Originally posted by mate0377

Larzul talking about GW2 as a failure...?? Really ? The most successful MMORPG since WOW

 

only in your mind... most hyped, probably, that´s about it

Not in his mind.

From business and  financial point of view GW2 is a huge success. You want to know what failure is?  TSW and AOC.... you should know better.

You know what else is a financial success? Farmville, Fifa 13 and Dragonvale. Do I need to play financially succesful games?

HELL NO. Not touching any of these "successes" with a six foot pole. Same goes for Gw2.

By the way TSW and AoC are doing fine, there are more than enough people around to play with and the finanacial side of things is none of our your or my business, unless you are a stakeholder. Are you? Guess not. So, cut out the business talk.

It's not so much that I think GW2 is some super mmorpg or something.  But when you say GW2 is a failure, you mean other mmorpg are doing better?  Because I think GW2 is doing fine because they are doing better than "the other mmorpg on the market now".

So you think TSW and AoC is doing better than GW2?  I don't know about TSW, the thing with AoC is they don't have enough subscriber that they are actually lossing money, at least for quite a while.  And I'm not talking about the business side, I'm talking blatantly I dont' think many people is playing AoC. 

And you lost me when you are talking about farmville or Fifa13, those arn't mmorpg.  You dont' need to play a financially successful mmorpg, but you do kind of have to worry if the company is consistantly lossing money.  You never know when the studio can't take enough and just shut down the game.

Originally posted by Akerbeltz

The solution? As the guy suggests, going back to the model of catering to specialized, niche publics. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be an overcasual, disneyland-coloured, consoley game to play along your children, or solo, or casually - ala Guild Wars 2, Rift, post-vanilla WoW...But there should also be an alternative for players that want to expend their limited gaming-time in an immersive, realistic, challenging experience.

 

Your bias is as bad as the commentator's - and easy to see.

"overcasual, disneyland-coloured, consoley game to play along with your children,"

... nice to see you aren't being too dimissive of casual players here...

The very idea that an "immersive, realistic, challenging experience" cannot exist for anyone except 24/7 hardcore players (those that many 'Carebears call 'No-Lifers') is a steaming pile of mythology perpetuated by two things;

1. Lack of sufficient innovation amongst games companies to date.

2. Crass egocentric 'leetism from a vocal tiny minority of gamers who go on and on and on about it ad nauseam - like theirs is the only voice worth listening to.

I have been in turns, an almost feverish hardcore player in a hardcore raiding guild, a hardcore player in a more casual guild, and a casual player in a casual guild.

I have seen all sides of the play spectrum, and as I have got older and have matured, I increasingly find the types of players the commentator represents to be the most self-aggrandising and self-centered of the hardcore set. Anyone who takes a balanced approach to gaming knows the telltale signs. Anyone over the age of 30 and has a job, social life and partner and/or kids is sick to death of hearing this one-sided argument.

Just to make myself clear here.

The MMO gaming world has far more 'casual' players than hardcore - by several orders of magnitude. WE are the ones with the biggest voice and the deepest pockets, and Games Companies have realised this and are trying to cater for us - the majority.

They haven't got it right yet, but they will eventually.

What none of US need is a return to the kind of game that requires 12 hours a day (or more) to play competitively. We don't want full loot; we don't want FFA OW PvP without a robust consequences system; we don't want an endless gear grind...

... and we certainly don't want the narrowly focussed, self-serving and grossly overly opinionated telling us what the MMOs that we play 'need'.

I think we know already...

Now if you want to post a rejoiner - then might I ask that you please confine yourself to characterising the elements of it you don't agree with, with less obvious condescension.

Trying to pass off someone elses playstyle as 'invalid' and demanding games which would naturally exclude them is pretty innexcusable. Doing so when in the tiny minority is just plain stupid - it's always easier to exclude the few and cater for the majority, and it's a no-brainer when revenue is involved...

What you and the commentator should be doing is making a lot of noise demanding a well-crafted hybrid game that is inclusive and caters for your style alongside the others.

You would'nt be happy in a small game without much support because of low revenues, and you should know this really.

Originally posted by emikochan

Stop trying to change games that people enjoy.

I don't think i can remember a time when i've come across such brutal irony.

