Former WoW Dev: "I think we killed a genre."

[Takeda Kenshi]

That 'whoever' would be EA.

The game did have quests, but they were randomly generated.

 

[Stabwound]

I'd say Everquest killed the genre, not WoW. Was Everquest not the same type of babby playground as WoW, just less pussified?

There can never be another UO, or hardcore open world PVP MUD again. Back in the days of UO, you had no choice: even if you weren't a PVP player, you still had to deal with a hostile world where everyone will cut your throat for 5 coins unless you got someone else to protect you. Nowadays people that want a babby playground will simply choose not to play such a game.

MMORPGs are an awful genre now, but they didn't used to be, and they can really never be good again on a large scale. Everything now is reduced to "kill 5 rats and don't you dare touch anyone else! Plus be sure to kill this boss 50 times to get his mystical hat which will make you 0.1% stronger!"

That is really depressing. I didn't even play the good UO and it makes me sad to think about, seriously.

 

[Terpsichore]

While level scaling could be a half-assed solution, I think that it would be better to just... not have levels. You could level your skills/spells/traits/whatever instead, so all zones could remain relevant.

 

[Machocruz]

Most modern MMO are just quest generators, and not good quests either. Then when you've generated enough quests you can go in a dungeon and fight a boss. Rinse, repeat until find the right pauldrons, than go fight a super boss. Get better pauldrons.

Kill the quest generator, and the body will die. Or something like that.

 

[Damned Registrations]

Back when I played EQ, it was pretty ruthless. If you died and didn't retrieve your corpse quickly enough, you lost every item you had equipped. There were also wonderful things like trains (enemies aggro'd other enemies, so a fast moving player could piss off pretty much every monster in the entire zone and lead it stampeding over you, and they'll just murder whatever is closest rather than running past you to kill the initial antagonist) and hazards like trap doors that just dumped you into a pitch black room with an enemy you couldn't see wrecking your shit. I have fond memories of travelling around the world of EQ at low levels back in the day, living in constant terror of high level enemies (like gryphons flying around 20 levels higher than the other monsters in the zone), poking my head into random caves and not knowing if I'd find an awesome place to loot and gain xp or a deadly trap way out of my depth. There was also no in game map and different races could speak different languages, which was pretty awesome. Wandering naked (and without spell reagents) through the dark woods trying to find your corpse again (hopefully you were lucky enough to type /loc and note your coordinates before dying) without dying again and losing even more xp (and potentially entire levels) was pretty thrilling. I also recall doing a quest that took me all over the world at around level 20 (there was no minimum level for such things, nor did items have level requirements), enlisting the help of random higher level players nearby to reach/defeat certain enemies, all for an item that was trivially more powerful than my current robe but a significant status symbol as it was the unique result of a difficult mage only quest.

Such things are probably lost forever now, and it's certainly a bit sad.

 

[PorkaMorka]

I'd say Everquest killed the genre, not WoW. Was Everquest not the same type of babby playground as WoW, just less pussified?

There can never be another UO, or hardcore open world PVP MUD again. Back in the days of UO, you had no choice: even if you weren't a PVP player, you still had to deal with a hostile world where everyone will cut your throat for 5 coins unless you got someone else to protect you. Nowadays people that want a babby playground will simply choose not to play such a game.

MMORPGs are an awful genre now, but they didn't used to be, and they can really never be good again on a large scale. Everything now is reduced to "kill 5 rats and don't you dare touch anyone else! Plus be sure to kill this boss 50 times to get his mystical hat which will make you 0.1% stronger!"

Agree 100% and I did play UO as well as a bunch of other MMORPGs that paled in comparison.

We'll never get another MMORPG that is as ambitious as UO and that allows us to fuck with our fellow players in so many different ways. And even if we do it will not be the same because the player base will not be anywhere near as innocent / naive / unspoiled as people were during the early days of UO. Everyone will have the best build from the forums and they'll be consulting a website / bot with the solution to every quest and the best resource gathering spots mapped out.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

Mark Kern: "I killed MMOs, so buy my new MMO!"

