No Mention Of Rift = Good Thing

[Arthritis]

Stumbled on this http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged...223042438.html this morning, buried DEEP in Yahoo! headlines. No mention of Rift, which may be a good thing, but they did mention End of Nations, which in Alpha and Beta has been a blast to play! (I hope I didn't just violate the NDA right there....lol)

Thought you folks might get a kick out of the article.

Thanks!

[Annalea]

Not entirely sure if I agree with a lot of the content there, but the overall point is still quite a good one. Free-to-play models are definitely gaining momentum; I have to admit, I'm rather starting to prefer it myself.

The Wedbush Securities guy seems a little crazy though. An upside of 50 million active users a month for TOR?

[No_Exit]

Yahoo articles are well... Yahoo articles. Provides some interesting info, but its like getting your actual news from a gossip blog.

That said... yes MMOs are struggling, however the gaming market as a whole is struggling. Its a product of the economy more then anything, although yes.. part of it is that gamers are not getting as sucked in as they once were, and the new generation of gamers is VERY fickle.

[Efaicia]

The genre isn't dying, people are just bored with mush (WoW copies).

The first developer to put something substantial out there, where one has to think and play strategicly instead of clicking a button and rolling your face over the keyboard a few times and collecting loot, where your reputation matters, what you craft matters, where it isn't how fast can you mash, but how can you outsmart this boss with 19-24 other people.
Where the world is huge and feels endless to explore, where people are given a reason to explore it, instead of reason to never go there.

That developer will make a ton of money. Gamers are gamers, we will always be gamers. Just because we aren't eating mush, doesn't mean we have stopped eating.

[tro44]

The genre isn't dying, people are just bored with mush (WoW copies).

The first developer to put something substantial out there, where one has to think and play strategicly instead of clicking a button and rolling your face over the keyboard a few times and collecting loot, where your reputation matters, what you craft matters, where it isn't how fast can you mash, but how can you outsmart this boss with 19-24 other people.
Where the world is huge and feels endless to explore, where people are given a reason to explore it, instead of reason to never go there.

That developer will make a ton of money. Gamers are gamers, we will always be gamers. Just because we aren't eating mush, doesn't mean we have stopped eating.

Darkfall and Mortal Online say hi

[AtomicUniverse]

Darkfall and Mortal Online say hi

I don't really like those MMOs where other players can loot all your stuff when they kill you....I'm sure if I played them I'd find myself very p'd off....a lot!

[ottopaul]

The genre isn't dying, people are just bored with mush (WoW copies).

The first developer to put something substantial out there, where one has to think and play strategicly instead of clicking a button and rolling your face over the keyboard a few times and collecting loot, where your reputation matters, what you craft matters, where it isn't how fast can you mash, but how can you outsmart this boss with 19-24 other people.
Where the world is huge and feels endless to explore, where people are given a reason to explore it, instead of reason to never go there.

That developer will make a ton of money. Gamers are gamers, we will always be gamers. Just because we aren't eating mush, doesn't mean we have stopped eating.

The first developer to do all of those things really really well will get about 500,000 players, while another 500,000-1,000,000 players claim that everything they did was totally lame and "not how *I* would have done it" or "not what *I* wanted them to put in it". And probably lots of hyperbole. "These guys don't even listen to their fanbase"... "How they designed *this* class is a slap in the face to my long held ideals about what *that other* class should be capable of"... Or if they get way too creative, and forgo the concept of classes all together, someone will claim that whatever system they *do* use is either way too complicated or way too simple.

The reason WoW got up to 11mil or 12mil or whatever their peak was, is because of how 'user friendly' and 'casual friendly'... how easily accessible it was. And they managed to do that while still having a 'hardcore' aspect in their game. A large chunk of that 11-12 mil are people who didn't even consider themselves 'gamers', before someone they knew got sucked them into WoW like a drug dealer.

Most of the things you mention *DO* sound like good things that I would enjoy in a game, but, I'm sure we'd both vastly disagree on the best 'How' to do those things. And while we're disagreeing, someone else will claim they(and everyone else ever, who this person is sure will agree with him/her) want something completely different.

[Fohox]

The genre isn't dying, people are just bored with mush (WoW copies).

The first developer to put something substantial out there, where one has to think and play strategicly instead of clicking a button and rolling your face over the keyboard a few times and collecting loot, where your reputation matters, what you craft matters, where it isn't how fast can you mash, but how can you outsmart this boss with 19-24 other people.
Where the world is huge and feels endless to explore, where people are given a reason to explore it, instead of reason to never go there.

That developer will make a ton of money. Gamers are gamers, we will always be gamers. Just because we aren't eating mush, doesn't mean we have stopped eating.

I think a good, deep sandbox type MMO is what the genre needs right now. Linear, theme park MMOs can't produce content as quickly as players devour it. The last few years has seen large groups of players jump from one game to the next because they max out and have nothing left to do.

