Halidan

I have to say my favorite portion, and this may seem ridiculous, is the ability to zone complex polygons rather than squares. In SimCity your creations never looked truly living because you were confined to blocks. I'm looking forward to winding roads which intertwine with no rhyme or reason :)

Mr. Angry i think you may have missed the point. While I agree that you have every right to critique a game, a critique is all you can really give. A critique is much different from nerd rage because it's not based off an emotional response, is clear minded with decent evidence, and doesn't directly attack other forum members who carry opposite viewpoints.

First, an emotional response, while understandable, does nothing for the game or its population. For example, if I tell you WoW sucks the emotional response is usually something like "STFU NOOB" or "go back to Hello Kitty". These aren't arguments, they aren't constructive, and do nothing for the debate. Since the first hallmark of nerd rage is an emotional response, usually consisting of overly pent-up aggression, I agree with the OP.

Second: real evidence. So you got DCed in Kharazan (sp?) and it's the second time this evening. You run to the boards that WoW sucks cause blizzard "can't tell a server from their ass". Question is, are you DCing cause of a new patch, population lag, an issue with your ISP, or is it actually an issue with the server? Have you taken the time to figure it out before running to the boards QQing over spilt milk? This is another hallmark of nerd rage: the expectation that everything is faultless on your end and everyone else is the problem. (Personal anecdote time) I have a friend who suffers from nerd rage and it can get quite unbearable. He assumes he is smarter than everyone else is the problem. This becomes particularly tedious when you are trying to explain something to him and he won't listen largely cause he's blind to his own errors. In a forum these stubborn episodes are not constructive; rather, they are destructive because people get sucked in to the negativity without any recourse for a positive outcome.

Third, and my personal favourite, is reducing opposing positions to caricatures and attacking the person not the position. "Straw Man" arguments sadly work; the audience get riled up and everyone starts throwing mud. Nothing ever gets resolved though. Each side takes turns pot-shotting the other side's character and not the position. Terms like NOOB, fag, etc get thrown around like cluster bombs and the forum post burns down into anarchy.

The reality is, and I know this is shocking, most forums rot with the vitriol of nerd rage. Case in point: AoC. The game had a really shitty start, we all agree. I haven't played it since and I don't honestly know if I'll ever go back. Problem is there were and are people out there who no longer play the game, yet continually stalk the forums for any opportunity they have to espouse their nerd rage on the population. Having fun with the game? You're an idiot. Think the game's getting better? You're a fag noob who doesn't know his ass from his face. I equate these tendencies to something like a bad ex-girlfriend experience. You dated her, maybe even loved her, and she broke your heart. Now all you can do is run around telling anyone who will listen how much of a bitch she is, deriding everything about her, and generally doing whatever you can to spoil her image to anyone else who knows her. Problem is the person who looks like an ass isn't her but you. You're the one who can't let go, and you're the one who's immature.

I don't believe EVE's dynamic history is related to the sandbox nature of the game. The truth is something a little more complicated. EVE's ability to create great moments is in large part due to the people who play the game. For example, in many ways SWG (the original) was set up much like EVE is, minus factional warfare, but you never had events quite like this infiltration.

IMO what makes EVE remarkable is the players who are willing to invest themselves into this world. There was an earlier post mentioning that these things can happen in other MMORPG's like WOW but for the most part don't. It would be argued that it's the linear nature of the game. Personally i believe though that WOW doesn't do what EVE does because the players don't envision a world that dangerous.

It should also be noted that in many ways the game mechanics of WOW prevent any large scale history because there are no player owned areas which affect the economy. Similarly Blizzard holds the hands of their populace much more than CCP ever would. If you don't believe me just try and learn, and I mean really learn, EVE. The learning curve is more like scaling a wall.

I can't believe you guys are speculating on market reaction. First of all there are too many variables to state that this is related to people leaving the game. Investors don't care and don't read forums or sites like this for financial advice. Second the whole damn market is in a slump. If you would take your head out of your arse you would see that teh market is switching to commodities because stocks are flopping all around.
If you really want a good reason to blame for these stock dips you might want to look at rising energy costs, concerns over disposable income in the US, and investors not wanting to take risks on brands that aren't well known in the market.
Usually i like this site but this shite reporting has got to go.

okay seriously why does Lavine always look like he is getting his prostate massaged during the photo?

...or Final Fantasy 3 (6 depending on where you live). What IP did steampunk/ fantasy better that FF?

good points. I hadn't framed the quest that way in my mind (shows you what two heads can do :) ) .. If you were to add morality to this as well there could be some real interesting episodes. Maybe certain characters don't want to succeed while others do who are in the same quest area and this would create tension. I definitely love the idea of accessing quests and blocking off quests to create new experiences in static worlds.

I would have to say that the problem lies not in creativity but the medium through which the story is represented. In an MMO especially, the world is always static because creating change on any scale requires development. Players looking for that quest that really grips them need an outcome and that outcome means there needs to be change. For instance, I'll create a quest which is not "kill X for X times" and call it Quest A. Quest A involves saving a town from disease by inoculating NPC's in this given town. If i fail what happens? Well obviously there cannot be the ultimate repercussion where all the NPCs die a horrible bubonic death. If i fail the only outcome is I do it again and this time get it right by cutting seconds off the time between point A and B. If I succeed on the other hand what should happen? Well obviously I should be called a Hero and have parades in my honour, maybe even a statue. (i just saved their entire village!!!) That can't happen though so instead I receive a crappy sword with a slightly different texture and a bonus to certain stats. MMOs cannot be designed for true immersion because they lack both of these qualities. First, there are no repercussions for failure, and second there are no true rewards for success.
There are no repercussions because the code cannot be changed. If one player failed or succeeded then that quest can never be redone because the outcomes are too drastic. If the village dies there are no quest givers, and if the village has been saved who needs the next player to run the quest? (barring you don't live in industrial age London surrounded by filth)
The answer is simple, MMOs make crappy quests. Is there a solution? I think player/ dev run events are the key. This is not a new idea so i don't think i need to elaborate but one look at the top ten MMO moments tells you the player/dev moments are the ones people remember.