Slashdot Mirror
The MMORPGs Of 2004 Analyzed
Thanks to GameSpy for their feature discussing the large array of new MMORPGs due in 2004, as they suggest: "We're in the middle of an MMORPG gold rush, with companies hurtling headlong into the battle for your time, and more importantly, your monthly fee. The big question is whether there will be enough players to go around." Featured games include Everquest II (it's argued: "EverQuest players are a natural target audience that can't be ignored, but Sony obviously doesn't want players canceling their accounts to migrate to the sequel"), The Matrix Online ("When The Matrix Online actually goes online, how many people will still care?"), and World Of Warcraft ("Blizzard has never been known for innovation. Will this ultimately come across as just another MMO?")
About Blizzard. Blizzard just keeps polishing their old ideas, each iteration getting progressively better. Not necessarily a bad way to do business, you know what you're getting: a reiteration of their previous game (which was fun) with some more fun and style added. So we shall see if it's just another MMO.
I have yet to see a MMORPG that lived up to its pre-release hype.
So maybe we should hold off with the "gold rush" crap until these games are actually out.
It's interesting to see that the online RPG market is already turning to sequels, licenses, and derivatives after less than a decade of wide-spread commercial attention. It seems that the large game publishers are falling back on what they know in order to maximize profit.
It's a bit unfortunate, because the online medium deserves a lot better than that. You can do some very cool and interesting things online that you simply cannot do with traditional single-player games. The social dimensions these games and worlds can explore are astounding.
I think that in the future we'll see the rise of more 'independent' games. My own company, Near Death Studios, runs Meridian 59, a classic game with a strong focus on PvP. We are willing to cater to the smaller market that wants meaningful PvP in their game. There are plenty of other games out there, including the rather unique A Tale In The Desert that offers an entirely non-combat world. I think that as more people are able to take bold steps in developing an indie game, you will see more options out there. My hope is that the indie games will be able to offer people more of what they want, instead of just trying to slap a license into an online world where it doesn't fit, or build a sequel of a game that should last a long time. By offering people a more focused experience, instead of pandering to a mythical "mass-market audience" for these games, the indies will hopefully show the power of the online medium.
Of course, if only it were that easy. Players have to actually support these games for them to grow. Yeah, indie games are as a rule less pretty and less polished than big-name games. But, if the gameplay is more of what you like, why not support them? The gameplay is arguably the reason why people play these games. Also, most of the smaller games can't afford big advertising budgets like the large games do. EQ has probably spent more on advertising than ATITD has spent on game development as a whole, so obviously more people are going to hear about EQ rather than ATITD. So, people need to do a bit more searching for these games. In the end, I think it's the best option to keep the online medium intersting and fun for the most people.
My crazy opinions as an indie online game developer.
Brian "Psychochild" Green
MMO developer's blog
Blizzard has never been known for innovation
Here come the fanboys...
The article does say that Blizzard isn't very innovative. I was always under the impression that they were innovative. Even if WOW isn't going to be the first MMORPG ever made, I'm sure they will do something with it that will set it apart from the rest. After all, last time I checked, every game they have ever made has achieved Game of the Year status.
-Magiluke
Earl Grey, Hot.
When The Matrix Online actually goes online, how many people will still care?
Not me, they took enough of my money. I was a fan until I saw revolutions.
You can't take the sky from me...
Yeah, consider who the innovators are and you normally find a great idea poorly implemented. What Blizzard has CONSISTENTLY done is take an idea and OPTIMIZE it and make it better than anything else. This is exactly why the Blizzard MMORPG gets my wager as the MMORPG to win the war of 04.
"EverQuest players are a natural target audience that can't be ignored, but Sony obviously doesn't want players canceling their accounts to migrate to the sequel"
Then maybe they should have considered possible Not calling it Everquest 2.. I'm just throwing out ideas here, but if you don't want people leaving everquest for the sequel, don't bill it as a sequel, bill it as a new game.
If she wasn't a white suburb girl, we'd never really hear anything about it.
You must have her confused with Elizabeth Smart.
Anyway, slightly more on-topic, does anyone have a link to The Matrix Online's page past the intro flash widget? I'd at least like to have some idea what they're doing, without having to sell my computer's soul to Satan... er, I mean, Macromedia.
Or will I get from one part of the town to the next on autothwip (or, worse, autorun)? I've never been a fan of MMORPGS, and I do want to reserve hope for this one, but what's the fun of, say, creating a character who's high on agility, dexterity, and speed, if the primary bonus one gets out of this is a decreased enemy hit percentage?
I want to do a backflip in midair, knock two villains' heads together, and then perch on a wall, not right click, select melee, wait, then right click on the other, and repeat.
This is what was so dissaponting about Freedom force, and what keeps me from investing in an MMORPG. You don't really play them, you kind of direct the game.
"Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
Yeah but what makes her such a tragic story anyways? Last I heard she was in a hospital, and the troops had to stage a breakin to get her out of there. What happened with that?
Dont try to read the html version of the matrix online. That is impossible. You have to realize:
there is no html version.
*cough* Warcraft 1,2, AND 3 *cough*
*cough* Starcraft 1 and Broodwars *cough*
*cough* Diablo 1 and 2 *cough*
If anybody can make an awesome MMORPG in a time when the MMORPG market is saturated with crap and ripoffs, its Blizzard. They have a history of bringing us innovative games that are *gasp* fun to play! I have stayed out of the MMORPG fray for a while now after having become jaded by EQ and its ilk, but if any of the new MMORPGs coming out gives me any hope, it is World of Warcraft, and if anybody can pull it off, it sure as hell is Blizzard.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
..what you think it means.
