Yet another Massively article telling us to Get Over It!

[Peregrine Falcon]

I apologize if this has already been posted. I did search, but admittedly not in depth.

Anyway, Massively has yet another article whose message is: City of Heroes players need to get over it already.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/05/07/the-soapbox-your-mmo-is-going-to-die-and-thats-ok/

Now the author doesn't come right out and say: 'This is directed at the City of Heroes community', but between the very first pic being a CoH screenshot, and some of the lines at the end of the article, it's pretty obvious that it's not so subtly directed at us.

I was finally able to sign up for an account at Massively, so that I can comment on these articles. If you haven't already, then maybe you would like to make a comment and let Massively know just how you feel about their continuing series of pro-NCSoft 'get over it' articles.

[TimtheEnchanter]

Oh look at that. Someone just handed the 'get-out-of-blame-free' card to the tyrannical key-holders of the MMO industry.

I guess fighting to keep a game alive is SO last year. Time to get back to arse-kissing big business.

The author is pretty much trying to play god with this 'Death exists so you can appreciate life,' philosophy.

"The moments are somehow deeper, denser, because we quite literally can never go back. There's nothing wrong with sharing a beautiful moment and allowing it to pass into the ether." Umm... moments DO never come again, whether or not a game is shut down. Does Mike think it takes wanton destruction to keep society out of a Groundhog Day time loop?

[Codewalker]

Meh, I said the only thing I need to say to that article.

"No."

It's an opinion piece, and I disagree with the author's opinion. I'm not going to waste my time fighting in the comments or trying to convince people who don't care.

We've got stuff to do.

[eabrace]

It seems to me that it's probably hard for someone who spends their time bouncing from game to game to game to game to comprehend why we're so pissed.  And while I can't speak specifically regarding the reviewer that wrote this piece, I suspect most game reviewers - by the nature of their job alone - spend a whole lot of their gaming time doing exactly that.  You just aren't likely to really form attachments to a game or become a part of its community if you keep moving around.  Sure, as with moving around a lot as a kid, you might find new friends in each game more quickly, but you probably also learn to move on and forget most (if not all) of those people just as easily when you move to the next game.

On the other hand, I can literally count the number of games I've spent a significant amount of time in since I started playing CoH in 2004 on one hand.  I've tried quite a few games, but they didn't hold my interest and certainly didn't prove worthy of a monthly investment of my cash.  And I never left CoH to try another game, I only played CoH a few less hours during the week (down to around 75% of my time spent playing games at it's lowest point.)  The depth of my attachment to CoH simply can't be comprehended by someone who didn't spend damned near every hour of their gaming time for years at a time playing the same game and interacting with the same people.  They don't get the comfortable familiarity of logging in and seeing the same group of player names in global chat channels that they've been seeing for years.

I've spent more time interacting with some people in CoH than I spent with my best friends in college - and I still get together with those guys to catch up once a year and catch a couple of hockey games back on campus.  I'd be just as pissed if the university up and nixed the hockey team and told us we'd have to go see basketball games instead because ticket sales were still turning a profit, but it wasn't as big as they wanted it to be.

[FlyingCarcass]

I hate to sound cynical, but I think the reason Massively wants folks to "Get over" the untimely death of CoH (and other MMOs) is because they'd like folks to get interested in other MMOs. After all, live MMOs produce more news to write about and therefore more opportunities to attract visitors to their site and all its lovely advertisements.

[JaguarX]

I hate to sound cynical, but I think the reason Massively wants folks to "Get over" the untimely death of CoH (and other MMOs) is because they'd like folks to get interested in other MMOs. After all, live MMOs produce more news to write about and therefore more opportunities to attract visitors to their site and all its lovely advertisements.

hmmm. that is true. In the "NOW NOW NOW" and "Hey a new game!" two weeks later "Bah this game is old s dirt. I want something new!" and repeat process era of society, new games attract more attention. More attention attracts ads, more ads more money. Plus any news source dont want to look like they are stuck in theo ld talking about what many gamers in this era view as old news, old game, and then they will be viewed as outdated, which means less people, less ads, less money.

