Anyone tried EQLive with its 50 expansions?

[Arterian]

I can promise you they will not make EQ1 with better graphics.

They are going to invest more money in market research than the game itself, determine that WoW is the most profitable MMO ever, and build a WoW clone in Norrath.

Game over.

[Gadwen]

Originally Posted by Arterian [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I can promise you they will not make EQ1 with better graphics.

They are going to invest more money in market research than the game itself, determine that WoW is the most profitable MMO ever, and build a WoW clone in Norrath.

Game over.

You forgot one detail, a WoW clone with micro transactions.

F2P is shitting all over this genre.

[TarukShmaruk]

Originally Posted by Gadwen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You forgot one detail, a WoW clone with micro transactions.

F2P is shitting all over this genre.

Actually F2P is allowing games to succeed and thus financial investment incentives for new games to be made.

It lets people with money (but no time) pay for the development that the pure F2Pers get to take advantage of.

[Arclanz]

Originally Posted by t0lkien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...They are designing them by committee via marketing, and it's a complete cluster of second guessing and ego driven mediocrity in the end.

...People disdained Brad McQuaid for his at times infuriating and arrogant "vision", but he had one. And it shows.

...I believe it's individuals who make these things great...

Great post. Highlighting parts I especially agreed with. Whenever a committe tries to please the masses, everything gets washed over and watered down = sucks for everyone rather than being epic for some.

[Vondra]

I don't know what EQnext will be like but I don't think it's going to be another straight themepark.

Those types of WoW clones have been doing consistently badly for several years now and I think people have noticed.

[t0lkien]

Originally Posted by TarukShmaruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually F2P is allowing games to succeed and thus financial investment incentives for new games to be made.

It lets people with money (but no time) pay for the development that the pure F2Pers get to take advantage of.

Actually, I know this is the theory, but that's not how it works. Games are designed from the ground up for F2P so that the design is fundamentally changed by the F2P element. It ruins good games. Designers can no longer come up with an idea they think will be fun, they have to come up with ideas that can be monetized. Trust me on this, it's )&*)*ing awful, and creates poor gameplay (which is the real point). As a designer you are no longer concerned with creating fun, delight, depth, charm, joy, challenge etc. You are forced to shoehorn any idea into the format of how it can be leveraged to get the player to spend money on it.

That, my friend, is the death of gameplay as we know it (and one of the reasons the industry is imploding right now, and studios closing down left, right, and center).

[TarukShmaruk]

Originally Posted by t0lkien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, I know this is the theory, but that's not how it works. Games are designed from the ground up for F2P so that the design is fundamentally changed by the F2P element. It ruins good games. Designers can no longer come up with an idea they think will be fun, they have to come up with ideas that can be monetized. Trust me on this, it's )&*)*ing awful, and creates poor gameplay (which is the real point). As a designer you are no longer concerned with creating fun, delight, depth, charm, joy, challenge etc. You are forced to shoehorn any idea into the format of how it can be leveraged to get the player to spend money on it.

That, my friend, is the death of gameplay as we know it (and one of the reasons the industry is imploding right now, and studios closing down left, right, and center).

It doesn't create poor gameplay when people pay out the ass for cosmetic things and minor boosters.

[t0lkien]

Originally Posted by TarukShmaruk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't create poor gameplay when people pay out the ass for cosmetic things and minor boosters.

In F2P (or P2W) games, every part of that game is a carrot to get you to spend money. It has to be that way. Almost every aspect of the design is intentionally plugging into psychological elements - the same ones that get people addicted to slot machines by the way, and is the reason slots are now implementing lots of RPG elements. This is why there is so much discussion about "Skinner boxes". There are lots of articles online about this for anyone who wants to read about it.

You cannot have a game like the original EQ within that model, because it's intentionally difficult, slow burn, challenging, subtle, and long term. It plays on foreshadowing, delayed gratification, and rewards genuine thought and effort. You don't get a trophy just for turning up. There are so many touches of "unreasonable detail" because it was for the most part a labour of vision and love. The difference is clear for anyone who loves games and RPGs in particular, and it's the same in all works of creativity.

