1 million of you are keeping Blizzard in money hats.

[Fabricated]

I inspect people with cool looking shields. I like shields for some reason.

[Strazos]

Sure, MMOs currently use skills....but it's Which skills that become annoying. Lets not even get into the fact that many of the "high end" players resort to 3rd party mods to make things easier.

[schild]

Ohh boy, we've come to MMORPGs take no skill now?  We've resorted to that.  Mmm k. 

Time to use an old standby: I disagree with what you said. 

You know, I've always wanted a chance to say this. Memorizing when to hit things during a slow process and memorizing a list of skills and what they do and where they are on a hotbar isn't a skill. IT'S A NECESSITY FOR LIVING. Even though really, your brain isn't saying "Dark Fury is connected to F1" it's saying, "oooooh blue shiny shadow things fly out from my sword by hitting this button" and then it becomes muscle memory.

[stray]

but it's Which skills that become annoying

Very true. They really don't appeal to my button mashing, weened-on-Nintendo sensibilities....But yet, I still play them. I'm not sure why that is. Exploration maybe (something single player games don't offer in the same way)?

[edit] I'll just say that my version of button mashing is different than what Schild just said. I'm speaking in the Street Fighter/Shoryuken sense, or Prince of Persia bunny hopping puzzle sense. Not in the mmo hotkey sense.

[edit] I will say however that the best mmog's offer in terms of skill is about cooperation and teamwork. The puzzle doesn't get interesting until more than one person comes into the mix. That's all fine and good -- It's a massive multiplayer game. My problem is that individual dynamics are completely braindead. Why does it have to be either/or? It should be fun on an individual level, as well as a teamwork level.

[Rasix]

Ohh boy, we've come to MMORPGs take no skill now?  We've resorted to that.  Mmm k. 

Time to use an old standby: I disagree with what you said. 

You know, I've always wanted a chance to say this. Memorizing when to hit things during a slow process and memorizing a list of skills and what they do and where they are on a hotbar isn't a skill. IT'S A NECESSITY FOR LIVING. Even though really, your brain isn't saying "Dark Fury is connected to F1" it's saying, "oooooh blue shiny shadow things fly out from my sword by hitting this button" and then it becomes muscle memory.

Then what is skill? A pvp duel in UO or WoW isn't much different than Ryu v. Spiderman in an arcade.  Take two people with access to the same resources, a different set of skills available (or moves), and the better person is going to win a majority of the time. 

I killed thousands of people in UO and died maybe a handful of times (during the dread lord days). A good 50% of those encounters were against people with knowledge of the same exploits, the same or often better stats, and probably a better PC and connection.  I have at best, marginal handeye coordination and reaction times.  I can say I was good at that game and had "skill" (I'd honestly say I've never been good at a mmorpg since). Skill is just not circle strafing and headshotting someone with a desert eagle.   I still knew who my betters were and I didn't win duels against them. 

Being around the top end of folks, day in and day out, you learn some things. Some people are better at these games and it's just not a manner of them being first to 60 or mapping their keys better than everyone else.  Christ, there's people I knew in AC2 that could pull of stuff that just made you scratch your head.

Really, it's not even an argument when you're taking into consideration PVP. PVE, yes, most idiots can be good enough at PVE because at a point you're going to hit a wall at just how effective you can be given the circumstances.  It's still rather easy to tell the cream for the crap.  Saying this stuff takes no skill just automatically discounts a lot of amazing players I've come across. 

[Llava]

And really... play in the Tomb of Primeval Kings a few times in Guild Wars and tell me there's no skill in that.

[Strazos]

That takes more group skill, and less individual skill.

[stray]

That takes more group skill, and less individual skill.

Which is where I'll give mmog's credit. They just need to be as dynamic on an individual level (which would in turn make group play even more interesting). Some games have a class/build or two that brings out the fun potential, but at their core, it's all a bunch of bullshit (yeah, that's my technical description).

[edit] And this is just a complaint about character/player abilities and combat. I didn't even mention level design. That would be a whole thread in and of itself.

[Megrim]

Skill is just not circle strafing and headshotting someone with a desert eagle.

Oh hey now...

 - meg

[Cheddar]

Google for Darkfall and Dark and Light. They do seem awful a lot like next generation SB in every aspect, so it might not turn out that great in the end.

Dark and Light has classes.  I do not like classes.  Darkfall seems more open ended.  Of course what they are telling us and what the reality is are two different things.  I guess we will see what happens.

[Nebu]

I'm sure a lot of people just don't like WoW .. no big deal ... but the " I'm Too Good For This Kind of Mass Market Product" attitude is pretty stale. Because of course no successful game actually deserves that success, right? Anything with that wide an appeal .. well ... ITS THE MCDONALDS OF MMORPGS, RIGHT? YOU WOULDN"T BE CAUGHT DEAD AT A FUCKING MCDONALDS, SOMEONE MIGHT SEE YOU MINGLING WITH THE COMMONERS!!