I think he gives himself too much credit. WoW didn't kill MMOs, but it did stunt their progress for a few years, as everyone just cloned WoW to try for a piece of that pie. Now that developers are starting to innovate again, I think we could see a renaissance in the genre. On the other hand, MMOs take a lot of money to create, and anything that costs a lot of money will be dumbed down for the mongoloid hordes. I guess we shall see.

Mmm I'm not sure the "level scaling is evil" mantra holds for MMOs

I daresay that level scaling isn't necessarily evil, even in single-player games. The problem with games like Oblivion is that there's no reason to gain levels, because the enemies will always be the same level as the player. In GW2, the enemy levels don't scale - only the players' do, and they only scale downwards. The result is that you can't expect to survive in areas you're underleveled for, but you can go to areas you're slightly overleveled for and not have it be a complete waste of time.

Innovation won't sell new MMOs when the masses are burnt out on the entire genre. No matter what you add to your MMO, you'll falter at the marketing stage because everyone will see your push as just another list of empty promises. MMOs need a 5-10 year rest period where people aren't being bombarded with constant failed attempts, so they can grow nostalgic and start to want a revival. MMOs aren't dead but they're going on the same kind of vacation as isometric WRPGs did.

 

[Gerrard]

There were also wonderful things like trains (enemies aggro'd other enemies, so a fast moving player could piss off pretty much every monster in the entire zone and lead it stampeding over you, and they'll just murder whatever is closest rather than running past you to kill the initial antagonist)

Just another example of hypocrisy from nostalgiafags where shitty design of the old is good while modern shitty design is bad.

We'll never get another MMORPG that is as ambitious as UO and that allows us to fuck with our fellow players in so many different ways.

And you have no one to blame for it but yourselves.

 

[Hoaxmetal]

even if you weren't a PVP player, you still had to deal with a hostile world

https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=b7c47419-f5b3-4b1c-93f8-cf0e7c001b95&action=buddy

:<

 

[oscar]

Fallout Online. The game even developed a rock-solid faction system without any in-game mechanics for it. Russian-speakers vs non-Russian speakers. If you see Cyrillic text, you open fire.

I've always felt (at a theoretical level since I've spent less than an hour in my life playing MMOs) that the key is permadeath and low/unimportant levels. Permadeath so dying is actual significant and involves risk calculation (hm that guy I've just bumped into is on low health, should I risk that he's a higher level than me and attack and steal his superior equipment or play it safe?). Low/unimportant levels so being a 'top dog' doesn't mean you're indestructible and can roll through endless legions of lower-level players. Death should always be around the corner and the player should never be left feeling unstoppable (for reference, I'd say that five Level 1s should be able to take down the maximum level in a straight fight). This forces players to co-operate to survive (though betrayal is always a possibility so choose your associates wisely).

Races should also be important rather than some fairly trivial stat differences. For the theoretical MMO I've described, you could have something like orcs starting off tougher than humans but having less ultimate potential. So if you're feeling like a relatively safe game where you can jump in and kick some ass without worrying too much whether you ultimately die you could roll up an orc. Or elves could start a bit more fragile than humans but with access to unique powers if you manage to survive the relatively rougher start. With factional warfare, this could result in things like that while the humans will over time become more powerful if top level players manage to develop, but orcs will have the initial advantage and will be less damaged by the loss of top-level players. Both orcs and humans will be extremely weary of allowing the elves to develop and level up in peace and will make (possibly even team up or declare a ceasefire with each other) dedicated efforts to kill their levelled players before they reach a critical mass of high-end players that will be able to dominate the other factions.

 

[felipepepe]

Real world language setting factions apart is fantastic. That way you really make people feel as part of their factions, and roles like diplomats or spies that speak both languages will organically appear.

