Interesting take on MMORPGs (un-ruining the MMO)

While it took awhile to get there i really like and agree with what this guy is saying.

Well, it has to be taken with a grain of salt, but overall I liked it. I'll have to run down his other stuff when I'm home.

Ya he's 'admidittely' laying it on thick on some parts but i agree with the overall premise.

I checked out his bit on cyberpunk and, while i didnt agree with all of it, it was well stated and fun to watch.

The moment he assumes that it is 'WoW' that created all the MMO conventions that he claims everyone else is copying, I start to wonder how well researched his argument is. Hint: WoW was not the first MMO and it didn't invent all these now ubiquitous MMO mechanics. Second Hint: It copied all that sh*t.

Theotormon wrote:

The moment he assumes that it is 'WoW' that created all the MMO conventions that he claims everyone else is copying, I start to wonder how well researched his argument is. Hint: WoW was not the first MMO and it didn't invent all these now ubiquitous MMO mechanics. Second Hint: It copied all that sh*t.

I'll have to rewatch it but dont think that's accurate. He spends some time talking about Everquest and what it offered before WoW. I think he says WoW slightly tweaks and repackages the themepark experience to be the first one to be truly successful.

Edit: Ya he says Everquest is first and that WoW was the definitive themepark. He also throws some hyperbole around too but warns you about it on screen first.

Theotormon wrote:

The moment he assumes that it is 'WoW' that created all the MMO conventions that he claims everyone else is copying, I start to wonder how well researched his argument is. Hint: WoW was not the first MMO and it didn't invent all these now ubiquitous MMO mechanics. Second Hint: It copied all that sh*t.

He didn't say WoW invented them, he said WoW popularized them to the exclusion of everything else.

I like this guy's videos, I recommend the one he did on violence in games. The ME3 ending one was good too.

kyrieee wrote:
Theotormon wrote:

The moment he assumes that it is 'WoW' that created all the MMO conventions that he claims everyone else is copying, I start to wonder how well researched his argument is. Hint: WoW was not the first MMO and it didn't invent all these now ubiquitous MMO mechanics. Second Hint: It copied all that sh*t.

He didn't say WoW invented them, he said WoW popularized them to the exclusion of everything else.

This. His point isn't that they invented these mechanics. His point is that they popularized them so much that basically every MMO since includes these mechanics simply because they are in WoW.

...they have to turn the grind level up to 11.

Ha! Sad, but true.

Yeah, the point here isn't that WoW invented anything. Only that they have a billion subscribers and that makes everyone eager to copy their model.

I watched a bunch of other stuff on his channel (including the 39 minute rant on Mass Effect). I won't pretend he's always right, but he does have some interesting things to say. I especially liked his bit about Cyberpunk. Class act, three and a half stars. Would watch again.

Zudz wrote:

Yeah, the point here isn't that WoW invented anything. Only that they have a billion subscribers and that makes everyone eager to copy their model.

Without watching the video yet, I'll make the larger clarification that every generation of MMOs has had a big dog that everyone has tried to copy. We used to talk about Everquest-clones.

Many people here probably are already familiar with the history, but here's a quick summary: The earliest proto-MMO (depending on how you define it) was MUD1 (by Richard Bartle and Roy Trubshaw) in 1978. Many MUDs and MOOs and MUSHes followed, with the primary codebase being DikuMUD, because the source code was readily available to be copied. Everquest was inspired by DikuMUD's design, just translated into 3D, which explains some of its oddities. WoW broadly followed the Everquest model, and nothing has displaced it yet.

This leaves out all of the alternate design approaches (Ultima Online, Star Wars Galaxies, EVE, Dark Age of Camelot, Runescape, etc.) which are at least as important to the history and future of the MMO space as anything the WoW clones are trying.

Gremlin wrote:
Zudz wrote:

Yeah, the point here isn't that WoW invented anything. Only that they have a billion subscribers and that makes everyone eager to copy their model.

Without watching the video yet, I'll make the larger clarification that every generation of MMOs has had a big dog that everyone has tried to copy. We used to talk about Everquest-clones.

Many people here probably are already familiar with the history, but here's a quick summary: The earliest proto-MMO (depending on how you define it) was MUD1 (by Richard Bartle and Roy Trubshaw) in 1978. Many MUDs and MOOs and MUSHes followed, with the primary codebase being DikuMUD, because the source code was readily available to be copied. Everquest was inspired by DikuMUD's design, just translated into 3D, which explains some of its oddities. WoW broadly followed the Everquest model, and nothing has displaced it yet.

This leaves out all of the alternate design approaches (Ultima Online, Star Wars Galaxies, EVE, Dark Age of Camelot, Runescape, etc.) which are at least as important to the history and future of the MMO space as anything the WoW clones are trying.

This is addressed briefly in the video (well, not the MUXes). The point is mostly that WoW's success is so overwhelming that ever since pretty much everything has used their design, and possibly iterated. They're not saying WoW did it first, or even best, only that they made literal millions upon millions of dollars and companies are still trying to recapture that success with the same model.