I personally don't want to go to McDonalds because the food sucks.  That's an option, right?  Translate that to WoW and you'll understand.  Though I must admit that 5 minutes of the general chat channel at the release of WoW was very different than anything I had experienced in UO, EQ, or any MUD I had ever played.

[Strazos]

Any interaction with the general population in WoW makes me stabby.

[stray]

Darkfall seems more open ended.

Darkfall's very much open ended. That much is true.

It is anything and everything.....Because it doesn't exist.

[Cheddar]

Darkfall seems more open ended.

Darkfall's very much open ended. That much is true.

It is anything and everything.....Because it doesn't exist.

If you are going to quote me, at least finish reading the rest of the post.  I said the same thing.

[stray]

I didn't realize you were saying that since you finished it with the slightly hopeful "We'll see what happens". It sounded like you were expecting a game still (albeit a shitty one).

[AcidCat]

I personally don't want to go to McDonalds because the food sucks.  That's an option, right?  Translate that to WoW and you'll understand. 

Well, my meaning was more along the lines of WoW not equating to McDonalds. That just because a game is successful and has a fairly wide appeal, that doesn't mean it lacks quality. WoW is in fact the opposite of the lifeless, assembly line generic product of something like McDonald's - it is vibrant, it has a style all its own, and it was clearly made with a love of the material. The McDonalds choice was EQ2 - which has largely been rejected.

[Nebu]

Well, my meaning was more along the lines of WoW not equating to McDonalds. That just because a game is successful and has a fairly wide appeal, that doesn't mean it lacks quality. WoW is in fact the opposite of the lifeless, assembly line generic product of something like McDonald's - it is vibrant, it has a style all its own, and it was clearly made with a love of the material. The McDonalds choice was EQ2 - which has largely been rejected.

I see it very differently.  I see WoW as a marketing success but a huge step backward for the genre.  To me, WoW is McDonalds; geared to the mainstream and mass appeal.  I prefer to get my burger from a specialty place (i.e. niche).  I want more Mom & Pop places (puzzle pirates, ATitD, etc.) and fewer McDonalds (WoW).  As for EQ2, I think it's a large-scale niche product.  It caters to EQ folks while WoW caters to a much larger audience.  WoW targets not only the Blizzard fanbase, but also targets those new to the mmog genre.   If forced to draw a similar comparison, I'd compare EQ2 to Wendy's. A solid enough game that caters to a smaller crowd. 

On a side note, I personally found the environments in EQ2 much more immersive than anything in WoW.  I guess the stylized graphics of WoW just never grabbed me. Personal taste I guess.

[Morfiend]

What it comes down to for me is I enjoy WoW. I have fun playing it. Thats all that matters to me.

[Nebu]

What it comes down to for me is I enjoy WoW. I have fun playing it. Thats all that matters to me.

Well put.  It's a game.  Fun is all that should matter.

[AcidCat]

Personal taste I guess.

Certainly, of course no game out there can please everyone. I do think many of the complaints against WoW are from folks that are just tired of this style of game, and are ready for the genre to branch out in new ways. A valid point of course, but irrelevant for all the gamers who aren't tired of that kind of MMORPG - not necessarily just people brand new to the genre, but players who like the familiarity of those tried and true game mechanics.

Same for other genres too. I'm sure there were Quake and Unreal Tournament fans that loved those games back in the day and are just as excited for the upcoming games in the series, and people that have exhausted any enjoyment they're going to get from running around and shooting things repeatedly.

[El Gallo]

I like WoW because it proved Jessical Mulligan was right: just give me a fun game.  All the introspective analysis and neverending BS we spewed for years on this forum and its predecessors, all the circle-jerking fluff that got passed around MUD-DEV means nothing.  Blizzard swept all that shit away: those ideas and people (unless they are willing to adapt rather radically to the new world) are now just plain irrelevant.  Thank God for that.  Just give me a fun game.

[AcidCat]

I like WoW because it proved Jessical Mulligan was right: just give me a fun game.  All the introspective analysis and neverending BS we spewed for years on this forum and its predecessors, all the circle-jerking fluff that got passed around MUD-DEV means nothing.  Blizzard swept all that shit away: those ideas and people (unless they are willing to adapt rather radically to the new world) are now just plain irrelevant.  Thank God for that.  Just give me a fun game.

Well said.

[Sky]

/applaud EG

[Xilren's Twin]

I like WoW because it proved Jessical Mulligan was right: just give me a fun game.  All the introspective analysis and neverending BS we spewed for years on this forum and its predecessors, all the circle-jerking fluff that got passed around MUD-DEV means nothing.  Blizzard swept all that shit away: those ideas and people (unless they are willing to adapt rather radically to the new world) are now just plain irrelevant.  Thank God for that.  Just give me a fun game.