Bonus point: Kwas would be butthurt since everyone speak their language but they don't speak any other.

 

[Night Goat]

I've always felt (at a theoretical level since I've spent less than an hour in my life playing MMOs) that the key is permadeath and low/unimportant levels. Permadeath so dying is actual significant and involves risk calculation (hm that guy I've just bumped into is on low health, should I risk that he's a higher level than me and attack and steal his superior equipment or play it safe?). Low/unimportant levels so being a 'top dog' doesn't mean you're indestructible and can roll through endless legions of lower-level players. Death should always be around the corner and the player should never be left feeling unstoppable (for reference, I'd say that five Level 1s should be able to take down the maximum level in a straight fight). This forces players to co-operate to survive (though betrayal is always a possibility so choose your associates wisely).

I agree with you about the low/unimportant levels, but I really don't think permadeath would work well in an MMO. A good MMO requires and encourages a long-term investment of time, and over the months and years people get attached to their characters. If any engagement might result in a player losing years of progress, they'll probably avoid taking any risks whatsoever. With all other factors being equal, you'd have a 50% chance of losing your character every time you fight another player, so few players would make it very far into the game at all. And when players did lose their high- or even medium-level characters, ragequitting would be virtually guaranteed.

In my own hypothetical MMO, every player character is a wizard. Each wizard has a domain, a customizable demi-plane that grows with the wizard's power and can only be entered with its owner's permission. When defeated in battle, a wizard would be banished to his or her domain, ready to start planning revenge. No one would lose their characters permanently, but death would still be enough of a hassle for people to avoid it.

 

[LeStryfe79]

A very good AAA sandbox MMORPG can definitely have mainstream success on par with WoW. Games like Sims and Minecraft prove there are tens of millions of people who like that sort of thing. Trouble is, I'd wager only 5% of those folks would like full loot, permadeath, or open PVP systems. I think a solution would be to let people make their own hardcore leagues, where dying sends that character to the general population. This is similar to what Path of Exile is trying, and I see no reason why a game like EQ Next can't do the same. That way, the 95% who are care bears help fund a higher quality game for those who are not.

 

[Stabwound]

There are already MMOs with permadeath, if you count MUDs, which you should. Almost nobody plays them (maybe population of 10-20 max) and all of them, even non-permadeath ones, are slowly dying. It's surprising to me considering how massive the population of the internet is, and it obviously has a lot to do with the games being mostly text, but I don't think many people care for hostile environments. Games like WoW and Diablo 3 have shown that the majority of people want babby sandboxes where you just run on a treadmill and make your character get 0.001% stronger every time you kill a goblin, and repeat the same shit over and over while watching numbers slowly rise.

On the topic of real-world language factions, there are also at least 1-2 "popular" MUDs that make you select a character race and mechanics don't allow you to understand other races, you're automatically hostile, etc. It's not the same as the Fallout Online example, but mechanically the same thing.

It's weird to think about how virtual worlds way more free and interactive were popular and existed in the 90's, and things have actually gotten more closed in and boring rather than expanding on the idea. The average MMORPG of today isn't even comparable to the average MUD of the 90s. It's barely even the same genre of game, other than the idea of playing with other people.

 

[Gozma]

Games like that are only truly interesting when you're breaking them.

Looking back at MMOs I played, this is perfectly said. I basically felt like a sucker playing them normally with my friends. Then you find some exploit that changes the way the game works and suddenly you feel like you are backstage at the magic show watching the disappearing woman sprint around to the back of the theater to reappear behind the audience, whee. Then they patch it and you quit.

 

[Stabwound]

Yeah, I agree with that, too. I haven't played many MMOs at all, but the most fun I had in Guild Wars was figuring out a broken build that allowed you to solo farm a very difficult optional dungeon, which was difficult to do even in groups, but trivial to do with the broken build.