Although I wish neutral straight down the line game articles were the norm meaning no aerticles that are for one side and another for the other side just pure SUBTSTANTIATED aka no rumors, he said she said, or I heard it was this amount of money nonsense, just pure unadulterated facts. But then again that article and I think the last one is in the opinion section and have more leway with opinion of things new and old. And like anything, everyone have one and not all will fall in line with everyone view. It's life. Sometimes opinion articles will be in favor of the movement and eventually some will be the move on type. Opinion. If you ask three billion people their opinion on something, there will be 3 billion variations depending on how they view it, understand it, past experience with the subject and sometimes lack of experience of the subject, personality, exposure, and how they view the words and the meaning and tone of the words, sometimes mood at the moment, and sometimes what other people around them think sad to say. Some opinions will be relatively the same others will not. None is better than the other just different, and sometimes if the opinion is formed around misinformation, wrong facts, or substantiated stuff a person opinion may change but if that opinion is done on their perception, feelings, and views of it, then beating over the head telling them they are wrong and need to adopt the opinion that the beater thinks is right, will not change their mind. In fact it probably will give them more resolve in their opinion.

A lot of animosity happens when people dont wish to understand where the other one is coming afrom and forget that they havent walked in your (not meaning you in particular in general) shoes, or  seen or been through or have the same brain as you (unless the Widow Mind link is real and true.). So of course they will se stuff different. It's only natural. As Metallica said I think "If you can understand the me then I can understand the you." Apply this and people will be surprised how easy conversations about differing opinions go but going in there guns blazing wont help nothing but widen the gap.
 
Hell, even my opinions here probably have some people thinking my brain is on too much  catnip.  But day to day articles, yeah usually it have to be up to date stuff. 

[FatherXmas]

I don't think it's purpose was to be a shut up and move on already post but a reminder that MMOs are a different beast, not like PC games in general.  Those rules, don't apply here.  With an MMO your ability to play is not controlled entirely by you, but by the publisher.

The article is simply tossing a bucket of cold water on players of existing MMOs to get their attention and tell them they need to prepare to come to grips when this happens.  Nothing is forever.  You are most likely not be able to play WoW 20 years from now.  With the shear number of MMOs available out there it's only time until the great MMO crash will come, when publishers and developers realize that MMOs aren't the rich vein of gold they might have been in the earlier era of Everquest, RuneScape or soon after WoW came out.  There is going to be a pull back so be prepared.

Then the article goes on an attempt to soften the blow by pointing out that game death isn't entirely a bad thing.  I always wondered if MMOs affect PC game purchases, that they affect overall PC game sales as more people focus on their MMO of choice, forgoing other games.  Personally I know that CoH became an almost exclusive game for years where before I would buy 6-9 games a year.  For instance there was a time where their wasn't a turn based or real time strategy game I wouldn't buy.  That habit went away in the first 5 years of CoH.  Only near the end did I start buying box sets of the games I ignored for all those years.  So an MMO closure, from a industry standpoint, may be a good thing as a whole.

Don't turn that article into what it's not.  It's not directed at us.  If anything we've highlight something that many, many others aren't even aware of, the emotional ties that an MMO, unlike any other PC game, can create.  Between online friends, your avatars, as something included in your day to day routine, it's sudden absence can leave a hole that we don't know how to fill and that is something all MMO players have to prepare for.  It's a warning to all that someday it may happen to them.

[Manga]

 ???If you read closely it's obviously written by the same kind of person that a year ago would have told us to stop playing that outdated game and pick up something new and shiny.

What they do not understand are people (like me) who are very choosy about what they play - who are unhappy and unsatisfied with the new shiny, and therefore stick to what they like until something that is just as satisfying comes along.  Sadly, nothing really has.

I do see that this writer's angle is that if we don't always hop to the new shiny we'll eventually be cut off, but that argument doesn't convince me.

[TimtheEnchanter]

It seems to me that it's probably hard for someone who spends their time bouncing from game to game to game to game to comprehend why we're so pissed.  And while I can't speak specifically regarding the reviewer that wrote this piece, I suspect most game reviewers - by the nature of their job alone - spend a whole lot of their gaming time doing exactly that.  You just aren't likely to really form attachments to a game or become a part of its community if you keep moving around.  Sure, as with moving around a lot as a kid, you might find new friends in each game more quickly, but you probably also learn to move on and forget most (if not all) of those people just as easily when you move to the next game.

That doesn't fit with what he's saying about the memories. You don't get sentimental about a gaming experience by playing it just long enough to give it a review. It takes joining guilds, making friends, and becoming a part of the sub-plot that has built itself by the players and their inter-personal dramas, politics, etc.