Originally posted by Caliburn101

 

Your bias is as bad as the commentator's - and easy to see.

"overcasual, disneyland-coloured, consoley game to play along with your children,"

... nice to see you aren't being too dimissive of casual players here...

The very idea that an "immersive, realistic, challenging experience" cannot exist for anyone except 24/7 hardcore players (those that many 'Carebears call 'No-Lifers') is a steaming pile of mythology perpetuated by two things;

1. Lack of sufficient innovation amongst games companies to date.

2. Crass egocentric 'leetism from a vocal tiny minority of gamers who go on and on and on about it ad nauseam - like theirs is the only voice worth listening to.

I have been in turns, an almost feverish hardcore player in a hardcore raiding guild, a hardcore player in a more casual guild, and a casual player in a casual guild.

I have seen all sides of the play spectrum, and as I have got older and have matured, I increasingly find the types of players the commentator represents to be the most self-aggrandising and self-centered of the hardcore set. Anyone who takes a balanced approach to gaming knows the telltale signs. Anyone over the age of 30 and has a job, social life and partner and/or kids is sick to death of hearing this one-sided argument.

Just to make myself clear here.

The MMO gaming world has far more 'casual' players than hardcore - by several orders of magnitude. WE are the ones with the biggest voice and the deepest pockets, and Games Companies have realised this and are trying to cater for us - the majority.

They haven't got it right yet, but they will eventually.

What none of US need is a return to the kind of game that requires 12 hours a day (or more) to play competitively. We don't want full loot; we don't want FFA OW PvP without a robust consequences system; we don't want an endless gear grind...

... and we certainly don't want the narrowly focussed, self-serving and grossly overly opinionated telling us what the MMOs that we play 'need'.

I think we know already...

Now if you want to post a rejoiner - then might I ask that you please confine yourself to characterising the elements of it you don't agree with, with less obvious condescension.

Trying to pass off someone elses playstyle as 'invalid' and demanding games which would naturally exclude them is pretty innexcusable. Doing so when in the tiny minority is just plain stupid - it's always easier to exclude the few and cater for the majority, and it's a no-brainer when revenue is involved...

What you and the commentator should be doing is making a lot of noise demanding a well-crafted hybrid game that is inclusive and caters for your style alongside the others.

You would'nt be happy in a small game without much support because of low revenues, and you should know this really.

 

We are all biased in relation to what we expect and value in mmorpgs and games in general. Even you Caliburn...

When I started playing muds and mmorpgs - those were Dragon Realms, the first Neverwinter Nights, UO and AC - , these games were mostly aligned with rpg tabletop mechanics - in fact, most of the guys I came across those came from the tabletop a/o pen&paper rp scene, same as me. There was no spoon-feeding, no markers, no on-rails personal story or tunneled questing, no convenience tools, no welfare-rewards...Also, in terms of rp there was no need of suspension of disbelief, nor the necessity of creating imaginary assets and situations via emoting, as all this could be provided by the very game - i.e. If you role-played a merchant that had a fleet of 5 caravans, it's because you actually had those caravans in-game. Basically, you ( aka your character)- were put into a sort of virtual-world that had a defined lore and a set of rules and you (aka your character) just wandered around that world - your actions defined your character, not a predetermined scripted story.  

Naturally, people that share my background associate mmoRPG with this model, and what we expect from a mmoRPG is in relation to this very model. And, you can see, this model is completely opposed to what the so-called "casuals" expect. In fact, for us "casual", "easy" and "convenient" are incompatible with our idea of mmoRPG.

In this sense, I have no intention of defending a model that pretends to cater both publics ("hardcore roleplayers" and "casual" or however you want to call it) for I have the certainty that such thing is impossible in terms of satisfaying both sides of the equation - conceptually, mechanically, metaphysically impossible. Listen, I don't like to be treated like an idiot, as I feel whenever I play casual-themepark - I don't say that people that play casual-themeparks are idiots, I know that -, I don't like to be handed rewards under a push-a-button-reward algorithm (would I say "reward/reward" algorithm, in opposition to risk/reward one?), I don't like to have to follow a predetermined story in which I'm the savior of the mmorpg world (a notion that I find absurd in a mmoRPG), I don't want a tunnel-vision experience, I don't like.... Man, and you tell me that I should defend a model that pander to the likes of me and the so-called casuals?

