Crystal Ball-ing: Futura MMO-itis

Some appreciated linkage took place yesterday on my post about Rift and the difficulties of the current MMO gamer to just let go of the WoW mentality. (Thanks Common Sense Gamer)

Reading through the comments on his post got me thinking...especially one specific posting.

SmakenDahed said: “Guys, what do you want?” Something different.

This got me, of course, looking at my Crystal Balls for our future in MMO land. Can the genre really offer enough change that everyone really wants? The major complaint is how Rift is so much like the old MMO's, why would anyone want to play it?

But, will the new generation be that different?

Lets take a gander while I do a reach around and look at our future in MMO's...

• Star Wars: The Old Republic Online

This one has my ire up. The spectating I have done on this game has so many looking to Bioware for their next gen relief. Can the supposed "story" pillar really offer the change in this genre the MMO player craves?

Hell, all I need to do is go to my previous post and look at comments to see how "story" will be to the standard (WoW) MMO player...

Allen said "MMOs are about the gameplay. That's what makes people pay money every month to play. People aren't going to shell out $15 a month for a story, no matter how good, once they've completed that story. The gameplay is the hook."

So, is that how you feel? Rift has a unique IP and original story, but according to this player...who cares? But, is it the fact that so many are attached to the Star Wars IP and the legendary story, that it will be the key to their enjoyment?

Even though discussion has been rampant on some unique gameplay styles, SWToR will still have various issues that have plagued our MMO's since WoW began. Talk is there will be dual faction RvR...uh, everyone complains that true factional RvR needs three to survive. Dual factioning equals imbalance. What about the standards? Kill 10x? Gonna be in at launch. Raids? Sure thing.

What is unique? How about the companions...oh crud, DDO and Guild Wars have these....

Ok, will graphics...oh, fudge...NVM.

Again, next gen? Where?

Why will Star Wars be your MMO nirvana?

• The Secret World

Ok, this one is easy. Right off the bat, we have Funcom at the helm. Yes, Ragnar, the man who supposedly can do no wrong is in charge. BUT...two launches of an MMO, both gone horribly wrong...Can the third time be the charm?

This issue alone will most likely turn away a good bit of audience.

Right off the bat though, gameplay is unique in respect to no "levels" per se, but a skills based system. The setting is also unique (modern day instead of renfaire fun). So, where could it possibly go wrong?

First off, the main push is the "story"... Yep, another game that believes players want story. I know I do. Age of Conan was awesome in respects to that first 20 level run. Story was incredible. then they pulled it out from under our feet and the game fell on it's ass. It has since been polished up quite a bit, but is still a sore spot.

What about progress? We do not know much in that respect. Here is what the website says...

"The Secret World does not force you down a set path of progression. You are free to do anything you want at any time. If you ever get tired of doing missions or slaughtering demons, why not return to your secret society and perform tasks for them so you can rise up in their order? Do so, and you will unlock even more powers, weapons, and even unique uniforms. And, of course, untold secrets!"

Lets check our words...Tasks? QUESTS. Missions? DUNGEONS. Slaughtering? GRIND.

Did I get them all? As you can see, anyone can take any part of the "hype" a game developer builds and see that even our next gen games cannot escape the routines we have grown accustomed to.

Out of any game I will discuss today, Secret World has the most chance to offer a unique experience. The fact the developer is frowned upon and the mechanics still have that "similarity" feel...it will be hard for the game to escape the discussion that surrounds all MMO's.

• Tera

Why this is on ANYONE's radar, is a mystery to me. With it's Aion like graphics, why does it appeal to the MMO gamer?

Boobies.

Ok, well, there is also action based combat, but still....Vindictus does that already.

So, what does it offer? Quests? yes....Raids?...yep, yep. Story....meh, who cares, right? Most likely a lot of text boxes based on the videos I have seen. Hey, WoW does that too.

So, the game engine is definitely next gen, using Unreal 3. But, this is another issue. The game will hardly run on the hardware most gamers use (especially with the complaints so many give Rift of FPS issues, yet a friend of mine runs on a laptop with built in graphics, adequately, ...)