I'm of two minds about this.  I agree with you from the standpoint that in the end, a fun game is all that matters and over the years on these and other boards I realized that I didnt really want a vibrant, massive virtual world sim anymore simply b/c they were too problematic.  WoW is just a larger step towards "EQ done right", much as DAoC was also a step forward, albeit a smaller one.  Take as just a fun game with those expectations, it succeeds quite well and the market responded.

BUT, that doesn't mean I don't also want to see something NEW in the orpg space that pushes the boundries.  For all it's polish and popularity, WoW just didn't do much that was actually different from it's predecessors.  I think that's the reason some many of us here keep grumbing and bitching, yet we;ll dive into any online gaming beta like a drug addict looking for a fix.  We've all seen and experienced the fun these game offers, and more importantly, our imaginations have also shown us the potential fun that could be had extrapolating from our experiences.  How many times have you said to yourself "man, this is OK, but it would be great if it had X".

So while I too don't get the hate of WoW, it's certainly possible to like WoW and still want something more.  Ironically enough, I intentionally didn't attempt to beta WoW b/c it didn't sound all that appealing (been there/done that syndrome).  But, postive word of mouth made me try it, and I liked it; hell even my 5 and 9 year old boys played and like it.  They eventually got bored with it, as did I.  And I'm sure I'l also try the "next best thing" whatever that turns out to be, but I'd ALSO like something a little deeper/more complex...

Xilren

[Margalis]

Aspects of WoW are very assembly line, especially the loot. Just the naming of loot items is ridiculously generic. Sword of the Whale, Sword of the Monkey, Sword of the Flea, Sword of the Baboon...yeah we get that each animal corresponds to a different basic stat already.

I've always said there are two aspects to creating a good game: adding good parts and eliminating bad ones. The thing is, just doing the second part can net you a pretty good game overall. If you eliminate all the bad, what's left is decent, if uninspired.

Most games could benifit a lot lot more from people just playing, saying "this isn't so fun" and then changing it. What works on paper, in your head and in mockups may not end up working at all in the game.

For example, as I've said before, FFXI could be a great game if they eliminated some of the bad. There is a short list of things they could change that would improve the game dramatically:

Don't balance the game such that White Mages are required in groups.
Spread out the effective levels of an XP party and rebalance classes such that the difference between OK groups and really great groups isn't as large.
Make everything faster. (Travel, levelling, searching our items, etc)

Of course, there are tons of smaller things they could do, but my guess is that just the changes above would eliminate many many complaints that come directly or indirectly from the problems those changes would address.
---
Just removing the bad parts of a game is pretty easy. The hard part is adding in the good parts so that you don't end up with a game that is polished but bland. But just one or two good ideas can go a long way there.

One way to look at it is the number of good things in a game limit the high end the game can achieve, but the number of bad things limit the low end. I personally think WoW has a low limit on it's high end achievement, because nothing there really impresses me. But it also has a very low limit on it's low end.

Compare that to a game like AO. The ceiling there is a lot higher IMO. Of course, reaching the ceiling is another matter.
---
Most games released (not just MMORPGs) have a number of large things obviously wrong with them. Avoiding that is step 1, and that's one thing Blizzard is very good at.

[WayAbvPar]

So while I too don't get the hate of WoW, it's certainly possible to like WoW and still want something more.  Ironically enough, I intentionally didn't attempt to beta WoW b/c it didn't sound all that appealing (been there/done that syndrome).  But, postive word of mouth made me try it, and I liked it; hell even my 5 and 9 year old boys played and like it.  They eventually got bored with it, as did I.  And I'm sure I'l also try the "next best thing" whatever that turns out to be, but I'd ALSO like something a little deeper/more complex...

Amen.  I had a very similar experience with WoW. It was fun for awhile, then I got bored. I would love to see something more complex, as long as they remember to keep the fun first.

[Merusk]

It's very easy to forgive the 'generic loot' scheme of green items once you realize they're only meant as filler pieces and for enchanters to have something to DE for materials. Naming 10k bits of trash loot something unique would be silly.   Yeah, green items may be your bread & butter for leveling-up but that goes pretty quickly.

 Quest items and blues and then purples are what you're meant to e wearing at 60, all those have unique names.  Even playing only quasi-casually on my 60 (the time played reflects my Alt-love.. I'm running 6 chars) I've managed to fill it with blues and quest items in all but 3 slots.

As to the depth of the game, I don't think you're ever going to see MTG level of depth in any MMO, though that's some people's ideal.  It's too hard to balance, and devs are too exposed when they have to nerf.  Add on that 'depth' too far, far too many people (including devs) means 'time investment'.  Also,  too much depth also begins to mingle with that complex 'virtual world' problem Xilren mentioned.