F2P games can't do that. Their game mechanics can't do that. Their reward schemes can't do that. Honestly, it affects absolutely everything from art style to time between level ups, to the layout of geometry. It's built upon instant gratification and ADD attention spans. There is nothing, in the end, that is untouched by the single-minded pursuit of mass market mediocrity and profit.

So, by its nature it can't create anything but shallow, mercenary, exploitive, manipulative gameplay - which is the antithesis of good gameplay. And it can't do anything but undervalue ingame effort and reward. Buying game progression devalues everything about that game, and cheapens it irreversibly. It is the death of everything that under-girded RPG games, and people are just beginning to realize it en masse, and stop handing over money to it. They've been tricked, and they see it. The games industry is imploding right now, as I've said. In the past few months dozens of studios have closed, some major. Zynga, that abortive mess of a Skinner box shop, just laid off 500 employees. Most of my ex-colleagues are out of work - all over the world. So much about games is crap right now, and this coercive F2P philosophy is a big part of the reason why.

Originally Posted by Arclanz [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Great post. Highlighting parts I especially agreed with. Whenever a committe tries to please the masses, everything gets washed over and watered down = sucks for everyone rather than being epic for some.

Thanks man. For my part, it's really been heartening to read the posts here showing that there are lots of people who feel the same way. There's this saying that a camel is a horse designed by committee, and it's brutally true.

[TarukShmaruk]

Originally Posted by t0lkien [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In F2P (or P2W) games, every part of that game is a carrot to get you to spend money. It has to be that way. Almost every aspect of the design is intentionally plugging into psychological elements - the same ones that get people addicted to slot machines by the way, and is the reason slots are now implementing lots of RPG elements. This is why there is so much discussion about "Skinner boxes". There are lots of articles online about this for anyone who wants to read about it.

You cannot have a game like the original EQ within that model, because it's intentionally difficult, slow burn, challenging, subtle, and long term. It plays on foreshadowing, delayed gratification, and rewards genuine thought and effort. There are just so many touches of "unreasonable detail" because it was for the most part a labour of vision and love. The difference is clear for anyone who loves games and RPGs in particular, and it's the same in all works of creativity.

F2P games can't do that. Their game mechanics can't do that. Their reward schemes can't do that. Honestly, it affects absolutely everything from art style to time between level ups, to the layout of geometry. It's built upon instant gratification and ADD attention spans. There is nothing, in the end, that is untouched by the single-minded pursuit of profit.

So, by its nature it can't create anything but shallow, mercenary, exploitive, manipulative gameplay - which is the antithesis of good gameplay. And it can't do anything but undervalue ingame effort and reward. Buying game progression devalues everything about that game, and cheapens it irreversibly. It is the death of everything that under-girded RPG games, and people are just beginning to realize it en masse, and stop handing over money to it. The games industry is imploding right now, as I've said. In the past few months dozens of studios have closed, some major. Zynga, that abortive mess of a Skinner box shop, just laid off 500 employees. Most of my ex-colleagues are out of work - all over the world. So much about games is crap right now, and this coercive F2P philosophy is a big part of the reason why.



Thanks man. For my part, it's really been heartening to read the posts here showing that there are lots of people who feel the same way. There's this saying that a camel is a horse designed by committee, and it's brutally true.

Just because lots of companies have made shitty cash-in F2Ps doesn't mean there aren't any good ones - look at LoL ; it's a huge success.

Cosmetics alone make up a huge portion of income because people always want to look special.

[t0lkien]

I don't mean to say there are no good F2P games, maybe there are. I wouldn't know because I despise the entire idea where MMOs are concerned, but people keep telling me there are good ones so I have to defer to that. I can say every one I've played, every previous subscription game that went F2P, has been mediocre at best (and in that regard EverQuest is a good example, though it was dying before that for other reasons).

I can also say the money grabbing philosophy behind them has negatively impacted the games industry, and games in general. And that's being thoroughly diplomatic about it [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

... and I'll shutup now.