No, what we have here is another Korean MMO. Though they are popular to a large audience of manga/anime lovers, the derision most of these games receive due to poor westernization and shoddy UI's, etc...all add up to another game that will be reamed on a regular basis...(again, looking at Aion as our example).

Next?

• Guild Wars 2

This one I saved for last.

Though still stuck in Fantasy tropes and using some standards, GW2 is set to try and change the MMO genre as we know it. No quest markers? No grind? No Holy Trinity of Tank/DPS/Heal?

What could possibly go wrong?

First is the requirement of "story". Guild Wars, the original, did this well. But, people were not that interested in this aspect. But, the game DID sell 6 million copies, so that built in audience who cares about the story will exist.

Even though there are no true "quest" markers or this feeling of "following the path", there is still a need to somehow notify players of what is happening, so some type of system will be used to say "Hey, come here and kill 10 of these...", etc.

But, guess what? Dungeons? Still there. Raids? Still exist. Those same features that EVERY MMO HAS is still in GW2. Also, PvP, which is notorious in the realm of balance hell, will of course lead to the inevitable nerf, which is the purview of the MMO complainer.

Guild Wars 2 should be my choice for most innovative here, and it will be huge. But, I can smell the rampant MMO player waiting in the wings to take each NEW element, and turn it on it's nose and make us believe it has all been done before.

****

Basically, our future, though bright, is fraught with the MMO burnout. That player who, jacked up so much on MMO gameplay, is crashing when it comes to the newest innovations in this market.

Though we have a list of games that each offer something to advance the genre...just like Rift did.. they will be frowned upon. I mean, if I can find the issues (and two of those games on that list are my most wanteds), what will prevent that burnout from doing the same?

Though Rift is a really great game, the player feels the need to attach themselves to the "similarities" and not let go. I feel each of these upcoming games, no matter how hyped our MMO player is, will offer that "same old" feeling.

My suggestion right now is that if Rift is too much like your old MMO to let that feeling of sameness go...then let MMO's go in general until one of these launch.

Maybe by then you will remember what you loved about MMO gaming.

Same as it ever was...

Today has been a flurry of discussion on various sites about upcoming MMO's Rift and Star Wars: The Old Republic.
One thing seems to be clear for both of these games...they are the "Same as it ever was..."

Is this really a bad thing?

I have argued in the past that the MMO genre really needs a swift kick in the pants. Innovation is dead for this style of game. I would prefer each of the above listed games made a move toward a different way to play an MMO. But, it is not to be. So, why should you still look at these games?

They are finally getting it right.

Since 2008 (or even earlier...depending on your view of the growth of this industry), every MMO that has been released has had some sort of issue. Whether it is bugginess (Warhammer Online, Age of Conan, etc, etc.), ugliness (Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online...animations and some models mainly) or unfinished games (most MMO's released since 2008)...there really has not been a winner in the genre since World of Warcraft.

Rift will be the first game to take elements of each MMO listed and polish it until you are blinded by the light of the sheen.

Will it really be ready? Is endgame there? Will balance haunt the infamous "souls" system? Will the "Rifts" be unmanageable due to lower populations as players level?

And will the Dev's continue to listen like they do now?

This and many other questions remain unanswered. Based on the feedback though and the current iteration (Beta 3 as of this writing) the game looks to be a competitor. For those who have grown tired of their current game, but are relatively new to the genre, Rift is a winner. To those, like myself, that loved the older MMO's; Vanguard, WAR and AoC all had something I liked, yet had more to hate; then it is a good home to come to.

As to Star Wars, or Guild Wars 2 or any further game, Rift will actually be telling. If the "familiarity" does not keep the players in this game, then innovation will be the only step to player retention.

This genre, I feel, has really been played out. Rift could be the last great game of the familiar "themepark" variety. After that, it will be time to step into the next generation.

Cheers!

Age of Conan - Server merges are complete

Noted to have a 24 hour down time, after 20 hours, the servers return.

All servers were merged as noted previously here.

It will probably take several days to see what the outcome will be for this. I do know the continued resurgence on Xfire is taking place with the game ranking at an amazing #47 yesterday. For AoC that is an accomplishment.