Myself, I'd rather see more "shallow" games like WoW evolve. Simple is fun for the majority of people, or else checkers would have gone away a long time ago.  Not everyone agonizes about their DPS and Min/Maxing their builds.  It's damned fun, and has kept my attentnion enough that I've played 3 characters into their 40 and above and 3 more into their 20s.  In short, what EG said.

Edit: Also, it occurs to me that too many devs and Jaded Gamers are dismissive of WoW. (See: Ara-shmuck's latest VS post) They don't 'get it' because it doesn't appeal to them.  They're 'too hardcore' and their dismissiveness is coming from  overthinking things. This seems to be a problem that almost all of the 'most brilliant' game designers (as nominated by the jaded gamers) seem to suffer from after they're lauded.  They lose sight of the goal of FUN in their personal drive to create  Uber AI or a rich social experience  Nitpicking something by overthinking can ruin many a good thing. Just My Opinion, though.

[Strazos]

One of my major sticking points is the non-scaleability of the group content, such as instances. It's been argued to death here, but I'd still like to see it. EQ2 already does this to a degree, and I think it's a great idea. Having to subject myself to the horrors of "Joe Sixpack - N00bler WoW player" is not a very enticing endeavor.

[HaemishM]

I wish we could just say "WoW got a lot of things right, enough to make it HUGELY SUCCESSFUL, but despite its numbers, it has huge fucking problems."

That's it in a nutshell. It is a fun game, with some interesting classes, an immersive art direction, moderately well-balanced and content-rich. But it also has serious backend technical issues, tons of cockgobbling, foreskin-licking retards, a team that is glacial at content updates and bug fixes, and an endgame focused on the same circle-jerk raid organization that has sucked it in the past.

And in the end, the gameplay itself IS somewhat bland, somewhat of a manufactured pulplike pastiche of MMOG's past and present. It IS EQ DONE RIGHT. That's ok for most. For people like myself, I can gladly play and pay for WoW without any sort of guilt, but I can also bemoan the fact that frankly, these motherfuckers had the money and the skills to do more. I weep thinking about what someone with WoW's budget and McQuaid's stubbornness (not his design skills or ideas) could have produced with the design GOALS (not the actual design) of Shadowbane.

[MrHat]

Glad to see Katrina didn't steal your soul.

[Margalis]

I wish we could just say "WoW got a lot of things right, enough to make it HUGELY SUCCESSFUL, but despite its numbers, it has huge fucking problems."

Actually I would say almost the opposite. WoW got a lot of things not wrong, enought to make it hugely successful, but despite its numbers, it doesn't have any huge fucking draws.

WoW doesn't give you many reasons to quit. (Compared to other games in the genre, certainly) But it doesn't have many selling points on top of that. But maybe that's enough.

[Rasix]

WoW doesn't give you many reasons to quit. (Compared to other games in the genre, certainly) But it doesn't have many selling points on top of that. But maybe that's enough.

Agreed on point 1.   No sb.exe. No 12.6 patch. No Trammelization.  No broken chat server.  Only other game that really didn't give me another reason other than, "I got tired of it" was CoH.

Still disagree on point 2 though and the overal assessment that WoW didn't get a lot right.  Probably largely a measure of personal preference. I like the game, you don't. Simple.

Edit: Although prevalent server cues would have been something I'd think people would quit over.  I guess they're not around as much now and was we all know, the only way to get an addict to want something more is to keep him/her from it.

[Pococurante]

I don't mind level-based games all that much, provided they put in a way for people of different levels to play together.  CoH did this with sidekicking/exemplaring, which I think is an outstanding solution to the problem.

Agreed - this should be "mandatory" for any level-based game that claims to promote community/grouping.

[Triforcer]

I like WoW because it proved Jessical Mulligan was right: just give me a fun game.  All the introspective analysis and neverending BS we spewed for years on this forum and its predecessors, all the circle-jerking fluff that got passed around MUD-DEV means nothing.  Blizzard swept all that shit away: those ideas and people (unless they are willing to adapt rather radically to the new world) are now just plain irrelevant.  Thank God for that.  Just give me a fun game.

This makes me wish I'd archived every dev post ever made on the pre-release, pre-beta SWG boards so I could post them here and make this statement even more godlike than it already is.

[Margalis]

SWG is an example of colossal failure of project management. You know you have MAJOR problems when the guy in charge thinks the game will be ready to release in a couple of weeks, and it ends up taking months and months. That is very much a process problem.

Some things are the faults of individuals, and some things are the fault of a broken system. Having no idea what state you are currently in as far as completeness and quality is the latter. So I don't see that as a problem with "devs" in the sense of brain-trust. The project management aspect was just a mess, and that shouldn't be the designers. (If it was, then that was the first mistake)

Project management can't make a game fun, but it can make the quality and readyness state known.