The article is simply tossing a bucket of cold water on players of existing MMOs to get their attention and tell them they need to prepare to come to grips when this happens.  Nothing is forever.  You are most likely not be able to play WoW 20 years from now.  With the shear number of MMOs available out there it's only time until the great MMO crash will come, when publishers and developers realize that MMOs aren't the rich vein of gold they might have been in the earlier era of Everquest, RuneScape or soon after WoW came out.  There is going to be a pull back so be prepared.

If that's the mindset that is generally being pushed now (and it sort of is, now that a few of the legendary MMO's have passed on), it doesn't bode well for the future of MMO's. I look at it similar to how people are in relationships. The first few, people put all of their heart and soul into it, but then after they've been dumped and burned enough times, they become closed off, taking a more robotic perspective on it. Love goes out the window, and gets replaced with something colder. You can do that, and you can date while burying emotions, but you lose a lot of the experience. The same is true with MMO's. If you don't let the game take you in, and you treat it as 'just a game,' you won't really become a part of the world. It's a contradiction, because that kind of immersion is one of the biggest draws of MMO's. Perhaps the industry will survive with that kind of mindset, but it won't be the kind of MMO that we've seen for the past 10 years. It would probably become more like the Korean model. An insanely boring grind to max your character, followed by a game that is about nothing but 'Multiplayer Deathmatches,' except that instead of fighting it out over LAN's or player-hosted servers, it comes with a monthly sub fee and pay-to-win loot items.

[Surelle]

What bothers me most about Massively lately is not that they think CoH is dead forever and that we should get over it and move on.

It's that they're still freaking Hit Whore Central when it comes to repeatedly mentioning CoH anyway, even though *we* need to get over its death and move on.   

You can't help but notice that even the Mild Mannered Reporter articles only get about 1/10th of the reader comments when CoH isn't mentioned that they do when it is.

[Mazz vs The World]

The problem isn't letting COH go, it's finding a suitable replacement. I think this is what many people are missing. I have come to terms with COH being gone, I have accepted that it may not ever come back. That's fine, that is me letting it go. What I can't seem to let go of is the fact that there's nothing out there at the moment close to COH. I think this is where people are missing the point that COH fans have been trying to make. Sure we want the game back OR we want a game that, at least plays like COH did. I see nothing wrong with wanting that, COH was one of the best super-hero games out there. Many would agree on that and sure there are other super hero games (not many) but they aren't even close to what COH was. I honestly wish people would realize that it's not necessarily about letting go of COH, it's about letting go of playing a good solid game that you could actually enjoy. I know that it wasn't for everyone and that there are some who would argue and say the game was terrible but that can be said for any game, not everyone will enjoy the same things. So yes I agree we can let COH go, once we get an acceptable substitute, until then we can miss and want COH as much as we want!

[JaguarX]

You can't help but notice that even the Mild Mannered Reporter articles only get about 1/10th of the reader comments when CoH isn't mentioned  that they do when it is.

Hmmm I wonder why?

[beveri8469]

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/05/08/a-mild-mannered-reporter-nine-reasons-for-nine-years-of-city-of/

here is another article about the 9yrs of coh too that was posted today

[Golden Girl]

When NCsoft is ashes, you have my permission to move on.

[FatherXmas]

The problem isn't letting COH go, it's finding a suitable replacement. I think this is what many people are missing. I have come to terms with COH being gone, I have accepted that it may not ever come back. That's fine, that is me letting it go. What I can't seem to let go of is the fact that there's nothing out there at the moment close to COH. I think this is where people are missing the point that COH fans have been trying to make. Sure we want the game back OR we want a game that, at least plays like COH did. I see nothing wrong with wanting that, COH was one of the best super-hero games out there. Many would agree on that and sure there are other super hero games (not many) but they aren't even close to what COH was. I honestly wish people would realize that it's not necessarily about letting go of COH, it's about letting go of playing a good solid game that you could actually enjoy. I know that it wasn't for everyone and that there are some who would argue and say the game was terrible but that can be said for any game, not everyone will enjoy the same things. So yes I agree we can let COH go, once we get an acceptable substitute, until then we can miss and want COH as much as we want!

That's because from an uninformed corporate standpoint, games get pigeonholed into genres and all games in that genre are essentially the same.  Right?

It's like having an acquaintance asking about my new girlfriend by pointing out my last girlfriend was Asian and this one isn't.  Just because I dated an Asian woman doesn't mean I only exclusively date Asian women and more importantly they are NOT interchangeable.