Unless of course you're using the Microsoft definition of innovation.
I'll agree that Blizzard has the ability to make an awesome MMORPG.. but it's not from innovating. As pointed out elsewhere, Blizzard's strength comes more from perfecting.
That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze
I am completely and utterly without any excitement over World of Warcraft. I expect Blizzard to do what they always do, take the basic elements of something that has been established and streamline the mechanics. If you hate the game play style already, it isn't going to do anything for you. I expect WoW to be the best leveling up, hack and slash, MMORPG ever... exactly what I have no desire to play. Leveling treadmills, no matter how fast or slow bore me to no end. I can not even begin to explain how little desire I have to sit there and slaughter NPCs for hours on end for the goal of getting more powerful to kill more NPCs. Diablo was as fun for me as pulling barbed wire through my hands. All of that said, I think WoW is going to make it big. I my find that style of game play utterly boring and only suitable for a proper addict, but the addict market is very big as all the current MMORPGs have proven.
At this point, I have a little hope for only a two of the MMORPGs. First, Matrix Online has some potential in concept. Of course, they have not bothered to mention exactly what that concept is. Everquest could be described as a game where warriors and magic users clash against terrible fire breathing dragons. Of course, that is the PR spin. The truth is that you sit there while some stupid NPC repeats some boring animation over and over again while your weapons either go through the model of the dragon or don't even bother to hit it. Yawn. For this reason I have little excitement over the PR spin of Matrix Online. Personally, I think that if they do anything but real time combat where player skill matters, it is going to flat out suck. The only reason why I have any hope (and I know this hope is totally unfounded) is that maybe when they hit the auto attack button and the two Matrix guys stand their stupidly firing their guns unmoving, they will realize how stupid it looks and realize they need some real fast paced combat. Maybe when two people unload clip after clip at each other to go through the thousand hit points of a level 50 agent, they will realize how stupid levels and HP are. It is probably a pipe dream, but I can hope. The Matrix Online will be a success in my opinion if two people of equal skill can kill each other with a single bullet. Here is to a fools hopes.
The other game that looks potentially interesting is Priest. It has an original setting and 'first person like combat'. That scores a lot of points with me. It gives me hope the game has nothing to do with leveling up. It again is probably a fools hope, but I am allowed to dream.
This next generation of MMORPGs does not excite me in the slightest. They are still all first generation games as far game play goes as I am concerned in terms. The graphics are nicer, but it is the same shitty game with balance and graphics tweaks. They are all still the same formulaic whack the mole, get a prize, level up, whack another mole, rinse and repeat until burn out. Some get fancy and throw in some half assed poorly throughout out PvP in there for kicks, but no one dares to change the same basic boring as hell formula.
It looks like for at least a couple more years I will just have to stick to my MUD. My MUD, ArmageddonMUD http://www.armageddon.org/ , does things MMORPGs are still far too gutless to do. Namely, it has permanent death and is NOT based around leveling up. No fucking dungeon crawls, no killing literally thousands of creatures to gain a few extra skill points. Battles are fast and furious, and the consequences for loosing is death. There are no god characters and few characters that last for more then a year. The RP is quality and enforced, and there are grand scale events that actually mean something.
Do you know what the best part of the game is though? You can actually honestly to godly loose. It is entirely possibly to be rich and powerful, and the next day be dead or broke. That is the biggest problem with MMORPGs. They are too damned afraid to give players anything but
This is amazing that /. published such a provocative/flamebait statement over Blizzard Entertainment.
I had previous discussions with ex-DiabloII players who convinced me of the very structural drawbacks the company developped the last past years.
But if there is something that cannot be retrieved, well, it IS their innovative way of thinking video games. I red the posts so far, and saw some people arguing about the upgrading skills of Blizzard.
Let me argue in two points.
1) Blizzard released twice two revolutionnary gaming principles. First Warcraft I, that, if it may have been inspired by older games (I'm thinking of Populous), initiated the micro-war strategy. And then Diablo which emphasized a very simple principle of repetitive fun into an overall fantasy scheme. So please don't tell they have not been innovative. Or maybe one may think that being innovative is truly to invent something ; in which case the only ever innovative game was Pong.
2) Concerning the improving skills, I can only agree. But keep in mind that they only improved the very principles they just have been making before. This in the basic principle of sequels and extensions. Let's examine what were the improvements. In Warcraft II, the right-click availability in order to made orders and strategies easier to achieve. In Starcraft, the principle of TOTALLY different races, with customizations of buildings, units, and basic strategy. In Warcraft III, the implementation of heroes inside a strategy game, with experience, skills, and special items. In Diablo II, skills organized by trees, specialization inside the trees. Etc. etc. etc. As it is said somewhere, different words carry differents ideas. Improvement is not innovation, but f***** important improvements sometimes do look like innovation.
Offtopic I may be. But really this is not fair. I don't have any shares form Blizzard, and I do disagree with their latest strategical orientations. But good work definitely needs to be recognized.
Regards,
Jdif
Let's overcome our weakness.
has slashdot disallowed anonymous posting? (seems to not be working)
you, my friend, truly are a hero. lynch wasn't gangraped. she broke her legs in an accident and was in an hospital when she was "rescued". the iraqis actually tried to giver her back to the troups earlier, but the people in charge obviously thought that an attack and rescue mission on an unprotected hospital was more news-worthy. you've been propagandized.
According to the Flash-drowned website, one of the features of The Matrix Online will be "Numerous different 'Matrix' abilities that players can swap out and exchange like playing cards".
Err, what?