Tabula Rasa, now with no FUN!

[schild]

I think it has a lot of potential (more so than HG:L) .

This is absolutely ridiculous. And not because I'm a fan of HGL but because Tabula Rasa isn't going to get enough money or players to meet any false impression of potential anyone thinks it has.

[Moaner]

With all do respect, I hope you're wrong.  I'm a big fan of HG:L too but I'm getting close to the end and the thought of rolling an elite character and tearing through the same content again is not very intriguing.  I probably will, but mostly because TR is so "meh" in it's current state.  Diablo2 stayed so compelling to me for so long because I actually enjoyed the story and setting.  Although it pains me to say it, I'm not getting the same enjoyment from HG:L's story.

Hopefully within the next 3-6 months one of these MMOs will compel me to play for more than 2 weeks.  You are probably right though, it'd be suprising to see TR take off and actually make enough money to improve things to a point that it's fun.

[schild]

Funny. My description of D2 is: hey look a demon and some crystals and some other shit I don't care about even one bit.

[Johny Cee]

Funny. My description of D2 is: hey look a demon and some crystals and some other shit I don't care about even one bit.

Lies.  I'm fairly certain that when you think of D2,  you just here the "ping!" sound of a ring dropping.

[Ratman_tf]

I think it has a lot of potential (more so than HG:L) .

This is absolutely ridiculous. And not because I'm a fan of HGL but because Tabula Rasa isn't going to get enough money or players to meet any false impression of potential anyone thinks it has.

Bullshirt. Anarchy Online was a blah game, without a ton of subscriber money,  that got it's shit together enough to put out three expansions and a ton of patches and add content.

Of course, Anarchy Online is still a blah game after three expansions and a ton of patches and added content.  

[schild]

Anarchy Online continued to get funded by a company without an option. NCSoft can cut TR off really fucking fast. Particularly with the numbers it's not going to get. It's not like NCSoft is benefitting in Korea from the release of this game. Lineage 2 will outperform it until the sun explodes. Unless something "changed."

Lies.  I'm fairly certain that when you think of D2,  you just here the "ping!" sound of a ring dropping.

I meant the story. That's my description of the story.

[geldonyetich2]

Considering MMORPGs in general have a very high suck:joy ratio, I wonder if my judgment of Tabula Rasa may be inadverantly weighted by those mysterious aspects that make MMORPGs attractive.  If it were a choice between "Tabula Rasa" or "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time", I only get to choose one to brighten my drab existence, then I'm going to have to go with the later choice.  Similarly, if it comes to sheer gameplay value, "Hellgate: London" strikes me the better choice just because it was developed primarily to be a game without all this MMORP baggage weighing it down.

Why do so many of us continue give MMORPGs a try at all then?  I think it's because we think there is more there.  A sort of virtual persistance aspect, or perhaps the massively multiplayer aspect has a potential for enriching it that a single player game doesn't.  This being the case, Tabula Rasa gets an unfair advantage that skews the normal judgment of the matter.

Bah, all I know in the end is these kids won't get off my lawn.

[Venkman]

NCSoft can cut TR off really fucking fast. Particularly with the numbers it's not going to get.

I disagree, at least in the short term. Having just released CoX to maintenance status (imho) and having both that and L2 seemingly static (and both down for this past quarter), it's TR through the holidays for them. And then beyond until Aion as their next biggest push. As I mentioned above, they put a lot of marketing behind TR, even throwing RG's name at it, and all that PR, only part of which can be attributed to trying to plug the bottomless pit of resources TR was. The other part is their need for a win, for something "big". This is not the NC of 2003/2004.

Edit: forgot the hyperlink

[schild]

Throwing RG's name on it cost nothing and was a desperation tactic. Too bad it mattered to all of 7 people.

TR, in reality land, will never be that something.

They need to stop dicking around and blaze a new trail.

[schild]

Why do so many of us continue give MMORPGs a try at all then?

I don't anymore. I only play MMOGs when someone wants my opinion on one and because I run f13. That said, if something comes along that blows my hair back and changes everything, I'll be the first to say it. I really do still want the genre to succeed. I think that's going to require a major console IP and a release on a console. Like living in Hyrule or the Gulch or something. And yes, Hellgate is very gamey. Almost arcadey in fact. It reminds me a lot of magic sword in its structure.

As for everyone else, I have no fucking clue.

[Ratman_tf]

I really do still want the genre to succeed.

What would this success be like? Financial like WoW or artistic or what?

[Rasix]

Good games.

Why do so many of us continue give MMORPGs a try at all then?