I get that these games are fun to play with buddies, but the gameplay itself is pretty shit boring to me. I played a ton of Runescape when I was a kid (10+ years ago) but these days that type of grind-the-fuck-out-of-everything gameplay is not fun anymore. Runescape was a little better than the typical MMO at the time with all-out PVP sections where some of the best items could be found, but I'm sure it's a babby's world by now, too.

I just want a classic UO-type game again. I'm pretty bummed that I missed out on that, and even more bummed that it doesn't exist outside of EVE and unofficial UO shards.

 

[dnf]

Lol, WoW devs stating the obvious. Every cash cow from Blizzard kills genres, be it Diablo for RPGs or Star/Warcraft for strategies

 

[Dr Tomo]

I've always felt (at a theoretical level since I've spent less than an hour in my life playing MMOs) that the key is permadeath and low/unimportant levels. Permadeath so dying is actual significant and involves risk calculation (hm that guy I've just bumped into is on low health, should I risk that he's a higher level than me and attack and steal his superior equipment or play it safe?). Low/unimportant levels so being a 'top dog' doesn't mean you're indestructible and can roll through endless legions of lower-level players. Death should always be around the corner and the player should never be left feeling unstoppable (for reference, I'd say that five Level 1s should be able to take down the maximum level in a straight fight). This forces players to co-operate to survive (though betrayal is always a possibility so choose your associates wisely).

I always lulz when I hear people talking nostalgically in every mmo forum that permadeath is key or this one feature that is like the holy grail. So when a company is dumb enough to implement it as a core feature I can start enjoying all the QQ of people being zerged by a bunch of players in pvp and the company becoming insolvent. Hell even in games like Eve, Darkfalls, and other pvp games that are similar there is nothing but threads with complaints about being "blobbed" to death. If people are already risk averse in these games do you think it will improve if you also added perma death feature?

P.S: "hm that guy I've just bumped into is on low health, should I risk that he's a higher level than me and attack and steal his superior equipment or play it safe?" My answer: " Well time to bat phone some bros and flood the area with +35 people from the guild"

 

[oscar]

Who gets the equipment then?

 

[Black_Willow]

Lol, WoW devs stating the obvious. Every cash cow from Blizzard kills genres, be it Diablo for RPGs or Star/Warcraft for strategies

Because there were no good strategy games after Warcraft and no good RPGs after Diablo

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

The reason why the kind of MMO being craved here is never going to get out the gate is simple: Such MMOs can only ever be fun for a tiny minority of the active playerbase, made worse by the fact that more likely than not you starting after launch date will incrementally diminish your chances of ever doing anything fun or worthwhile. These games are only fun for the inner clique, the Old Boys Club.

 

[Dr Tomo]

Who gets the equipment then?

Good question sadly no answer.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Bizzard-Activision is the greatest company ever.
And King Bobby Kotick simply sits on his throne of blood in his tower of fire and darkness, his fingers tapping one another with the grandeur only an executive can muster.
He mutters something part insane, part genius, part unintelligible, that only the followers of the darkest of eldritch abominable gods can fathom.
And we are blessed.

 

[Zeriel]

I can't help but read a lot of excuses and "we couldn't do it, so that means its impossible" from the people quoted in that article.

Fact of the matter is, World of Warcraft's existence and continued insane profitability proves the model still has life in it. The problem MMO developers have had since WoW came out was that they mistook the source of WoW's success. WoW wasn't a huge financial behemoth because it pandered to casuals or simplified the shit out of a drug dealer's business model (i.e Everquest era Skinner's Box). Sure, those things helped, but it was ultimately a success because underneath all of that, it was a pretty good game. It was never a surprise to me that all these copy cats failed, because not a single one of them nailed the fundamentals the way WoW did. They're all tributes to the crass ignorance of business majors, and the hubris of all the me-too developers who thought they were more talented than they actually were.

 

[Terpsichore]

No MMO so far managed to achieve combat as smooth as WoW's and that's something even the own devs can't see.