There was some ribbing on AoC for winning a Game of the Year award for 2008 (and I tend to agree with that wholeheartedly. It was not GOTY material)...but it should have received a "Most Improved" award. Craig Morrison continues to make the game better, and is on top of the titles changes.

My time card is burning a hole through my pocket, so I guess I better get ready to log in, as I completed Star Wars yesterday in a marathon run (tough game also near the end...). Great game, and quite pleased with the overall experience.

There was some good discussions yesterday on my post about MMO fees, and I will talk about that more later...

Have a good one.

Weekend Gaming Wrapup

And an interesting one at that.

Shock of shocks, but I have been having a BLAST in the new Star Wars:Force Unleashed game. I am not a huge Star Wars fan, but some things I like.
The last game I enjoyed was Republic Commando for the XBOX and PC. A very good FPS, with some cool tactical combat.
This latest game has SO many ways to take an enemy out, and as you progress you gain more abilities.


The visual quality is great, and the boss fights are just the way I like them.
Even better is the fact that the story in this one game is 100% better than the last 3 mistakes...uh, I meant movies.

Also, this weekend after going and having an awesome meal at P.F. Changs (yum...the best Chinese ever...), (EDIT: Yes, I know it is Fusion, yet the "Chinese" based dishes makes other Chinese taste like crap) we saw The Unborn. This movie was rated horribly, but I am a fan of Goyers writing, and he has at least made progress in his directing skills. I also think people concentrate on so many stupid things.
For example, so many reviews mention that the lead walks around in her panties, almost like she did it for the majority of the film. The panty walks lasted all of 2 minutes...
The story is convoluted, and people did not like that...OMG...please.
The concept was sound, and was unique as well. Just like The Invisible (which people also did not rate highly), and the interesting prospect of that story, we as a whole enjoyed each of these films.
If you have the capability to follow a good story, and can ignore some pitfalls, you can see the progress of a Writer/Director coming into his own..
In so many words, we liked it.
Anyways, this all leads to a trip to the store, and finding Resident Evil 4 for PC for a measly 5 bucks. Being fans of this series, but never having purchased it due to reviews knocking the graphical porting, and wonky controls...we decided..."What the heck"...5 BUCKS.
And we were not disappointed.


Luckily a patch had been released which fixed a majority of the texture problems. As well, the 360 controller works like the Gamecube controller did, and I was able to get the hang of the game before long.
There is no doubt as a whole the game is fun. And of course, with us being Horror Survival fanatics, we loved the creepy feel...so far.
We will play this one out.

Finally, as you may notice, another game left my list. The Darkness. I think it has to do with the FPS controls, and I am just not ready for an FPS at this time.
Plus, I added Age of Conan, as my time card shipped, and will be here Tuesday.

Awesome.

Finally this week, Fable 2's DLC is suppose to finally launch. New adventures, etc. I cannot wait to go back to Albion! Hopefully I will be done pretty soon with Star Wars, as I think I am at the end...woohoo. I am totally sticking to my one game at a time rule on the 360, so no Fable until Star Wars ends.

Cheers and lets all work toward having a good week!

Another one bites the dust!

Infinite Undiscovery ...time to say goodbye. I hardly knew ye'

7 hours in, and the lack of fun became quite evident. The issue revolves around the group mechanics and the drop system.
The game also plays like a real time MMO (it felt like the new Shin Megami Online game combat wise), which would be fine, if other features of an MMO existed.
I would level up, and the game would take care of everything. I would die, and the AI would take care of everything...ah heck, the AI even took care of most of the mobs.

There was no skill involved or needed.

The fact I was still using the same weapons, towns were few and far between to buy stuff, and saves were irritating...overall it just died in the Fun department.

So, with that out of the way, I decided to load up Star Wars , The Force Unleashed. There are a lot of cool mechanics here regarding force powers and what not. The fact the story is better than the last 3 movies also helps in enjoying the game.
This should tide me over for now until the release of Lord of the Rings Conquest (you know...a GOOD LOTR game).
And come February, the release of Drakensang, an old school party based RPG like Neverwinter Nights, but more involved.

Cheers

Tabula Rasa - Post 20 blues

And so it came to pass....