I try less and less. I've skipped LOTRO, Vanguard, TR, and CoV entirely in their release form. I didn't play EQ2 until it was 2 expansions+ in.

Games I bought and played at launch even after playing their detestable betas: AO, AC2 (on Darktide no less), and SWG. I played Auto Assault for a review.  I don't need to subject myself to that anymore (unless it's for a review).

It's getting really easy to skip the ones that don't have positive word of mouth, accessible betas, or anything that sets them apart from the rest of the crowd.  The second I play a game and it feels like "WoW, but worse", "WoW, with guns", or "WoW, with hobbits" and get the desire to play the game, I usually find that I just want to play WoW (a lot of NCSoft games feel like "CoH w/ something different" and I can skip them too since CoH wore on me after less than 12 levels). So I go play WoW for a bit until I'm burnt out on DIKU gameplay and the MMORPG community. 

I want something that appeals to me.  If I want generic DIKU that tries to force me into end-game crap I don't want, I'll play WoW (and that particular itch needs scratching about once a year). For some people, this is what appeals to them.  I don't think anyone's going to get it right for me for a long time, and thus, I save $15 a month.

[geldonyetich2]

I will say this much for Tabula Rasa. If we start with the perspective that we need to judge games off of the gameplay quality (defined as an ability to achieve what's known as "flow") then there's only two MMORPGs which can do so to any significant amount for me anymore:

• City of Heroes: Because of the lack of autoattack, the flexibility of powers' effects, and the ability to engage many foes at at a time.  You can fight while flying here, how many MMORPGs can make that claim?  (Well, okay, inconclusive point.)
• Tabula Rasa: Because of the lack of autoattack, cover works and is worth trying to use, the ability to engage many foes at a time, the interplay of friendly NPCs, and the ability to reasonably meaningfully impact the game world through your actions.

In both games, there's actually something there in terms of gameplay value.  Not this cheap auto-attack drivel, which stunned back in 1999 due to the sheer amount of players it allowed you to cram into a single zone but not much else.  Instead, they've moved on to add something resembling genuine gameplay.  These two developers dared show us what you can do for MMORPGs with more recent hardware and coding.

The problem that remains is that these are still MMORPGs and thus they still expect us to grind.  That fails: You'll still run into things you just can't do because you haven't grinded long enough.  The only escape these games have from that slippery slope is that, so long as the "flow" holds out, the grind isn't that noticeable.  It's just a matter of time, and if they set the grind a little too long, it loses you.

It's still too early for me to pass judgment on Tabula Rasa, I haven't really lost the flow yet.

[schild]

Hellgate's Marksman and Engineer and Evoker and Summoner classes do what TR tried to do but 10 times better.

[geldonyetich2]

This is true.  TR's lone claim to fame is that it can do it with 10 times more players around.  I'm no social butterfly, but some people might be appreciative of that.

[schild]

Meh. Not good enough. And it can't do it. It can once again do the 10 times worse version with 10 people around. If Hellgate looked or played like TR it would probably have groups of 40-50 people in one tiny area also.

[geldonyetich2]

Also true.  Put the two together and we've an interesting exchange.  Why do some game developers trade 10x the gameplay complexity for 10x the players?  Why do so many players tag along?  Simple ignorance, or is there something worthwhile there?  I honestly don't have the answers there.

[Venkman]

TR can put that many people together, but it mostly doesn't any more than any other MMO does. It's just as much "me against the loot" gameplay barely needing to be a persistent world to pull off what it is trying to do fun-wise.

HG:L did it better because they didn't bother limiting themselves to mostly-public-space environments like TR.

Just being an MMO doesn't cut it anymore, and can't be the excuse for compromising fun. UI is first, which TR had right for the game it was trying to be. At least at first.

[Margalis]

Being an MMO is a perfect excuse. Playing an MMO is a fundamentally different experience than playing a game like HG:L. That's why MMOs sprang to life in the first place.

It's reasonable to expect good actual gameplay in an MMO but it's also reasonable to compromise some things to get the MMO experience. Being an MMO *is* part of the fun.

[schild]

Not anymore, it isn't.

There's too many offering too little too late.

I demand fun out of MMOGs now and anyone who isn't is really part of the problem.

You might as well just join a chat room. Steam has one. It's free.

