Forums Kongregate

MMOs Are Ruining Kongregate... page 4

494 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by bobby71983:

the energy system only really works in a multiplayer game as a way to prevent a single player from zooming ahead unless they spend. there would be almost no incentive for a dev to do this in a single player game. people do it in multiplayer games so they can feel powerful over others. without the multiplayer aspect, this wouldnt happen.

The incentive for a developer is to make money, so there definitely is an incentive for devs to add energy systems in single player games. That’s why there are single player games already being made with energy systems in place, although most of them aren’t on Kong (yet).

Plus, many of the “MMOs” on Kong are really really stretching the definiotn of multiplayer. I don;t know what the expansions added to Dream World, but last time I played it it was a single player game with a highscore table ingame.

Originally posted by racefan12:

As bobby mentioned, restrictions in MMOs are in place for competitive balance purposes, not for revenue purposes (I would actually like it better if all options to spend money were removed, but that’s a different story).

If they were for balance then why would they be removed for paying players – unless selling an advantage is more important to the developer than balancing the game?

Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

Where, oh where did people start beleiving this? I think this ridiculously incorrect statement is the single most-used justification I’ve seen. Firstly: A game doesn’t cost anything to develop, unless you’re outsourcing half your work to China or Korea. Secondly, server costs are barely visible. Unless you’ve just got a badly designed game; your server costs should be tiny. If you’re running it yourself, it would only be the cost of the server hardware; and whatever minimal fraction of your power bill you feel like attributing to it. The main reason these MMOs rent servers is because they can host the game from a country with no copyright laws or enforcement.

Games cost a ton of money to develop. Indies manage it by delaying their costs (by offering revenue share instead of upfront payments), but I doubt many MMOs have ever been built that way.

A game running on even one server will be costing a few hundred dollars a month to maintain. A reasonably popular one that’s running on four clustered machines is unlikely to be hosted below $1k a month. You can’t buy your own machine and run it off your home internet connection, no ISP will allow that and you wouldn’t have anywhere near enough outgoing bandwidth for it anyway.

 
Flag Post

The usual arguments have already been said, so I’ll bring up a different point.

I think Kongregate is doing a disservice by promoting pay2win MMOs and not a competitive pay genre like an app store with full-featured games (not just freemium games). I wouldn’t mind seeing an influx of games like VVVVVV (without the demo promo), and those are where my money would go.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Dever:

The usual arguments have already been said, so I’ll bring up a different point.

I think Kongregate is doing a disservice by promoting pay2win MMOs and not a competitive pay genre like an app store with full-featured games (not just freemium games). I wouldn’t mind seeing an influx of games like VVVVVV (without the demo promo), and those are where my money would go.

kong doesnt make the games, other people do.

there arent very many non-mmos with kred options on here.

 
Flag Post

Yeah, that’s the point. Kongregate doesn’t have a system that promotes a digital distribution service for full-featured pay games. If that system is made more friendly, then devs that make those games would be attracted here.

 
Flag Post

the energy system only really works in a multiplayer game as a way to prevent a single player from zooming ahead unless they spend.

As bobby mentioned, restrictions in MMOs are in place for competitive balance purposes, not for revenue purposes

I bolded the important part.

The sole reason an energy system exists is to stop those who don’t spend from reaching the same strength as those who do spend. In short, promotion of spending money. Perhaps your implication of the secondary goal being annoying players into buying energy refills is right, though. “Competitive balance purposes” is a shitty non-reason, even without the spending part.

If you don’t like games that never end

Making a game crappier doesn’t automatically make it a “game that never ends”. In fact, you could finish the majority of the content in most MMOs, and only have the so-called multiplayer aspect remain.

Any way, yeah, I’m biased against MMOs. I don’t think they ruin Kongregate per se, but I’m very disappointed in the manipulation of dumb masses being a viable tactic and making it so that the worst “games” become the most profitable.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:
Firstly: A game doesn’t cost anything to develop, unless you’re outsourcing half your work to China or Korea. Secondly, server costs are barely visible. Unless you’ve just got a badly designed game; your server costs should be tiny.