Level 20 is here. And I am forlorn.

I am not compelled to login right now. I have a mission that I am working through (Tocastra Prison...something like that), and basically, it is brutal.
But, also, I hit that wall that always comes at level 20. The compelling need to go on starts to waver.

I start to think "Why should I even play?". The game will end in February. There is still not that many people on to form any friendships with or start any groups. I never have enough time to do these big dungeon runs like Tocastra.

And of course...the grind. It felt harsh for level 19, what will the next 10 levels be like? And if I do not finish the particular mission, I am pretty much stuck in progressing the story.

And why progress. There is not an outcome?

This makes me think of how Star Wars will be with it's Bioware'd story focus, Will the game end with chapters? Will it be like Guild Wars where there is a story with a beginning and end (which I love).

I have enjoyed Tabula Rasa though, but it is not the game to end all games for me. It never pulls you in fully. But, mechanically it is sound with some awesome crafting that I got excited to do all the time as I leveled. And the capability to progress solo even though the spawns were ridiculous..well, that was important.

I wonder how TR would have been with Henchmen?

Anyways. I am sure it is the lull before the holidays. I have quite a bit of work (when it rains it pours. Year end is my big money maker...even when the economy is down...how awesome is that?)...and I am not keeping regular hours, so morning game time will be small for a bit. Evenings are filled with Silent Hill, where I have progressed enough that I think I am almost at the end. And then I have Dead Space waiting for me (the wife is really excited over that one...), plus some movies will be making their way to me for Christmas..

Yea...gonna be crazy. Anyways, I will be off for a day or two for the Holidays..
Wish you and yours the best...

Cheers

Tabula Rasa - Tobold discusses the end of shooters

Recently Tobold discussed how the fact that with the loss of Hellgate earlier this year and now Tabula Rasa, is it possible that the "Shooter" based MMO is at it's end.

Tobold states :

"It is totally possible that there is a large demand for good shooter MMOs, but neither Hellgate nor Tabula Rasa were good enough. But then, I kind of liked Tabula Rasa, especially the instances, and wouldn't say it was a terrible game. Is it a statistical fluke that over the last 10 years games with swords sold better than games with guns, or is there a fundamental incompatibility of MMORPG gameplay and shooting?"

This is possible. I have argued about the other aspect of this known as "avatar" based Sci-Fi. This would explain the success of EvE for example.

He goes on to say :

"The reason why that question could be important is future games. The Agency will be a shooter MMO. Star Wars: The Old Republic will have both (light) swords and (laser) guns. Are these future games going to take a hit just because of the weapons they use, or will we see a game break the curse of the shooter MMO? What do you think?"

I notice he did not mention Stargate Worlds. Even though I am smelling a fail there myself.
My only argument for it's success is the magical like nature of the Asgard or the Jaffa, even though it really is science. Also, the Renaissance or Egyptian like settings at times, which meld Sci-Fi and Fantasy lend an air of mystery.

Of course, Hellgate and Tabula Rasa did this. No luck there.

The simple reason, and what I keep stating is overall, avatar based Sci-Fi MMO's always seem to fail. Matrix, Star Wars, TR, Hellgate, etc, etc, you name it. Science Fiction as a genre really does not have as large of a following as Fantasy in the MMO field.
But, why is this?

Lets try this...

What would happen if the MMO was a "real" shooter instead.

Look at Huxley (still vaporware mind you), which was to be a full blown shooter, and not calculated dice rolls.
Would it's Halo/Gears of War like shooter mechanics have been a better fit...an MMOFPS if you will?
The Agency for example has been noted to be real time shooting combat. And maybe this was the problem with Tabula Rasa. It used dice rolls to calculate the damages.

But, then Hellgate was real time. I think overall Hellgate's issues stemmed from content being so random and yet, the same. Dungeons used the same tile systems over and over.
And lets not forget bugginess that persisted even longer than Age of Conan's issues.

Who knows?

For Tabula Rasa, I am in the same camp with Tobold in that I do not think it sucked actually. It did not deserve a monthly fee though, and this is where it dropped the ball. A lower price point or micro-transaction could have been the winner to keep TR alive.