[geldonyetich2]

Now as ever, there is some trouble in quantifying fun.  I was quick to agree that HGL has 10x the gameplay as TR on the basis that's just a simple exaggeration that gets across the point that one feels more fun than the other.  We can't measure the fun because it'll vary from person to person and it's an abstract concept

If I were took really close at it, the actual differing factor seems more something between 1.5x to 2.5x to me.  An Engineer in HGL throws out his drone and two kinds of bots and backs them up with firepower.  An Engineer in Tabula Rasa throws out bots, turrets, and crab mines and backs them up with firepower.  The actual fundamental gameplay complexity between the two is actually pretty similar, but HGL pulls ahead because it doesn't comprimise this with all that MMORPG overhead.  The Engineer experience in HGL is better, to the point where saying it "feels" 1.5x to 2.5x for me, at achieving the "flow" than Tabula Rasa is.

Then we get into this whole "MMORPG experience" snafu and it's like two planes of existence.  That's no easier to quantify than "fun" for much the same reason.

[Margalis]

The MMO formula is mediocre core gameplay along with lots of people and a virtual world.

A chat-room has no goals and no gameplay. A game like HG:L has no people and no virtual world.

I'll be the first person to say that MMOs should have better core gameplay. But that said there is some give and take between numbers and complexity.

[tmp]

Not anymore, it isn't.

There's too many offering too little too late.

I demand fun out of MMOGs now and anyone who isn't is really part of the problem.

You might as well just join a chat room. Steam has one. It's free.

Would guess for people who play/design these MMOs the "fun" is "spend time clicking buttons and get carrot of bigger numbers and different appearance with more numbers on them". The whole fabled 'persistent character growth' or something. Not what you will get from plain chat room.

For fps player that fun will be clicking on pixels that are another guy's head in crosshair before they do the same. Or hearing the 'ping' if you are after Diablo kind of experience, dunno. But overall, just horses for courses.

[BigBlack]

See, there's the rub, though; when you simplify the FPS experience down that far, it bears no actual resemblance to the experience of playing an FPS anymore.

Whereas ProgressQuest + chat room actually bears a shocking resemblance to many of the Diku MMOs.

[tmp]

See, there's the rub, though; when you simplify the FPS experience down that far, it bears no actual resemblance to the experience of playing an FPS anymore.

Whereas ProgressQuest + chat room actually bears a shocking resemblance to many of the Diku MMOs.

Yeah, that's oversimplification and there's more to FPS than that. But then on the other hand the same applies to my take on MMOs, which is why I find ProgressQuest + chat box thing you speak of also very different from actual MMO experience... since it's missing both player's own activity and the interaction with other player-controlled characters in-world. I'll accept these aspects --while being part of 'what makes the MMO'-- aren't schild's idea of "fun", it's just that extrapolation of it into "i demand peanut butter in that chocolate and if you don't then you're part of problem" seems bit off.

[Ratman_tf]

The MMO formula is mediocre core gameplay along with lots of people and a virtual world.

A chat-room has no goals and no gameplay. A game like HG:L has no people and no virtual world.

I'll be the first person to say that MMOs should have better core gameplay. But that said there is some give and take between numbers and complexity.

If a game's going to trade gameplay for having more people, I say "fuck that".

Now if some more of these games would explore what's fun about having a bunch of people in the same game at the same time, besides getting in a small team and beating foozles or zerging a castle, that I wouldn't mind.

[Nebu]

The hook in MMO's is the fact that it's a chatroom with a 3d interface.  The hardcore types can collect widgets while they chat.  The realxed types can craft while they chat.  It all started as a BBS with a rng added to it.  I don't get why people still complain about the fundamental nature of MMO's. 

Here's a tip:  IF YOU DON'T LIKE A GAME, DON'T PLAY IT.

If enough people follow that simple tidbit, money will dictate the types of games that emerge.   

I personally don't like many FPS games as they bore me to tears in a matter of minutes.  The core mechanics in MMO's do the same thing, but they offer a) competition, b) social interaction, and b) a multitude of ways to play competitively (economics, combat, pvp, widget collecting, crafts, etc).  IIf you prefer fast-action sport games, play an FPS.  If you like variety in a social setting, play an MMO.  TR fails in that it delivers neither a good FPS game nor a good MMO.  I think that's been said to death in this thread.

[schild]

Gaming, imo, has gone past If You Don't Like a Game, Don't Play It.

We're firmly in the - considering the rising costs of development and longer dev cycles, etc - "Don't be part of the problem" protip zone.

Here are some people that are part of the problem:
1. People buying Wii Shovelware. (I'm arguing FOR the Wii here)
2. People buying EA football titles. (Exclusivity does Nothing Good for anyone but EA)
3. People buying MMOGs that break no new ground and are a tiny change in the Diku formula. (Seriously, just go play WoW)
4. People who think that hi-def isn't worth the switch. (It is. Reality. Fact.)
5. People who think Halo 3 is the best shooter of the year. (CoD4, Portal, and TF2 wipe their balls with Master Chief's tears)

There's a lot more. But those are off the top of my head. It's not a matter of taste. It's a matter of giving people with the money (the important folks) the wrong impression. That we're willing to put up with, nay, will hand over money for that shit.