Not sure where you get your info but in my experience that’s not true. Most non-hobbyists I know would laugh at those statements.

 
Flag Post

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

Time spent writing code that could have been spent being paid to do stuff.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Bilious:
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

Time spent writing code that could have been spent being paid to do stuff.

that is opportunity cost, not money spent.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

The softwares usually costs a lot of money, and for multiplayer games like these MMOs you need to rent servers to keep the players on. And that cost money too.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:
maintaining and making mmo’s requires far more effort and money than any other genre of game.

Where, oh where did people start beleiving this? I think this ridiculously incorrect statement is the single most-used justification I’ve seen. Firstly: A game doesn’t cost anything to develop, unless you’re outsourcing half your work to China or Korea. Secondly, server costs are barely visible. Unless you’ve just got a badly designed game; your server costs should be tiny. If you’re running it yourself, it would only be the cost of the server hardware; and whatever minimal fraction of your power bill you feel like attributing to it. The main reason these MMOs rent servers is because they can host the game from a country with no copyright laws or enforcement.

As far as Darkruler’s “Mardek ‘MMO’” example: Look at Epic War Saga. The game is now even more of a pile of crap than ever before; and is running an energy system… And all the best stuff is cash-buy.

for most single player games. once you upload them then you are done. barring some unforeseen bug that needs to be fixed, you usually never update the game again. further improvements tend to come in the form of a sequel.

multiplayer games require constant attention or you are gonna lose your player base. very few people want to play a multiplayer game that never gets updated.

multiplayer games require more time and effort to be successful than single player games in both development time AND upkeep. this is a factual statement and you cant debate it. you can debate whether the games are good or not, or whether the games are “bad for gaming” or any of that kinda stuff, but you cant debate the effort that goes into it. an MMO that is not maintained will fail. a single player game can be successful for years without a single update.

also, darks mardek example was something ridiculous and extreme and i agreed with it. a game like that would most likely fail.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

the energy system only really works in a multiplayer game as a way to prevent a single player from zooming ahead unless they spend.

As bobby mentioned, restrictions in MMOs are in place for competitive balance purposes, not for revenue purposes

I bolded the important part.

The sole reason an energy system exists is to stop those who don’t spend from reaching the same strength as those who do spend. In short, promotion of spending money. Perhaps your implication of the secondary goal being annoying players into buying energy refills is right, though. “Competitive balance purposes” is a shitty non-reason, even without the spending part.

If you don’t like games that never end

Making a game crappier doesn’t automatically make it a “game that never ends”. In fact, you could finish the majority of the content in most MMOs, and only have the so-called multiplayer aspect remain.

Any way, yeah, I’m biased against MMOs. I don’t think they ruin Kongregate per se, but I’m very disappointed in the manipulation of dumb masses being a viable tactic and making it so that the worst “games” become the most profitable.

When I read this, one game came to mind: Dragons of Atlantis.

The problem with these types of MMOs is not that they are bad for Kongregate, just bad for gaming in general. They are one of the few game types out there where 2 unbelievable things happen: 1) Unlike most games, you can literally pay your way to victory. 2) Developers realize this and simply cater to payers, despite labeling themselves as free-to-play. What’s worse is once the developers realized they have milked as much money as possible, they have another game ready with the same copypasta format as the other, the old game gets ignored (or worse, dumped) and then the cycle continues.

It’s sickening to say the least. I wish I could make a game that has similar gameplay (armies attacking each other) but is made with the gamer in mind, not my wallet. Unfortunately, I have neither the time (working on large project atm) nor the money (ugh server costs) to pull it off at the moment.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by bobby71983:

for most single player games. once you upload them then you are done. barring some unforeseen bug that needs to be fixed, you usually never update the game again. further improvements tend to come in the form of a sequel.