He briefly addresses RuneScape and EVE as he laments the loss of ingenuity in the industry.

Again, nothing in the video qualifies as gospel truth, but it is interesting. Though provoking, even.

Gremlin wrote:
Zudz wrote:

Yeah, the point here isn't that WoW invented anything. Only that they have a billion subscribers and that makes everyone eager to copy their model.

Without watching the video yet, I'll make the larger clarification that every generation of MMOs has had a big dog that everyone has tried to copy. We used to talk about Everquest-clones.

Many people here probably are already familiar with the history, but here's a quick summary: The earliest proto-MMO (depending on how you define it) was MUD1 (by Richard Bartle and Roy Trubshaw) in 1978. Many MUDs and MOOs and MUSHes followed, with the primary codebase being DikuMUD, because the source code was readily available to be copied. Everquest was inspired by DikuMUD's design, just translated into 3D, which explains some of its oddities. WoW broadly followed the Everquest model, and nothing has displaced it yet.

This leaves out all of the alternate design approaches (Ultima Online, Star Wars Galaxies, EVE, Dark Age of Camelot, Runescape, etc.) which are at least as important to the history and future of the MMO space as anything the WoW clones are trying.

I always felt that Island of Kesmai was the true first real MMORPG.. featuring much of the current MMORPG structure at a "large" scale. True EQ took it to another scale level as well as going full 3D, but most of the underlying structure of the MMORPG was done in IOK...and that went live in 84-85 so quite some time before EQ.

Certainly fully graphical (2D) was probably either the original Neverwinter Nights or Kingdom of Drakkar...

But the Holy Trinity has been around for literally ages.. back to the 300 baud dial up modem days.

I can get behind just about everything he said. I mean, I've even given Mortal Online a go.

I think the point that he was trying to make in the video in regards to WoW, is that it was the first MMO to become so big it became a cultural phenomenon. He uses that Michael Jordan analogy at the beginning of the video to lead into that. WoW didn't necessarily do anything super original, but it was the first one to become such a massive hit that it got noticed by the mainstream. It was on TV shows , south park did an episode around it etc...

It's only natural that other MMO developers wanted to capture a piece of that pie. And unfortunately it hasn't worked out well for them.

I think he's right in that the future of the genre will be emergent gameplay and sandbox worlds. I believe Smedley said recently that EQ Next will be more minecraft than EQ. I also think it's kind of funny that we kind of had that already with Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies, but the genre quickly moved away from those types of games. I'll be curious to see if this is where the genre goes, and if it gets successful by doing so. I still love playing these games, but I feel like we are waiting for the next big change to come.

God bless Ultima Online. I hate that game, but I love so many things it tried to do. It just never quite clicked when I was playing it. I never played SWG until The New Experience, or whatever the revamp was called, got put into place. I think I played it twice.

I hadn't seen Smed say anything about EQ Next, but the very idea of mixing in a little Minecraft is intriguing.

He made some very valid points. And, damnit, he makes me want to play EVE again.

faide wrote:

... I also think it's kind of funny that we kind of had that already with Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies, but the genre quickly moved away from those types of games. ...

Including SWG

Costs associated with making a compelling game that ultimately will only attract a small audience makes it a difficult ROI decision for even the most talented of developers. Emergent gameplay is great.. but the issue is frequently the 2% of the time the "emergent-ness" is awesome is overshadowed by the 98% time you have deal with all the bullsh*t that comes along with it.

Watching a bunch of footage from Defiance this is all I could think about. The shooter mechanics of that game just highlight how dumb the lifeless world filled with monsters around every corner has become. It's like they're deliberately marginalising everything that's interesting about large scale online games. You can't affect the world and you can't affect other players. There are no social dynamics, no consequences, no tension, it's just a soulless skinner box.

Oh the thing I would do for DayZ the MMO. I guess "sandbox" and "emergent gameplay" are just hollow buzzwords to some people, but I think those experiences would have as broad an appeal as current MMOs if they weren't buried behind cumbersome mechanics like in EVE or DayZ.

I spent several hours in Eve trying to figure out how to sell my ore to someone who had placed an order for it. As a long standing veteran of MMOs, and gaming in general, if I can't give my stuff to a person specifically asking for it I'll go find something less frustrating to do. Admittedly, I was daunted by the literal encyclopedia worth of help files. Maybe I'm being the unreasonable one here, but it just didn't work for me.

Honestly, MMOs in general have really lost their punch for me. The other 1000+ people in the world really don't do anything for me. I don't talk to them, I rarely trade with them, and they're typically not doing anything that actually affects me. Frankly, I would rather play something like Skyrim or Saint's Row with a group of up to 16 people that I know than play WoW, Guild Wars, etc with a thousand unknown cyphers.