So far ..Fantasy lends itself to the "We are legion" type of gaming, and this may be the other issue with Sci-Fi MMO's.
Think of all the FPS type games where it is "kill or be killed". Not much in the way of "team" based combat or mechanics.
More people play Deathmatches than the co-op features of most of these games.
The only difference is say the Horror genre, like Left 4 Dead which is showing that co-op counts to survive in shooters.
(And that begs the question of why no one has made a Horror MMO...even though Funcom is working on one with the Secret World, but, we know how everyone feels about Funcom lately.)

The only final argument that has not been brought up is the female gamer aspect. We do know the female gamer is becoming more prominent in the shooter arena, with Halo, etc.
But, for the most part, females look for a more casual type of gameplay according to various studies. Also, a Fantasy setting seems to attract gamer women. I can attest to this as all of my previous gamer girlfriends, as well as my current wife either do not like or abhor Science Fiction compared to Fantasy. All we need to do is look at the sale of Sims 2 and the overall female population there to note how this affects the genre.
When Tabula Rasa came up, even though I felt the setting screamed Stargate, and the wife enjoys SG, she just did not want to shoot guns...period. Even though I showed her you gained "magic like" powers with the Logos system, it was a no sale, thanks to guns (of course, she loves Horror games like Silent Hill or Resident Evil, and guns are not an issue there.)

So, we come full circle. Why is it that Sci-Fi fails in the MMO genre, compared to so many Fantasy MMO's coming out of our ears.

What do you feel is the main issue?

Fable 2 - Personal and Lonely is good

Continuing the small thread from yesterday about Spellborn, and the "miniature" groupings.
Today an article has appeared in Wired about Personal Gaming (my new phrase of the day!)

Basically the writer comes to a realization...

Playing with yourself feels good...

(/embarassment ensues)

But, the article discusses about his current Fable 2 game time and reflects some of my feelings as well..

"Why do we want to immerse ourselves in a world that emulates all the tropes of a vibrant world like World of Warcraft — but where we are, essentially, alone?

I told my friend he was looking at it all wrong. The reason we single-player fans love world-games like Fable II is precisely because there are no other "real" people around.

Because really, who needs people? People suck. I'm joking, of course — but only a bit. The truth is that, in online multiplayer worlds, dealing with the delightfully unpredictable behavior of "real" people can be an absolute chore. Teammates fail to show up for a raid, or they leave everyone waiting for an hour, or they log out in the middle of battle and leave you gored by a howling mob. Have you ever actually tried to play Age of Conan? It's like the Stanford Prison Experiment in there, my friend."

The writer goes on to state

"Indeed, the dirty secret of online multiplayer worlds like World of Warcaft is that the vast majority of people play solo in them. As Nicholas Ducheneaut discovered, players who are piloting characters below level 40 spend a stunning 70 percent of their time questing alone"

I think this is why Bioware may have something with SWTOR, by not FORCING players into groups. With Spellborn keeping it small, and personable, you can form cliques. DDO even realized the failure of the grouping mechanics, and presented THEIR henchmen system.

Back to Fable 2. It works. In the respect that secretly you CAN be in an online MMO. You can turn on the new "orbs" system. As you run around towns and in the wilderness, you can see others playing. And guess what, you can group...in duos mind you, but think of the many husband wives who play MMO's in Duos? Look at how Guild Wars presented a method in their last expansions to allow Duo play. You can play the whole campaign with just 2 players.

I still remember Diablo 2 and co-op'ing through. Baldurs Gate:Dark Alliance on the PS2. And now Fable 2 (although slightly broken) couch co-op or Marvel Ultimate Alliance (4 player).

We enjoy the thought of other players being online, but the constant need to become social elites (Questionnaires 3 pages long to join Raid Guilds in WoW, limited elite guild rosters like the CoW's in WAR), and being selective about those players (how many REALLY good PuG's compared to bad do you have. I can count on one hand the number of good PuG's)

Overall, we enjoy the "thought" of others online, but do we really care if we group or solo?

I ran into this post on Pumping Irony with his summary of the month... He states..