[arus2001]

I can't see the genre involving much without dramatic shifts in how we interact with our games, which basically leads me to .hack style or more Ghost in the Shell level tech where's basically VR and your brain is controlling your avatar as it would your body. Add a dash of full sensory immersion and actual gaming addiction will probably spike dramatically with the potential in escapism.

Stuff like the Wii or Kinect just doesn't cut it and are limiting in their own ways. There's only so much intuitive control design that can be had of a keyboard and mouse, too. Sadly, the above tech probably won't come about in our lifetimes.

This means all that's really going to be changing from game to game are the stories told and the graphics. Concepts like Kill X, Fetch Y, and Go To Z won't be disappearing in terms of tasks no matter how fluffed up by lore you make them.

[Eughe]

Darkfall and Mortal Online say hi

Because we all know that cut throat pvp games are always successful.



People are tired of paying monthly for a game that is no different than console games, which is what current MMOs are.

I havent been in a guild for 6 months and it hasnt been a deterrent yet. I know i couldnt get away with that 10 years ago. Hell, i couldnt get away with that 5 years ago. But even i am getting a bit miffed of the lack of community building games and the promotion of solo ftw games.

More drama, more politics, more rivalries. Those are the games that were always popular, because it built social communities, which in turn, built strong communities and dedication to the game.

But now, MMOs are trying to cater to console gamers, as opposed to MMO fans. What they need to realize is that console are used to playing an 80 game, beat it, and then move it. That trend is currently how MMOs are played, they rush through the game, get the lewtz, and then move on to the new game. Like they are playing some PS3 game.

Going f2p makes that type of scenario less detrimental to the industry. As most modern consolers, who would pay extra for the new game to get special weapons, or new boards or something, will indeed pay for fluff or even powerups to make that 80 game...i mean, MMO, run a bit faster, so they can move on to the next installation of Generic MMO 3: Return of the Standardization.

[Caydin]

As long as people consider WoW to be the beacon of success, people will consider MMOs to be dying. It's not subscription numbers but profitability that determines whether or not a game is doing well. Rift does fine because it's fun for us and profitable for Trion. The teammembers at Trion love their jobs from what we've seen, and generally speaking, we players want to support that company. Until one of those elements changes, Rift will always be a great experience.

[Europe]

As long as people consider WoW to be the beacon of success, people will consider MMOs to be dying. It's not subscription numbers but profitability that determines whether or not a game is doing well. Rift does fine because it's fun for us and profitable for Trion. The teammembers at Trion love their jobs from what we've seen, and generally speaking, we players want to support that company. Until one of those elements changes, Rift will always be a great experience.

Yes and no. There's always a tipping point where wanting to support a company becomes not enough, usually when the playerbase sinks just a little too low. If it feels like there's nobody to have this massive experience with, the whole thing generally goes to hell.

[Ravel]

...It's not subscription numbers but profitability that determines whether or not a game is doing well. Rift does fine because it's fun for us and profitable for Trion...

Rift was fun for many for a short period of time. Enough to make it profitable probably, but not enough to make it into the game people like me are looking for. When enough people rmember were Rift started to fail them they will look at whether changes to the game will repair what is wrong with Rift in their eyes. Personally I have seen no sign of improvement. When this point of view is shared by enough people the coming expansion might prove to be not profitable. The question is not whether Rift has been profitable, but whether it will remain profitable.

Or actually, whether the game will be fun again, which is more important to me. When it is not fun, who cares whether it is profitable.

[lizbot]

There's a new "mmos are dead" blog, article, or forum thread everyday. And yet there's still more games in development and still plenty of things for open-minded players to look forward to.

The article itself is rather poor, since they ask if mmos are dying, but the only they talk about is a specific payment model being replaced. The industry actively adapting to meet changing demands and playerbases is hardly an indication of death, quite the contrary.

[millie]

The first developer to do all of those things really really well will get about 500,000 players, while another 500,000-1,000,000 players claim that everything they did was totally lame and "not how *I* would have done it" or "not what *I* wanted them to put in it". And probably lots of hyperbole. "These guys don't even listen to their fanbase"... "How they designed *this* class is a slap in the face to my long held ideals about what *that other* class should be capable of"... Or if they get way too creative, and forgo the concept of classes all together, someone will claim that whatever system they *do* use is either way too complicated or way too simple.

The reason WoW got up to 11mil or 12mil or whatever their peak was, is because of how 'user friendly' and 'casual friendly'... how easily accessible it was. And they managed to do that while still having a 'hardcore' aspect in their game. A large chunk of that 11-12 mil are people who didn't even consider themselves 'gamers', before someone they knew got sucked them into WoW like a drug dealer.

Most of the things you mention *DO* sound like good things that I would enjoy in a game, but, I'm sure we'd both vastly disagree on the best 'How' to do those things. And while we're disagreeing, someone else will claim they(and everyone else ever, who this person is sure will agree with him/her) want something completely different.

.... and of course WoW started as just an Everquest clone anyway. A lowbrow, casual, well promoted clone but a clone none the less.