Theo - I thought about discussing Eve but it would have made the article too long. You are absolutely correct that the "Eve model" is a different way of handling database depreciation, where player skill, group affiliation, etc. have more impact. That said from what I understand (I'm not an active Eve player) there has still been significant database deflation in Eve - witness the increasingly powerful high end ships, the speed with which groups like GoonFleet could level up new recruits, etc... I'd be interested in what the Eve players think about it.
If They Are Persistent, Why Do They Need Sequels?
- Thread starter Archon
- Start date
Of the MMOs I've played, Warhammer Online, for all its issues, seems the closest to beating database deflation. Pretty much all levels, starting from level 1, are fun. One of the great features of WAR is you can que for tier 1 scenarios at level 1, fresh off the character creation screen.
One of my fondest MMO memories was doing that with a choppa. I got three insta-ques back-to-back, and by the the time I finished my first quest I was level 4, had an equipped piece of blue gear, had at least one set piece for the auction house, and was a member of one of the more active guilds on the server. From level 1 you do PvE, RvR, scenarios, and public quests, and it is like that for the entire game, and Tier 4 is no more fun than tier 1, and in fact tier 1 might have better balance and fewer abuses and exploits.
Beginning game or end game it was all pretty much the same game in WAR. I think the solution to database deflation would be to make a strong fun early game, where ¨leveling up¨ adds more content but not necessarily more fun. Keeping the emphasis on the early game is welcoming to new players and keeps most of the ¨data¨ interesting to most of the toons.
...On further thought, as you level up in MMOs, it is not like you gain new content, as much as you lose old content because it becomes irrelevant... which I guess is the point of this article.
One of my fondest MMO memories was doing that with a choppa. I got three insta-ques back-to-back, and by the the time I finished my first quest I was level 4, had an equipped piece of blue gear, had at least one set piece for the auction house, and was a member of one of the more active guilds on the server. From level 1 you do PvE, RvR, scenarios, and public quests, and it is like that for the entire game, and Tier 4 is no more fun than tier 1, and in fact tier 1 might have better balance and fewer abuses and exploits.
Beginning game or end game it was all pretty much the same game in WAR. I think the solution to database deflation would be to make a strong fun early game, where ¨leveling up¨ adds more content but not necessarily more fun. Keeping the emphasis on the early game is welcoming to new players and keeps most of the ¨data¨ interesting to most of the toons.
...On further thought, as you level up in MMOs, it is not like you gain new content, as much as you lose old content because it becomes irrelevant... which I guess is the point of this article.
While reading this I couldn't help but think of Guild Wars. At first I loved the PvP experience, but being me at was inevitable that something would come up and my attention span would fade for a time. Since Guild Wars doesn't have a subscription cost, I opted to keep it on my computer so I could play it again down the road. When I finally did return to it sometime later, I found that the experiences I enjoyed earlier were changed so abruptly that I haven't picked it up and played it again.
There is a level 20 pvp challenge that pits teams of 8 players at a time against each other from across the world. When I first got the game I'd regularly make it to the final stage, and even win it once or twice, with a ragtag band of players I picked up by spamming LFG randomly. When I picked up the game later on, I quickly discovered that the "experts" and "pros" of the game had been hard at work during my hiatus coming up with and perfecting various combat strategies and the only people you saw in the PvP were people who had a preorganized team that had spent their entire gaming life practicing their strategy until they had it to an art. If I wanted to make it to the end I had to work hard for it. Since Guild Wars was without subscription, I looked to it as a "Casual MMO," something I could get behind. Unfortunately I was completely wrong.
There is a level 20 pvp challenge that pits teams of 8 players at a time against each other from across the world. When I first got the game I'd regularly make it to the final stage, and even win it once or twice, with a ragtag band of players I picked up by spamming LFG randomly. When I picked up the game later on, I quickly discovered that the "experts" and "pros" of the game had been hard at work during my hiatus coming up with and perfecting various combat strategies and the only people you saw in the PvP were people who had a preorganized team that had spent their entire gaming life practicing their strategy until they had it to an art. If I wanted to make it to the end I had to work hard for it. Since Guild Wars was without subscription, I looked to it as a "Casual MMO," something I could get behind. Unfortunately I was completely wrong.
I'm going to suspect by 'sequel' you meant better quality ripoff, because unless I am QUITE mistaken the company who made this is different than CoH.
Also do you have any idea how many fantasy MMOs there are? And how strikingly similar some are to WoW? and the fact that they are actually making MONEY even though WoW already exists?
I think that's probably why they are making a sequel(again, your words, not mine).
I'm actually somewhat curious about Champions Online, but the fact that the first month is free... BUT you need to pay 50$ to buy the game at a store makes it less of a free trial and more of a cheap attempt to get some money from people who won't enjoy your game but will try it.
Also do you have any idea how many fantasy MMOs there are? And how strikingly similar some are to WoW? and the fact that they are actually making MONEY even though WoW already exists?
I think that's probably why they are making a sequel(again, your words, not mine).
I'm actually somewhat curious about Champions Online, but the fact that the first month is free... BUT you need to pay 50$ to buy the game at a store makes it less of a free trial and more of a cheap attempt to get some money from people who won't enjoy your game but will try it.
Cryptic was the company behind both City of Heroes and Champions. Heroes was co-owned by NCsoft, who later on took full control taking the City of Heroes Cryptic Dev with them. That studio was renamed Paragon Studios.bushwhacker2k said:
Both games started out at the same company. Cryptic decided to pursue other IPs. Champions is very much a reworked City of Heroes.
I haven't played a GTA game since San Andreas, so I can't really say.Distorted Stu said:
I can say that your avatar made my day, however. Kudos.
On topic, I feel really stupid for not realizing that the same studio made both Champions and CoX. Goes to show how much attention I pay.
Kajin said:
Sorry to double post, but I had to put this in. That is also only one side of guildwars, the PvP has become an art. But the PvE in its own regards has become quiet an amazing thing aswell. It used to be a group of ragtag guys going out to do a simple, quest, mission, etc. But now its turned into plotting, planning, and it has made the game into a strategic battle, rather than a simple fight. I am often awe inspired by some of these guys, they have it so down pat, they can do it by themselves with a hero at their side. I still play Guild Wars regularly, but I am no where near as good as the majority of players on there. A causal MMO it is not.
Or rather than making the game persistent, it could be made to cycle with the whole world being destroyed more or less eventually, winners declared, museums and archives made to commemorate the greatness of Cycle X and then the whole world could be restarted with players investing at different levels and different things being changed in the next iteration as a result.