"I’m curious about Fallout 3, but I have such a horrible track record with single-player games. I am largely unable to stay focused, especially in RPG’s which tend to be slower-paced. I get lonely when I am the only actual person in the world other than the handful of NPC’s that allow limited and shallow interactivity, so I tend to quickly come back to the PC and login to an MMORPG."

What can we garner from such a statement? Do some find a NEED to have the other players exist in that world? What makes the other player on the other end a requirement for enjoyment of a game?

Does this type of player ALWAYS group then? I have seen the poster state the many times doing things solo. So why the NEED to see others?

Maybe in this respect, some may need the online socialization due to complications, like those who cannot do anything but socialize online (cripppled, etc..) (not to say this is Scott's issue, and if it is...no offense.)

But today, casual playstyles and more mature people playing whose times are limited really decreases the overall abundance of players who can play ALL the time for these forced grouping systems.

Fable 2 helped me break out of the habit or need to be online LFG'ing. The game stands well on it's own merits as an RPG (lets not even get started on the broken mechanics of most of the MMO's now which ruins another aspect of being "online"), and down the road, it looks like these games are making an effort to present content in a lightened fashion toward groupings. Or making adjustments to the reasoning to group. (seems LOTRO is making adjustments to all of it's regular content to be solo friendly with the "story" lines being group only..to promote grouping if you want the REAL game...will that work?)

The market will be interesting to watch over the next several years as right now is the time for these games to evolve.

What is YOUR need to be online and not in a single player RPG?

Star Wars Old Republic - Fixing the MMO

A post over at Rock, Paper, Shotgun discusses how he feels that SWTOR may just be the ticket for a ton of MMO players..

Why?

Because it is not trying to be like MMO's?

"An MMO where you get NPC party members? Good grief, yes. A thousand times yes. I get the extra hands I require to tackle a stronger foe, but without them bitching and whining at me because I didn’t use my double-cloaking no-hit AOE poison buff at exactly the point they would have used it if they were playing on their own. See? SEE? Every single bugger in these games just wants the others in their parties to be the over-qualified AI companions that perform the tasks they don’t have time for. If you don’t play like they would have done it, you’ve failed them, you’ve let them down, you’ve spoiled their game. ... But if my party members are NPCs, they’ll do what they’re programmed to do, or when I tell them to do it. That’s great for any of the above frustrations I might experience. But more importantly, when I don’t do what they might want when they might demand it, they’re not going to storm off in a giant pissy huff and block me on IM."

Of course this has been done in Guild Wars, and Everquest is getting all hyped by the Tipa and Stargrace thanks to their henchman mechanic. And recently DDO has announced a henchman system.

Could it be the time of the MMO going solo?

The biggest argument for some people is "Why play an MMO solo?"...yet, as is explained at RP&S, that we instead get a never ending adventure game, but at the same time, if we wish to socialize...we can.

Let me take the Fable 2 co-op as an example.

I sold the game to my son based on a suggestion from Bildo.

My son has YET to put the game down...

Why?

He is totally playing online at ALL times...

He either joins others as their henchman, OR right now he is playing with one of his friends and they are running around in THEIR own worlds, while chatting to each other, and are located in the same place in THEIR worlds, and getting THEIR own items THEIR own XP and not having some idiot come along and trash their setting (how many times have you yelled at someone for stealing your mob or item for a quest).

This could be THE mechanic that so many others have missed.
Next to WoW, the second largest selling MMO has been Guild Wars with 3 million + boxes sold.

Why is this?

Could it be the control you have to either play with others or play alone..?

I can look back over my post and see all these Why's...but it has purpose.

Maybe this has been a key. Either party with others or party alone...we should have the option.

This may be the ticket to scrips also.

What do you think?

Star Wars Old Republic - We will be different

“When World of Warcraft came out, everybody thought, ‘No, the market is only this big, because that’s as big as EverQuest was.’ Blizzard showed that it could be much larger. Our goal is to show that by bringing storytelling to the genre that we can attract an even wider audience. Plus, we have the benefit of this huge brand, which has done very, very well for nearly 30 years.”

LucasArts executive Tom Nichols

Who in their right mind says they ARE competing with World of Warcraft...

THAT is TOTALLY different.

Holy Crud!