But the demise of the first and biggest game in our genre sends the message that either this genre has been tapped out or the few games that are still around already handles the interest for that genre.  No reason to build another.  Nobody bothered to do a postmortem and determine why the game struck a chord to begin with.  I'm guessing most believe it was because it was the first, tapping into a new segment that wasn't satisfied with wizards and barbarians.

In another thread I suggest that either through design or accident, the original devs game us a game where our character's identity was front and center.  Where the game's lore wasn't so all encompassing that it prevented us from going beyond the established lore (lets here it for a multiverse of infinite possibilities).  We weren't pigeonholed into one of a number of predetermined story lines as to why we took up the sword or the wand.  We didn't have to come from a race with a long established world history.  We didn't have a popular IP cannon that we couldn't stray out of.  And because of all this our connections to our characters were a lot stronger than most games and that's why we still had a rather vocal and loyal following right up to the day the announcement was made.

The casual observer saw a superhero game.  I think we saw it as the means to express ourselves in visual and story.  The problem however is that with the swing to true F2P, uniqueness and personal identity is a cash shop option.  You can charge money for that (along with useful inventory space).  B2P (buy to play) like GW2 and TSW can allow a few more options for free.

[FatherXmas]

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/05/08/a-mild-mannered-reporter-nine-reasons-for-nine-years-of-city-of/

here is another article about the 9yrs of coh too that was posted today

Well I agree with a lot of it.

I would add to number 5 that it's closure could also be used as an example that innovation didn't work because if it was so good, why did it close.  "If players X, Y and Z on your team are so good then why did your team lose?"

[JaguarX]

Well I agree with a lot of it.

I would add to number; 5 that it's closure could also be used as an example that innovation didn't work because if it was so good, why did it close.  "If players X, Y and Z on your team are so good then why did your team lose?"

*put on tin foil hat and sits on tin foil throne*

I wonder if ncsoft allowed these innovations to be tried hoping it would fail so they can say "see! We tried innovations and it didn't work. People want what they know!" But it worked, a notice that us usually reserved for fantasy games but here a super hero.mmo a genre that is supposedly not worth much effort making it work. Or maybe cox was merely a test mule for features they could see work and add to their staple flagships and if it didn't work it only would have been a "small" mmo sinking a super hero one at that.

*takes off tin foil hat and get off tin foil throne and use it to make swordfish steaks*

[Captain Electric]

The depth of my attachment to CoH simply can't be comprehended by someone who didn't spend damned near every hour of their gaming time for years at a time playing the same game and interacting with the same people.  They don't get the comfortable familiarity of logging in and seeing the same group of player names in global chat channels that they've been seeing for years.

I read those two sentences and instantly wanted to high-five you while simultaneously I wanted to sob into a beer.

When NCsoft is ashes, you have my permission to move on.

One of these days, I am going to give you a friggin ton of subscription or micro-transaction dollars.

[KSinclaire]

I suspect that at least some of these people crying "Enough already; move on!" are people who do not play very many MMOs.

I will "move on" when someone in the MMO industry "gets it right". Aside from the fine people at the former Paragon Studios; nobody else has.

CoH wasn't perfect, sure. Not by any stretch. But it hit many major points that even the company originally responsible for that - Cryptic - continues to miss in release after release.

[Manga]

I suspect that at least some of these people crying "Enough already; move on!" are people who do not play very many MMOs.

I'm of the same opinion.  But for clarity, so people understand what that means:

Let's say you really, really love, say, Call of Duty 3 - I use that as an example because looking at Wikipedia it was released in the same-ish era as CoH.  Let's say you really love it, and you haven't bought any of the newer games in the series.  Guess what most gamers will tell you?  That you're stuck in the past, and you should buy the latest Call of Duty: Black Ops II (released in 2012, ref Wikipedia) right away to avoid becoming a complete loser.

That's why there are lines for the latest Call of Duty releases at stores (yes, that's why I picked on that game - because it was known for its long release-day lines).  It's a combination of people who want the latest release, and people who are afraid of being called a loser for having last year's release 2 days too long.

They're trying to apply that to City of Heroes.  The problem with that is, there is no City of Heroes 2, or 3, or 4, there's only one.  It may be old, but there is NO REPLACEMENT.  There is no similar replacement either.  The only way you can stretch the definition of "replacement" is if you wrap all MMO's together as being equal - and if you do that, World of Warcraft players are the most stuck-in-the-past losers of all.