On top of that, that model of pandering to everyone has already been tried and, as far as I can see, it doesn't work - you end up pissing off one or even both sides of the rope. I think it would be more realistic to segment the objective publics and design especialized products for each of those segment - as I've already say, I think there also is a problem with branding, perhaps we should start distinguising between plain MMOs, MMORPGs, MMOFPS, Multi-Games, Coop. Casual Games.... Whatever ettiquete in order to help the public choose their fitting product - same as they do in music, clothes, cars.... My two cents anyway.

Last but not least:

"The very idea that an "immersive, realistic, challenging experience" cannot exist for anyone except 24/7 hardcore players (those that many 'Carebears call 'No-Lifers') is a steaming pile of mythology perpetuated by two things;"

This is a very extended and commonplace fallacy. It's not a question of amount of available time, is about what experience you actually want to have with your available time. It's directly related to what you value in mmoRPGs. Many of us don't need to have the best rewards or to be treated like especial snowflakes that deserve to have access to all the features and content and shit of the game. No, we just want to have an immersive experience in so far as our available gaming-time allows us.

I work hard, I have an active social live, go trekking once per week, have a family, responsabilities, bills and mortgage to pay...so, I have an average of 12-20 hours per week that I can dedicate to gaming (alongside my gf and rp gang). 12-20 hours, not a big deal, right?  Does that justify that I should be playing switch-and-go, spoon-fed, overeasy games? Of course not, because I look for a different kind of experience - I was never a Vampire Lord when I roleplayed the pen&paper version of Masquerade, didn't have that much available time, couldn't go to all the rp sessions, wasn't all that committed. Did I enjoy the experience in spite of this? Of course I did! Did I tell the DM that he should handle me rewards because I had to study for my Degree and didn't have that much available time? Of course not,  the very notion of that idea was just foreign.

We are different kind of beasts Caliburn, and we are not getting along in the same mmorpg. Of this I have absolute faith.

EDIT: typos

Originally posted by Caliburn101

 

I wonder if Don understands the manifest ironies of his handle - creating illusory windmills for other people to tilt at...

... perfect!

Without wanting to go too much off topic:

I always wondered if actually Quixote created illusory giants, the answer of course being found in the book itself when the Knight says: "I know who I am and who I can be". Giants are a fact in the eyes of the Don, Windmills in the eye of the barber. The problem there is Sancho: he does not know what he believes, his knowledge is merely circumstancial.

Back on topic:

there's this fallacy called 'of the true scotsman' that can certainly be applied here. It would go like this:

- No MMORPG would deliver over-casual disneyland-coloured press-button-to-win gameplay.

- Hey, this is an MMORPG and is over-casual.

- Then is not a true MMORPG.

As we all know, instead of modifying the definition of our universal we modify our subject. So it becomes merely circumstancial. Sticking to a universal definition of what an MMORPG should be against all odds is not a sign of virtue, but of intellectual bad habits.

Originally posted by Don-Quixote

Without wanting to go too much OT:

I always wondered if actually Quixote created illusory giants, the answer of course being found in the book itself when the Knight says: "I know who I am and who I can be". Giants are a fact in the eyes of the Don, Windmills in the eye of the barber. The problem there is Sancho: he does not know what he believes, his knowledge is merely circumstancial.

Show of hands if you're read Cervantes, audience.

Originally posted by miagisan
i agree with the other posters.....who cares what some loudmouth or some poster thinks about a game. If you enjoy it....rock on. Noone else can tell you what to enjoy or what to spend your money on.

so totaly +1

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Don-Quixote

Without wanting to go too much OT:

I always wondered if actually Quixote created illusory giants, the answer of course being found in the book itself when the Knight says: "I know who I am and who I can be". Giants are a fact in the eyes of the Don, Windmills in the eye of the barber. The problem there is Sancho: he does not know what he believes, his knowledge is merely circumstancial.

Show of hands if you're read Cervantes, audience.

An MMO based on the man of la Mancha. Would that be too much to ask for?

Dude in the videos has no idea what he's talking about. A definitive reason for why cameras and youtube should be restricted from certain people.

Not really, but it's funny to say.