None of that is to say that I won't play almost any MMO on the market at the drop of a hat. I just get different things from them than I once did. Price of scrutinizing the hobby, or evolving tastes, or summat.

I finally got around to seeing this video and I can safely say that I pretty much wholly disagree with everything.

The NBA survived Jordan and in fact now practically every team has a Jordan or two that is most likely doing them a disservice by calling them a Jordan.

We are already seeing the splintering of the market with WoW still alive and well. And he doesn't even realize he is admitting to it when he discusses the rise of free to play and multiplayer but not so massively games.

Sandboxes are much harder to design expansions for mentally. So most just expand the territory. You have already given the players tools to create gameplay that wasn't expected. Where do you go from there? Sure you can just increase the size of the sandbox but does that get any less rote than the level/gear/faction grind? The same argument about expansions trivializing prior content applies to sandboxes too.

The mechanics of WoW are what makes Wow successful, not its budget.

I am sorry but Eve's Goons vs Brotherhood war was an interesting blip on the radar, nothing more.

I don't know if I like this rewriting of history where EQ is a theme park, and we pretend that UO still isn't around.

fangblackbone wrote:

I finally got around to seeing this video and I can safely say that I pretty much wholly disagree with everything.

The NBA survived Jordan and in fact now practically every team has a Jordan or two that is most likely doing them a disservice by calling them a Jordan.

We are already seeing the splintering of the market with WoW still alive and well. And he doesn't even realize he is admitting to it when he discusses the rise of free to play and multiplayer but not so massively games.

Sandboxes are much harder to design expansions for mentally. So most just expand the territory. You have already given the players tools to create gameplay that wasn't expected. Where do you go from there? Sure you can just increase the size of the sandbox but does that get any less rote than the level/gear/faction grind? The same argument about expansions trivializing prior content applies to sandboxes too.

The mechanics of WoW are what makes Wow successful, not its budget.

I am sorry but Eve's Goons vs Brotherhood war was an interesting blip on the radar, nothing more.

I don't know if I like this rewriting of history where EQ is a theme park, and we pretend that UO still isn't around.

UO is around but it's niche all the sandbox games are and when compared to WoW they might as well be non existent. EQ has always essentially been a themepark. You're guided by quests and more importantly there's a level cap and once you maxed that out and then your gear you're essentially over until the next expansion.

I dont know enough about the state of basketball to make an assesment, but it's true that the style of play changed after Jordan arrived. That much is obvious.

The fact that Goons/Brotherhood war happened or that any of the crazy stuff that happened and continues to happen in that game is impressive. Blip for some, but it's definitely important to make note of it and try to allow it to happen else where.

Not sure where youre going about WoW's mechanics and budget. He said pretty much the same thing and nothing about the 'death' of WoW.

I also disagree with this bit:

Sandboxes are much harder to design expansions for mentally. So most just expand the territory. You have already given the players tools to create gameplay that wasn't expected. Where do you go from there? Sure you can just increase the size of the sandbox but does that get any less rote than the level/gear/faction grind? The same argument about expansions trivializing prior content applies to sandboxes too.

The thing about sandboxes is there's usally a reason to grind... Levels? (they normally dont exist for the player, but do tend to be there for gear or actions/abilities) and it usually is to conquer one way or the other your surrounding territory. If you expand the territory all it does is jsut readjust the battle lines. There's nothing to be trivilized because everyone is fighting for the right to make their own way inside the game world.

The splintering you mentioned is happening because people are try to capture that connection folks had to making their own personal stories in those older games. We're seeing people trying to juggle with the formula and combine different levels of each style of game to allow what happens in EvE to also happen in their game. Will it work? Be successful? Time will tell.

fangblackbone wrote:

I am sorry but Eve's Goons vs Brotherhood war was an interesting blip on the radar, nothing more.

Are you saying sandbox games don't generate interesting stories?

I also don't know what you're on about with expansions to sandbox games, do you have a concrete example? In my experience they're usually expanded by adding new systems that support what the players figured out they want to do, not by adding more land.

I don't know the answer to this, but I do wonder if sandbox games have a place for the older more casual crowd?

Badferret wrote:

I don't know the answer to this, but I do wonder if sandbox games have a place for the older more casual crowd?

yes/no

If you dont care that you may not be able to handle some things by yourself and be happy with the little bit that you can then you should be ok. There's folks that just can't handle that.

The cool thing about sandboxes is that the folks who just do a little here or there or find a little niche of their own inside the game will more often than not cause a side effect of having/needing other folks to help them which extends both your stories.

In Darkfall i helped a guy out getting ganked because the group attacking him was on my KoS list. He was a crafter and after the smoke cleared he offered me a sh*t-ton of arrows in payment and that he'd continue to supply me with arrows at 25% market price. He made enough with his other items that he didnt care to help me out. When i put my order in and we'd meet to exchange i never knew for sure if i was walking into a trap nor did he. Not to mention it was a bit unsafe for us to travel to our meeetings.