Edit: Basically Nebu, there's some stuff you shouldn't play even if you like it. For example, I like Boxing. But I'll take Hajime no Ippo over Fight Night any day of the week. Sure, HNI looks like total shit, but man, I just can be one of those guys who supports that machine.

[Nebu]

Edit: Basically Nebu, there's some stuff you shouldn't play even if you like it. For example, I like Boxing. But I'll take Hajime no Ippo over Fight Night any day of the week. Sure, HNI looks like total shit, but man, I just can be one of those guys who supports that machine.

You're right here.  Fight Night was a horrible disappointment and I felt badly for even supporting it.  I think the biggest problem is that games are difficult to judge by any means other than just trying them.  There are MANY hidden gems out that are passed by because they lack the hype attached to the more popular titles.  One of the things I love about this site is that it makes an attempt to point out just such titles.  Sadly, we're just a drop in the ocean. 

[schild]

I tend not to miss hidden gems.

In fact, I game for just that reason.

The gems, amongst this pile of shit smelling dirt.

[geldonyetich2]

I feel partly justified in purchasing TR.  While it's not a gem, per se, it is shinier and better smelling dirt than most.  The shit-smelling dirt could aspire to be more like it.

[Falconeer]

I am 29 messages late to the party but YAY Geldon's back :) Nice to see you mate! (But TR sucks, no seriously... )

[geldonyetich2]

Hiya, Falconeer, it's nice to be back.  Whether or not TR sucks, we're mostly quibbling over minor details as to the fascinating kind of suck it exudes.  Is it a light yet tantalizing sucking with a hint of mint in the air, or a heavy reverberating sucking with the overpowering scent of thousands of irradiated corpses following a nuclear apocalypse?  The examination of each extreme in between is undeniably our responsibility as Internet citizens to examine.

[Falconeer]

Hellgate's Marksman and Engineer and Evoker and Summoner classes do what TR tried to do but 10 times better.

This sums up all I think about Tabula Rasa.
Yes, it lacks the kind of world and persistency I look for in MMOs, but save for that Tabla Rasa plays like an amateurish-lower budget version of Hellgate.

I agree that it can get way better in a few years (some fixes on the "cover" part, maybe?), but right now it's meh 

[Venkman]

Being an MMO is a perfect excuse. Playing an MMO is a fundamentally different experience than playing a game like HG:L. That's why MMOs sprang to life in the first place.

It's reasonable to expect good actual gameplay in an MMO but it's also reasonable to compromise some things to get the MMO experience. Being an MMO *is* part of the fun.

No. That stopped being the case when the devs realized their primary audience was likely already playing another game, rather than being some off-the-street-er who'd never played a game before but had read Snow Crash once. Since then, MMOs have devolved into being fancy server tech that puts some limited number of customizable-over-time avatars in public-space environments for the less important stuff than they can get in private instantiated zones that merely support the same number of players you'd find in an average FPS map. Very few MMOs actually take advantage of being a massive persistent environment, and all that do are slotted into "niche", whether by quality (SB, DnL if that's still open) or gamestyle appeal (PS, Eve, ATITD, anything built in Multiverse). Nobody's been able to prove that the sort of MMO UO was trying to be pre-Trammel has mass appeal (and, yea, I realize going Trammel didn't send them skyrocketing accounts).

"Being MMO" was a bad excuse we accepted years ago because the games could be so different. It's a worse excuse now that the most popular games are so very not massive except in their advertised accountbase.

Being a 3D chat room isn't the appeal as anyone can tell from the specific lack of actual conversation that appeals given the scores of people in a zone at any given time. For more people seem to prefer the opportunity to be social than actually go that extra mile to be so. And that is evidenced by the amount of solo content that's grown over the years. People don't want to be forced to interact and they hate when others can screw up their chances at something.

And I say this as someone who loves the genre.

Would guess for people who play/design these MMOs the "fun" is "spend time clicking buttons and get carrot of bigger numbers and different appearance with more numbers on them".

To me it's got similar appeal to gambling. You've got some control going in, through practice and understanding probabilities, but in the end you're really there to win in an environment surrounded by people who are there to win too. The better the UI, the more fun you'll have trying to do this. The more another player can screw up your chances to win, the less appeal it has, unless just fighting at all has a reward system unto itself separate from the base-gambling route.