| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (41)

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 8:13PM AlamoeJones said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Oh sure, all you liberal elitists at Massively want to talk about the "evolution" of these games. But what about all the intelligent design happening as well??? Way to completely ignore the other side of the debate!

Typical.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 8:43PM Russell Clarke said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Lack of intelligent design seems to be the problem :D
Reply

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 9:32PM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Intelligent design is based around the idea that there are gaps in our understanding when it comes to evolution and such. That's all well and good but that doesn't translate into an intelligent counter arguement. It's sort of like if we were having a debate about something, you provide a view point supported by facts and I respond " Nuh uh ".
Reply

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 11:04PM Russell Clarke said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Uh, I think he was joking.

Gods, I hope he was joking!
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 12:47AM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
yah I realized that after the fact, I need to get more sleep >.
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 9:54AM AlamoeJones said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, sorry if I laid the sarcasm on a little thick there.
Reply

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 8:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
World of Warcraft was a "freak" game for the MMO industry. I would be very surprised if a game with anywhere near that many subscriptions came along anytime soon in the west.

For this reason i cannot see that any kind of evolution will happen in the next couple of years, as i think possible customers do not even know what they want as much as devs are not sure what to make for them.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 8:59PM Crsh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Honestly, the only merit WoW has is owed to a bunch of very creative folks and having access to a shitload of money for the development of the game.

Between 50 and 70 millions were invested in the development of the original game, something most devs and/or publishers can only dream of doing; money isn't everything, Blizzard was very smart about it because they have a vision, but it nonetheless gives a lot of options for creating something from scratch.

Trouble is, it creates a precedent for lazy managers; "I could do something better if I had more funds" isn't and shouldn't be an acceptable way of doing things, money doesn't cure laziness or the lack of vision.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 9:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Do you consider First-Person/FPS an evolution or a mutation?

I feel like twitch is the future, regardless of how it gets here.

Mutation is odd because it implies foreign influence. We have a global market and there are literally dozens of hybrid types of mmos. Racing mmos, spaceship mmos, etc. So it becomes difficult to call the influence of external sources mutation when it is so predictable and natural, and a process over extended time.

so what would mutation be to the MMO? How about MMO on a new medium? Mafia wars is doing that, right? millions of people playing through facebook.

how about an MMO on tv? on cellphone? on xbox360?

What else? how can you keep the parameters of a video game and still deliver it in a new way?

we are probably 5-10 (10 is if devs are super lazy) years away from motion control MMO. imagine the Natal, but for an MMO. I don't necessary want to see it, but i feel like that is another big step and is inevitable. sure, it might be hard as hell to manage your inventory :x

there is a lot that seems predictable and the idea of a mutation is probably going to have to surprise us. i envision it happening the way gta3 changed the single player model. something is going to have to revolutionize the concept and redefine the genre. until it is revolutionary, every new idea will be cast out as niche and lost to the gaping maws of the mmo tourist demographic.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 9:19PM Celeras said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Five letters for you if you want innovation.

FFXIV.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 10:09PM Eugimon said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
*snort*

BWAHAHAHAHAHA
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 8:04AM nomoredroids said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Eugene...I think he might have been serious. Which is funny considering how Square Enix has been making the same game for almost 20 years.
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 8:11AM Celeras said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The progression system in XIV has never been done in an MMO before, ever. Guildleves could be an interesting deviation from the norm. And FFXI wrote the book when it comes to on-the-fly job switching and the complete elimination of the necessity of 'alts'.

Ignorance, or trolling? I can never be sure..
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 3:49PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Steve

SWG
Reply

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 10:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Don't EVE and Fallen Earth qualify as serious mutations in the basic code of MMORPGs?

It's odd to me that sometimes people talk and write as if WoW and its clones represent the entire MMORPG market. WoW is big, but there's a lot of different things happening out there. And Fallen Earth is quite recent and quite indie; there seems to be plenty of room for innovation in the market for people that are motivated to make it happen.

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 11:03PM Paul Schuster said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If people only talk about the MMORPG market in terms of WoW and its kin, its because the largest growing segment of the genre looks nothing like them. Mobsters and the other facebook games, are on track to dethrone WoW as the king of the hill, if they haven't already.

The only problem is they don't share the diku-mud roots with their 3d cousins, coming from the door game root stock.
Reply

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 5:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Facebook games and their ilk aren't technically MMOGs. They more fall under the MSOG category (Massively Single-player Online Game). Most of these games involve little to no actual meaningful interaction WITHIN THE GAME ITSELF, which is the hallmark of MMOGs. Just because a million people play a game, even inside of a social networking site or some chat framework, doesn't mean that it is an MMOG.
Reply

Posted: Jan 17th 2010 11:28PM TheJackman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If only Everquest 2 change there models and interface clear out some junk out of the game so you do not need a guide to understand it. And add a lfg tool like Warcraft where you can find people fast to injoy the group part of the game. And we got a winner!

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 12:22AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
After all these years I am amazed at this genres infatuation with WoW. Its basic EQ. The leveling was easier, the quest were easier, the mechanics were easier, the target audience was not even the MMORPG player market...it was targeted at bnet & more casual PC / console gamers.

And yet ever since devs have been flat copying WoW and targeting MMO players, a group that more or less flat out rejects WoW.

We don't need "evolution" or "mutation"

We someone to say 'Wait WTF are we doing?" and get back on track pre-2004 and start making some virtual worlds.

BTW...STO - not it. Next big failure with MMO players. Why? Because as a virtual world it sucks my left nut. It's "Pirates of the Burning Seas" with a Star Trek skin and we all know how that story ended.

Posted: Jan 18th 2010 1:28AM Rayko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
QFT
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW