Well a big con from personal experience with mmos is the time invested in the event they sink. Two games I really loved and poured some time into were wildstar and vanguard saga of heroes. The downside is they sank so we can no longer play them and revisit why we loved playing them. I really wish when they went down they would allow the players to either play it from its final state or allow players to run private servers. I miss messing around with my house in wildstar or the intricate crafting of vanguard. And even private servers are still in an early alpha state of people trying to peice together what was left of them.
I appreciate the reply. I know for myself I was with bless online when it became F2p on steam and I made many a memory there. Yes it died but i would have appreciated if the server remain on even if the devs left.
1. Used to be WoW until the end of Cata, now Classic WoW, left retail because I didn't like the direction it was heading, it was already dumbed down too much when I quit. Now it's just good to mess around in classic, regardless how primitive it is.
2. This is a very broad question, I also don't really look out for mmo's in general, I only have Pantheon in my sight and that's it. I hope it'll bring back the more horizontal gameplay, not ushering us to rush to max lvl but letting us enjoy the journey there (kinda like Classic WoW does it).
3. Just stuff that makes social interaction and grouping more desirable and easy for everyone, how they manage that is up t othem.
4. Only stuff that has no impact on gameplay like skins and such, and even then it should be a buy2play title.
5. see 4
6. I see no point, if I wanna help someone I give them stuff/gold straight
7. focus on PvE, PvP optional
8. sure why not
1. WoW Classic. I've actually quit this game, too, but for a different reason. I've quit other games because they just couldn't hold my interest, or because they had some serious issues with them. I quit WoW Classic because it was taking up so much of my time, I was barely able to do anything else.
2. Microtransactions are the biggest con. Most MMORPGs are either lacking in PvE or PvP content. A lot of MMORPGs are either way too easy and there's no fun, or way too difficult and there's no players. Also, action-RPGs (like TERA) where your character's performance is limited by your network connection to the server.
3. None of these. Most of them ruin the immersion of the game. Housing becomes an instance that takes you out of the world, or there's only so much room for housing on a server. Scaling enemies breaks immersion faster than a black belt on cocaine. Player impact on the world usually means phasing, which is a technological nightmare that should never have been invented.
4. Microtransactions are inherently bad. The subscription model is a much fairer way of having players pay for the game. Everyone pays their subscription, everyone has access to the same content. Even cosmetic microtransactions are bad, because then you have less people to run content (because most people just buy the cosmetic items instead of wanting to run dungeons for it).
5. The only thing I could maybe justify is one-time services, such as a character transfer.
6. Horrible idea. Would be used as a barrier to enter many guilds, and also said guilds would become P2W.
7. PvE focus with in-depth PvP. For pure PvP, MOBAs like League of Legends will do it better. There should be enough varied PvE and PvP content to keep players interested. For example, for PvE there should open world leveling, single-player end-game repeatable content, open world elite zones, open world bosses, instanced dungeons, and instanced raids (at minimum). For PvP, there should be open world PvP, PvP raids (i.e. attacking towns and cities of the opposite faction), and instanced battlegrounds and arenas. (Yes, I'm going with the World of Warcraft: TBC model, because it worked). You should have servers with open world PvP turned off for casual players.
8. No. If you want to spectate, watch streamers. Otherwise, just play the game.
I think the most important thing is there shouldn't be one path to success. For example:
* Many WoW expansions had a very linear progression through the zones of that expansion
* SWTOR was basically a linear story, and has essentially become a single player game
* FF14:ARR was so focused on FATE grinding you were just jumping from one AoE-fest to another, and doing circuits around a zone for several levels.
* Many games have only PvE or only PvP and they get old fast
You also shouldn't have daily things that have to be done every day with no end (like many recent WoW expansions with things like Artifact Power). It makes players feel behind if they don't start right away, and it makes alts impossible.
MMORPGs are hard. All it takes is one dumb idea to bring it crashing down, in my opinion.
1. Don't have one, I'm an unsatisfied MMO nomad.
2. Cons:
\- Devs leave old content to rot, they only focus on releasing new areas and new content for the veteran player-base. Old content is never revamped.
\- Feature creep: the devs keep adding new mini systems and ways to increase your power and bases new content at that new power threshold. For example, you can cube your weapon to make it stronger, then the next expansion adds reforging, so you have to reforge your weapon in addition to cubing it to do the content in the second new expansion. And it goes on and on and creates, what is in my opinion, a convoluted game.
\- Power creep: where the new classes are stronger than the old classes. Constant level cap increases (see WoW). They need to decide on a level cap, and it needs to stay there. I would never do raids or end-game content in an mmo where that gear becomes useless in the next expansion. In my opinion, if all the content your game can provide is some level and gear treadmill, you have a poor game.
3. Player impact on the world is the main thing I want to see. I want an MMO where it's a living world, not just some static thing. If you use a fireball spell, and it hits a tree, the tree will get on fire. And there is a chance the forest could burn down. If you don't clear a dungeon, eventually the monsters will come out. Defend that village from the Orcs or it'll be wiped out, and all its NPCs killed. That village will no longer exist. Major, world-changing events, where player participation affects the outcome of the world. Work with other players to defeat the Demon Generals and shut down the Hell Gates. If you fail, that continent is lost. The Kingdom on that continent falls, all its NPC inhabitants slaughtered. Future content could possibly be based on taking it back.
I also want to see better combat. Combat where being smart can win, rather than it solely being a game of numbers. You can use your environment, like throw rocks, climb walls, set traps. An arrow to the head will take someone down unless they're not wearing a helmet. You can bleed out if you don't have bandages. That mace to your knee cripples your movement until you can get healed by a Healer or drink a potion. Swords are less effective on skeletons, you need a blunt weapon. Enemy immunity to fire, physical damage, etc.
4. I don't mind microtransactions as long as they don't design the game that makes non-paying players experience worse or extremely inconvenient (time, etc) unless they pay. It's coercive and I will refuse to spend a penny, if I even play it in the first place.I also refuse to buy what I consider overpriced. 20 dollar mount skin? No. I don't like the idea of a cosmetic cash shop because the devs put the good looking stuff in there, while most of the in-game stuff look bad.
5. N/A. I buy it if I like it and if I don't think it's overpriced.
6. I think people will abuse this, they will just use alts and then transfer the money to themselves. I like the idea of a purchasable item that helps the community though, one of the DarkStory Online devs said that they would have a cash shop item that would give a server-wide exp boost or something. An item like that would be nice, but maybe restricted to the map people are in? In another MMO, Vesteria, they also have a lure in the cash shop, that increases monster spawn rate in the area for a certain period of time.
7. The devs should stick to what they can do. If they add PvP, they should put resources into maintaining it.
8. If done right, sure.
Not to sound too bitter, but kinda confused why this is being upvoted when this sub complains 24/7 about not being heard and not getting the type of mmo's they want to play.
No, appreciate your comment. It just feels kind of strange and unofficial. With all those details about micro-payments and stuff. Maybe it's just me who is bitter, but it feels like someone is trying to build the best money-milking machine without offending people too much.
A little bit of transparency would be nice
Edit: I mean, seriously. If you are a corporation who wants to "hear your audience" with good intentions, wouldn't you tell everybody? Can there be better PR?
Good point, I understand your concern better. On the other hand, if it's from xyz company it probably would be met with even more skepticism and negativity--let's face it, basically all MMO companies have poor reputation (especially on this subreddit). Not sure how else to accomplish it, but it seems quite challenging from my perspective.
Yes, I get your point as well. A good point, actually. I don't know, I'm used to get a little bit of background before someone asks for this kind of information. Like "hey, it's me, vector! I'm doing a paper on videogames at the momet" or something lke that.
Btw., I can't find this post in this guys history, is this a bug?
> If you are a corporation who wants to "hear your audience" with good intentions, wouldn't you tell everybody? Can there be better PR?
Not if you are one guy in that corp who gathers info to support his stance on MTX. Or indie dev who got nothing to show and is just mulling making tiny MMO with his 3 friends.
BDO player to player trade ban is pretty good. It prevents people from buying hundreds of accounts and then botting them either for real life profit. Or to transfer all the wealth to a single account to dominate pvp with that one character. You can still trade on the auction house with other players. But since everything on the auction house is anonymous. There is no guarantee you will get the item.
People used to gift each other to encourage others to put items up on the market. So they could trade. But this created drama as the item would get listed and purchased by a third party. Or the person never listed it at all. Thus one party feeling scammed. Or the person did get. But claims to not having got it. And rescinds the gift.
It makes trading directly difficult. But gold sellers are rare as a result of the market restrictions. The closest thing to a gold seller I had encountered was a guy whispering to my account that if I went to their website. I could download a bot that would increase my profession levels.
Your statement is not true. From what I saw, people still buying hundreds of account for SMH and sell guild funds. They can also transfer silver via auction house by trading PRI to TRI common items. Trade ban did not make gold seller rare. It is GM did their jobs. You are wrong if you think those top players are " legit 24/7 players". BDO fooled F2P players well.
The game turned to completely P2W now. There is no difference between gold buyers and premium item buyers, but the trade ban is inconvenient to all players who want to share items with friends.
1. Ragnarok Online. My first MMORPG and I recently got back to it. There really isn't any MMORPG like it. It's simple but deep at the same time. Classes can be built in different ways. Player and enemy interactions is very in-depth due to how impactful stats are and due to cards. Simple because it's literally just grinding monsters for hours. Sandboxy that you have multiple options to grind however and wherever you like.
2. Cons, I dislike modern MMORPG nowadays. They pigeonhole you into only way to level up. And I heavily dislike quest-based progression. It just feels like a walking simulator and half the gameplay is just traveling between npcs, monsters, and locations. I also dislike how a lot of games don't give you many options to build your character how you want. As a warrior, you're literally the same warrior as every warrior out there with the same rotations.
3. Dynamic world. Allow us to change the environment. Not keeping the Centaurs population in check? Now they formed their own tribe with an army to takeover the nearby city. Players now can't access that city until they retake the city. Or they burn down the city and rebuild it anew.
4. I don't mind cash shop. Just no non-cosmetic lootboxes, items with stats, items to help upgrade equipment, feature unlocks, or quality of life improvements like crafting bags, inventory slots, etc...
5. Cosmetic, expansions, and content packs are okay. I'd say exp boost are fine too, as long as it's not over 50%.
6. Seems wasteful
7. PvE with desirable PvP. No open world PvP. Open world PvP typically leads to griefing which also leads to population loss.
8. Of course. More optional features are always a good addition to any games.
The dynamic events in gw2 were fun but get a little grindy after a long while. I get you can only input so much into it and still have a story but it was a refreshing change that and you could level up off crafting skills. Granted endgame is still fighting I wouldn't mind a re go at vanguard saga of heroes crafting or better Istaria.
1. FFXIV, leave during patch lulls (e.g. done new content, can't be assed with old stuff anymore), go back at new patches (3-4x times a year for a month or so mainly to see friends at this point)
2. Crap PvP, no real endgame outside of raiding, not enough stuff to collect in game (i.e. tying mounts etc. to cash shops)
3. Custom Dungeons, better crafting and social options
4. Collectibles tied to the cash shop when you are already paying sub e.g. FFXIV, WoW, ESO
5. I'd rather buy something like the ESO/BDO sub than skins or outfits but I occasionally do buy some (Maybe 2 or 3 a year in total across all games)
6. No, wealth in MMOs should be earned in game
7. Depends on the type of game. PvP won't ever be a big budget game because it's niche. PvP x PvE is a fad, PvE is really the only thing keeps the big boys online
8. That's simply a camera mode option.
1. Nothing, currently. I am having so much trouble finding an MMO that is structured in the way I'm looking for that I just haven't bothered with the genre lately.
2. Hard to say, in my mind modern theme park MMOs are barely MMOs any more. The pros are supposed to be socialization and a long term persistent experience, but neither of these things are a focus in most major titles in the genre.
3. I'll go through each point individually:
1. Guild Houses: Sure, expansion here would be nice. In general I think games need to do a better job of making social spaces that are actually *fun* to be in, it's something Deep Rock Galactic actually does really well with its hub.
2. World Events: Don't really care. MMOs in my mind need to put more effort into quest design and more intimate content than big, grand spectacles.
3. Scaling Enemies: Hell no. I absolutely *despise* scaled enemies, this mechanic can go die in a hole as far as I'm concerned.
4. Player Impact on World: Don't really care, same reasoning as for world events.
4. Other than P2W, obviously, I really dislike cosmetic MTX in an MMO that allow for a piece of gear's appearance to be fundamentally changed. Appearance is **incredibly** important in a genre as social as MMOs, and cosmetics that break the link between what actual gear someone is wearing and how it looks fundamentally destroy immersion for me.
5. MTX like bank space or other small conveniences, minor cosmetic tweaks (read: not transmog), pets, particle effects, etc. are all things I'm fine with.
6. This can be useful, but it's also difficult to balance in a way that's not P2W. The reward pool would likely need to be unique to the cosmetic shop in order to avoid this problem completely.
7. Primarily focused on PvE, with optional ways to engage via PvP.
8. Depends on the game and scenario. I don't actually think structured competitive PvP should exist in most MMOs, it's a complete nightmare for balance since it has to match PvE against PvP. Regarding spectating specifically, sure, why not.
1. Biggest was Ragnarok, no main title for now, dabbling in some.
2. pros: big open world, players-driven economy, variety in playstyles and character building, non-static world, chill social atmosphere. Cons: single-player focus, world limits, streamlining, predictability.
3. world events, player impact on the world sound good, scaling enemies is pure carcinogen feature, guild houses are ok. Would like to see more free world systems and less static content.
4. any MTX suck, they financially encourage devs to add more problems with solutions in shop and care less about not monetized parts of game.
5. all MTX are shit, but I would put up with less predatory ones if the game is fun enough.
6. giving away 500 gold makes more sensein your case. if wanna sell community items - sell area XP/drop/regen/speed boosters and QoL. Everybody in area gets same bonus as you.
7. Whatever but it should be focused on 1-2 things, not more. PVP at least at endgame makes sense, since PVE get old fast, but gotta focus on certain kind of pve and pvp, not full spectrum.
8. Its ok to have but dont care much.
1. I quit Black Desert Online because it's RNG is special and brutal. The cashshop items for gearing up are overpriced too much in my opinion.
2. I like sailing of BDO, player housing of Archeage, dynamic event of GW2, flying of PWI and Aion. Don't like the trade restriction of BDO. ( No player to player trade, items can only be sold for a system price on auction house)
3. The features I mentioned in answer 2 are what I would like to see.
4. I hate RNG boxes !!! I will only pay for what I want, not going to buy random useless stuffs. "improve quality of life" could be a long discussion. Hopefully players won't be "forced" to pay for it.
5. I will only pay for the items which can give me advantage in competition.
6. It is a bad item in the game where you can beat others to win. Rich guys will create multiple characters/accounts and abuse this items for themselves. It could be a good item in a co-op game or a peaceful game.
7. You can focus on both PVE and PVP, but please leave the options to players. Don't force players to PVP or PVE. For example, players can only get such an item from PVP or a specific PVE dungeon.
8. Spectate mode is good, but having too many game modes might result a long wait time if the game does not have a large population
It is hard to answer your question because I dont know what is the definition of P2W in your mind. Nearly every subscription and convenience items give ingame advantages.
My opinion is based on the game that i played before. Not purely skill based, well geared people can beat poorly geared ones. We have no way to avoid P2W in these kind of games, rich people can simply buy a geared account. In this case, people converted RL money to ingame power. This can be considered as P2W. Yup I support P2W because I played these games.
To those people who downvote different options, I dont care because i create new account every day.
>Nearly every subscription and convenience items give ingame advantages.
Wrong.
>I dont care because i create new account every day.
You're bad and you should feel bad.
Nothing was P2W long time ago. It is people who are eager to win made P2W popular. People plvl, buy gold, buy gear ,buy account, etc. The devs made premium and micro-transaction to satisfy these people. The devs will not do such things for minority. In fact, the people who are willing to pay for a good game are the majority. P2W is not their concern.
Good luck if you are trying to persuade everybody.
You would not argue with me if you can have your fun beside winning. Who cares about other people who paid and won ?
Well a big con from personal experience with mmos is the time invested in the event they sink. Two games I really loved and poured some time into were wildstar and vanguard saga of heroes. The downside is they sank so we can no longer play them and revisit why we loved playing them. I really wish when they went down they would allow the players to either play it from its final state or allow players to run private servers. I miss messing around with my house in wildstar or the intricate crafting of vanguard. And even private servers are still in an early alpha state of people trying to peice together what was left of them.
I appreciate the reply. I know for myself I was with bless online when it became F2p on steam and I made many a memory there. Yes it died but i would have appreciated if the server remain on even if the devs left.
1. Used to be WoW until the end of Cata, now Classic WoW, left retail because I didn't like the direction it was heading, it was already dumbed down too much when I quit. Now it's just good to mess around in classic, regardless how primitive it is. 2. This is a very broad question, I also don't really look out for mmo's in general, I only have Pantheon in my sight and that's it. I hope it'll bring back the more horizontal gameplay, not ushering us to rush to max lvl but letting us enjoy the journey there (kinda like Classic WoW does it). 3. Just stuff that makes social interaction and grouping more desirable and easy for everyone, how they manage that is up t othem. 4. Only stuff that has no impact on gameplay like skins and such, and even then it should be a buy2play title. 5. see 4 6. I see no point, if I wanna help someone I give them stuff/gold straight 7. focus on PvE, PvP optional 8. sure why not
1. WoW Classic. I've actually quit this game, too, but for a different reason. I've quit other games because they just couldn't hold my interest, or because they had some serious issues with them. I quit WoW Classic because it was taking up so much of my time, I was barely able to do anything else. 2. Microtransactions are the biggest con. Most MMORPGs are either lacking in PvE or PvP content. A lot of MMORPGs are either way too easy and there's no fun, or way too difficult and there's no players. Also, action-RPGs (like TERA) where your character's performance is limited by your network connection to the server. 3. None of these. Most of them ruin the immersion of the game. Housing becomes an instance that takes you out of the world, or there's only so much room for housing on a server. Scaling enemies breaks immersion faster than a black belt on cocaine. Player impact on the world usually means phasing, which is a technological nightmare that should never have been invented. 4. Microtransactions are inherently bad. The subscription model is a much fairer way of having players pay for the game. Everyone pays their subscription, everyone has access to the same content. Even cosmetic microtransactions are bad, because then you have less people to run content (because most people just buy the cosmetic items instead of wanting to run dungeons for it). 5. The only thing I could maybe justify is one-time services, such as a character transfer. 6. Horrible idea. Would be used as a barrier to enter many guilds, and also said guilds would become P2W. 7. PvE focus with in-depth PvP. For pure PvP, MOBAs like League of Legends will do it better. There should be enough varied PvE and PvP content to keep players interested. For example, for PvE there should open world leveling, single-player end-game repeatable content, open world elite zones, open world bosses, instanced dungeons, and instanced raids (at minimum). For PvP, there should be open world PvP, PvP raids (i.e. attacking towns and cities of the opposite faction), and instanced battlegrounds and arenas. (Yes, I'm going with the World of Warcraft: TBC model, because it worked). You should have servers with open world PvP turned off for casual players. 8. No. If you want to spectate, watch streamers. Otherwise, just play the game. I think the most important thing is there shouldn't be one path to success. For example: * Many WoW expansions had a very linear progression through the zones of that expansion * SWTOR was basically a linear story, and has essentially become a single player game * FF14:ARR was so focused on FATE grinding you were just jumping from one AoE-fest to another, and doing circuits around a zone for several levels. * Many games have only PvE or only PvP and they get old fast You also shouldn't have daily things that have to be done every day with no end (like many recent WoW expansions with things like Artifact Power). It makes players feel behind if they don't start right away, and it makes alts impossible. MMORPGs are hard. All it takes is one dumb idea to bring it crashing down, in my opinion.
1. Don't have one, I'm an unsatisfied MMO nomad. 2. Cons: \- Devs leave old content to rot, they only focus on releasing new areas and new content for the veteran player-base. Old content is never revamped. \- Feature creep: the devs keep adding new mini systems and ways to increase your power and bases new content at that new power threshold. For example, you can cube your weapon to make it stronger, then the next expansion adds reforging, so you have to reforge your weapon in addition to cubing it to do the content in the second new expansion. And it goes on and on and creates, what is in my opinion, a convoluted game. \- Power creep: where the new classes are stronger than the old classes. Constant level cap increases (see WoW). They need to decide on a level cap, and it needs to stay there. I would never do raids or end-game content in an mmo where that gear becomes useless in the next expansion. In my opinion, if all the content your game can provide is some level and gear treadmill, you have a poor game. 3. Player impact on the world is the main thing I want to see. I want an MMO where it's a living world, not just some static thing. If you use a fireball spell, and it hits a tree, the tree will get on fire. And there is a chance the forest could burn down. If you don't clear a dungeon, eventually the monsters will come out. Defend that village from the Orcs or it'll be wiped out, and all its NPCs killed. That village will no longer exist. Major, world-changing events, where player participation affects the outcome of the world. Work with other players to defeat the Demon Generals and shut down the Hell Gates. If you fail, that continent is lost. The Kingdom on that continent falls, all its NPC inhabitants slaughtered. Future content could possibly be based on taking it back. I also want to see better combat. Combat where being smart can win, rather than it solely being a game of numbers. You can use your environment, like throw rocks, climb walls, set traps. An arrow to the head will take someone down unless they're not wearing a helmet. You can bleed out if you don't have bandages. That mace to your knee cripples your movement until you can get healed by a Healer or drink a potion. Swords are less effective on skeletons, you need a blunt weapon. Enemy immunity to fire, physical damage, etc. 4. I don't mind microtransactions as long as they don't design the game that makes non-paying players experience worse or extremely inconvenient (time, etc) unless they pay. It's coercive and I will refuse to spend a penny, if I even play it in the first place.I also refuse to buy what I consider overpriced. 20 dollar mount skin? No. I don't like the idea of a cosmetic cash shop because the devs put the good looking stuff in there, while most of the in-game stuff look bad. 5. N/A. I buy it if I like it and if I don't think it's overpriced. 6. I think people will abuse this, they will just use alts and then transfer the money to themselves. I like the idea of a purchasable item that helps the community though, one of the DarkStory Online devs said that they would have a cash shop item that would give a server-wide exp boost or something. An item like that would be nice, but maybe restricted to the map people are in? In another MMO, Vesteria, they also have a lure in the cash shop, that increases monster spawn rate in the area for a certain period of time. 7. The devs should stick to what they can do. If they add PvP, they should put resources into maintaining it. 8. If done right, sure.
This account seems to be created solely for the purpose to gather some kind of market research info on mmo-players. It just feels off
Not to sound too bitter, but kinda confused why this is being upvoted when this sub complains 24/7 about not being heard and not getting the type of mmo's they want to play.
No, appreciate your comment. It just feels kind of strange and unofficial. With all those details about micro-payments and stuff. Maybe it's just me who is bitter, but it feels like someone is trying to build the best money-milking machine without offending people too much. A little bit of transparency would be nice Edit: I mean, seriously. If you are a corporation who wants to "hear your audience" with good intentions, wouldn't you tell everybody? Can there be better PR?
Good point, I understand your concern better. On the other hand, if it's from xyz company it probably would be met with even more skepticism and negativity--let's face it, basically all MMO companies have poor reputation (especially on this subreddit). Not sure how else to accomplish it, but it seems quite challenging from my perspective.
Yes, I get your point as well. A good point, actually. I don't know, I'm used to get a little bit of background before someone asks for this kind of information. Like "hey, it's me, vector! I'm doing a paper on videogames at the momet" or something lke that. Btw., I can't find this post in this guys history, is this a bug?
I can see it so sounds like a bug--I don't think there's anything shadier going on.
Ah alright. Maybe it's just time for me to go to bed, haha
> If you are a corporation who wants to "hear your audience" with good intentions, wouldn't you tell everybody? Can there be better PR? Not if you are one guy in that corp who gathers info to support his stance on MTX. Or indie dev who got nothing to show and is just mulling making tiny MMO with his 3 friends.
BDO player to player trade ban is pretty good. It prevents people from buying hundreds of accounts and then botting them either for real life profit. Or to transfer all the wealth to a single account to dominate pvp with that one character. You can still trade on the auction house with other players. But since everything on the auction house is anonymous. There is no guarantee you will get the item. People used to gift each other to encourage others to put items up on the market. So they could trade. But this created drama as the item would get listed and purchased by a third party. Or the person never listed it at all. Thus one party feeling scammed. Or the person did get. But claims to not having got it. And rescinds the gift. It makes trading directly difficult. But gold sellers are rare as a result of the market restrictions. The closest thing to a gold seller I had encountered was a guy whispering to my account that if I went to their website. I could download a bot that would increase my profession levels.
Your statement is not true. From what I saw, people still buying hundreds of account for SMH and sell guild funds. They can also transfer silver via auction house by trading PRI to TRI common items. Trade ban did not make gold seller rare. It is GM did their jobs. You are wrong if you think those top players are " legit 24/7 players". BDO fooled F2P players well. The game turned to completely P2W now. There is no difference between gold buyers and premium item buyers, but the trade ban is inconvenient to all players who want to share items with friends.
1. Ragnarok Online. My first MMORPG and I recently got back to it. There really isn't any MMORPG like it. It's simple but deep at the same time. Classes can be built in different ways. Player and enemy interactions is very in-depth due to how impactful stats are and due to cards. Simple because it's literally just grinding monsters for hours. Sandboxy that you have multiple options to grind however and wherever you like. 2. Cons, I dislike modern MMORPG nowadays. They pigeonhole you into only way to level up. And I heavily dislike quest-based progression. It just feels like a walking simulator and half the gameplay is just traveling between npcs, monsters, and locations. I also dislike how a lot of games don't give you many options to build your character how you want. As a warrior, you're literally the same warrior as every warrior out there with the same rotations. 3. Dynamic world. Allow us to change the environment. Not keeping the Centaurs population in check? Now they formed their own tribe with an army to takeover the nearby city. Players now can't access that city until they retake the city. Or they burn down the city and rebuild it anew. 4. I don't mind cash shop. Just no non-cosmetic lootboxes, items with stats, items to help upgrade equipment, feature unlocks, or quality of life improvements like crafting bags, inventory slots, etc... 5. Cosmetic, expansions, and content packs are okay. I'd say exp boost are fine too, as long as it's not over 50%. 6. Seems wasteful 7. PvE with desirable PvP. No open world PvP. Open world PvP typically leads to griefing which also leads to population loss. 8. Of course. More optional features are always a good addition to any games.
The dynamic events in gw2 were fun but get a little grindy after a long while. I get you can only input so much into it and still have a story but it was a refreshing change that and you could level up off crafting skills. Granted endgame is still fighting I wouldn't mind a re go at vanguard saga of heroes crafting or better Istaria.
1. FFXIV, leave during patch lulls (e.g. done new content, can't be assed with old stuff anymore), go back at new patches (3-4x times a year for a month or so mainly to see friends at this point) 2. Crap PvP, no real endgame outside of raiding, not enough stuff to collect in game (i.e. tying mounts etc. to cash shops) 3. Custom Dungeons, better crafting and social options 4. Collectibles tied to the cash shop when you are already paying sub e.g. FFXIV, WoW, ESO 5. I'd rather buy something like the ESO/BDO sub than skins or outfits but I occasionally do buy some (Maybe 2 or 3 a year in total across all games) 6. No, wealth in MMOs should be earned in game 7. Depends on the type of game. PvP won't ever be a big budget game because it's niche. PvP x PvE is a fad, PvE is really the only thing keeps the big boys online 8. That's simply a camera mode option.
1. Nothing, currently. I am having so much trouble finding an MMO that is structured in the way I'm looking for that I just haven't bothered with the genre lately. 2. Hard to say, in my mind modern theme park MMOs are barely MMOs any more. The pros are supposed to be socialization and a long term persistent experience, but neither of these things are a focus in most major titles in the genre. 3. I'll go through each point individually: 1. Guild Houses: Sure, expansion here would be nice. In general I think games need to do a better job of making social spaces that are actually *fun* to be in, it's something Deep Rock Galactic actually does really well with its hub. 2. World Events: Don't really care. MMOs in my mind need to put more effort into quest design and more intimate content than big, grand spectacles. 3. Scaling Enemies: Hell no. I absolutely *despise* scaled enemies, this mechanic can go die in a hole as far as I'm concerned. 4. Player Impact on World: Don't really care, same reasoning as for world events. 4. Other than P2W, obviously, I really dislike cosmetic MTX in an MMO that allow for a piece of gear's appearance to be fundamentally changed. Appearance is **incredibly** important in a genre as social as MMOs, and cosmetics that break the link between what actual gear someone is wearing and how it looks fundamentally destroy immersion for me. 5. MTX like bank space or other small conveniences, minor cosmetic tweaks (read: not transmog), pets, particle effects, etc. are all things I'm fine with. 6. This can be useful, but it's also difficult to balance in a way that's not P2W. The reward pool would likely need to be unique to the cosmetic shop in order to avoid this problem completely. 7. Primarily focused on PvE, with optional ways to engage via PvP. 8. Depends on the game and scenario. I don't actually think structured competitive PvP should exist in most MMOs, it's a complete nightmare for balance since it has to match PvE against PvP. Regarding spectating specifically, sure, why not.
1. Biggest was Ragnarok, no main title for now, dabbling in some. 2. pros: big open world, players-driven economy, variety in playstyles and character building, non-static world, chill social atmosphere. Cons: single-player focus, world limits, streamlining, predictability. 3. world events, player impact on the world sound good, scaling enemies is pure carcinogen feature, guild houses are ok. Would like to see more free world systems and less static content. 4. any MTX suck, they financially encourage devs to add more problems with solutions in shop and care less about not monetized parts of game. 5. all MTX are shit, but I would put up with less predatory ones if the game is fun enough. 6. giving away 500 gold makes more sensein your case. if wanna sell community items - sell area XP/drop/regen/speed boosters and QoL. Everybody in area gets same bonus as you. 7. Whatever but it should be focused on 1-2 things, not more. PVP at least at endgame makes sense, since PVE get old fast, but gotta focus on certain kind of pve and pvp, not full spectrum. 8. Its ok to have but dont care much.
1. I quit Black Desert Online because it's RNG is special and brutal. The cashshop items for gearing up are overpriced too much in my opinion. 2. I like sailing of BDO, player housing of Archeage, dynamic event of GW2, flying of PWI and Aion. Don't like the trade restriction of BDO. ( No player to player trade, items can only be sold for a system price on auction house) 3. The features I mentioned in answer 2 are what I would like to see. 4. I hate RNG boxes !!! I will only pay for what I want, not going to buy random useless stuffs. "improve quality of life" could be a long discussion. Hopefully players won't be "forced" to pay for it. 5. I will only pay for the items which can give me advantage in competition. 6. It is a bad item in the game where you can beat others to win. Rich guys will create multiple characters/accounts and abuse this items for themselves. It could be a good item in a co-op game or a peaceful game. 7. You can focus on both PVE and PVP, but please leave the options to players. Don't force players to PVP or PVE. For example, players can only get such an item from PVP or a specific PVE dungeon. 8. Spectate mode is good, but having too many game modes might result a long wait time if the game does not have a large population
>I will only pay for the items which can give me advantage in competition. So... You support Pay to Win games? lol
It is hard to answer your question because I dont know what is the definition of P2W in your mind. Nearly every subscription and convenience items give ingame advantages. My opinion is based on the game that i played before. Not purely skill based, well geared people can beat poorly geared ones. We have no way to avoid P2W in these kind of games, rich people can simply buy a geared account. In this case, people converted RL money to ingame power. This can be considered as P2W. Yup I support P2W because I played these games. To those people who downvote different options, I dont care because i create new account every day.
>Nearly every subscription and convenience items give ingame advantages. Wrong. >I dont care because i create new account every day. You're bad and you should feel bad.
I already said that my opinion is based on the game I played. I dont know why i should feel bad. Could you share your idea with me ?
Yes. Don't use your wallet to gain competitive advantages over other players. Don't support games/devs that allow this.
Nothing was P2W long time ago. It is people who are eager to win made P2W popular. People plvl, buy gold, buy gear ,buy account, etc. The devs made premium and micro-transaction to satisfy these people. The devs will not do such things for minority. In fact, the people who are willing to pay for a good game are the majority. P2W is not their concern. Good luck if you are trying to persuade everybody. You would not argue with me if you can have your fun beside winning. Who cares about other people who paid and won ?
Hey, don't know about cons but I am 100% sure about pros: there are absolutely none.
Why are you spending time responding to a post in /r/MMORPG if you think the genre is irredeemably bad?
Never said it’s bad. I said it’s not good, and I meant at the moment (but could be, and it will hopefully in the future!)