There’s no rule saying single-player games can’t be constantly updated, and multiplayer games have to be constantly updated. Take Anti-Idle: The Game for example. Also, patches and expansions have been around forever for both types, and DLC is common now.

multiplayer games require constant attention or you are gonna lose your player base. very few people want to play a multiplayer game that never gets updated.

Yes, many multiplayer games will die without constant updates, but the same goes for single-player games. Their lifetimes will likely be short without updates. Think about the average lifetime of a single-player game and compare that to an MMO’s.

multiplayer games require more time and effort to be successful than single player games in both development time AND upkeep. this is a factual statement and you cant debate it. you can debate whether the games are good or not, or whether the games are “bad for gaming” or any of that kinda stuff, but you cant debate the effort that goes into it. an MMO that is not maintained will fail.

I somewhat agree with development time but not with upkeep. Servers will cost money, except for strictly peer-to-peer multiplayer games. MMOs can last for several months and even a year without an expansion.

a single player game can be successful for years without a single update.

A single-player game can also die quickly without a single update. Multiplayer games can also last years without an update.

You also have to define successful when comparing the two, because I doubt they bring in the same amount of money or are played the same number of times if those are what you’re going by.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Bilious:
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

Time spent writing code that could have been spent being paid to do stuff.

Where did you get this idea? It’s servers, and software.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by DragonArcherZ:
Originally posted by Bilious:
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

Time spent writing code that could have been spent being paid to do stuff.

Where did you get this idea? It’s servers, and software.

the majority of expenses are actual working hours. this is true for all well made games.

 
Flag Post

No one should be paid wages to make flash games.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

No one should be paid wages to make flash games.

wrong.

it doesnt matter what language the game is in. flash games have an inherit disadvantage to other more sophisticated languages, but there are plenty of flash games that are better than pay to play games. just because someone slaps a price sticker on a game doesnt mean its actually worth anything in the eyes of a responsible consumer.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by bobby71983:
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

No one should be paid wages to make flash games.

wrong.

it doesnt matter what language the game is in. flash games have an inherit disadvantage to other more sophisticated languages, but there are plenty of flash games that are better than pay to play games. just because someone slaps a price sticker on a game doesnt mean its actually worth anything in the eyes of a responsible consumer.

so what you’re saying is that mmo’s suck? that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MrWiggles49:
Originally posted by bobby71983:
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

No one should be paid wages to make flash games.

wrong.

it doesnt matter what language the game is in. flash games have an inherit disadvantage to other more sophisticated languages, but there are plenty of flash games that are better than pay to play games. just because someone slaps a price sticker on a game doesnt mean its actually worth anything in the eyes of a responsible consumer.

so what you’re saying is that mmo’s suck? that’s what we’ve been saying all along.

pay to play games are games that you have to actually pay for. all console games and most of steam are examples.

everything on kong is free.

 
Flag Post

“Never have to pay for” does not automatically exclude “Cannot reasonably play without paying” or “Cannot fully access without paying”.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by bobby71983:
Originally posted by DragonArcherZ:
Originally posted by Bilious:
Originally posted by aturtledoesbite:

Would someone please explain why it costs money to make a game? Do you have to pay a dollar every time you write a line of code? Where are these “development fees” coming from?

Time spent writing code that could have been spent being paid to do stuff.

Where did you get this idea? It’s servers, and software.

the majority of expenses are actual working hours. this is true for all well made games.

Yup, programming a very complicated game, is well, very complicated. There’s also the money that has to be paid to artists/musicians to make the music/art.

Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

No one should be paid wages to make flash games.

And that makes sense how?

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

“Never have to pay for” does not automatically exclude “Cannot reasonably play without paying” or “Cannot fully access without paying”.

all games on kong can be reasonably played as a free player.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by bobby71983:
Originally posted by Captain_Catface:

“Never have to pay for” does not automatically exclude “Cannot reasonably play without paying” or “Cannot fully access without paying”.

all games on kong can be reasonably played as a free player.

Pretty much agreed on that part. I think what CC means to say is that you can;t stay competitive if you don’t pay, which is pretty much true. Prime example: Tyrant.

 
Flag Post

I think being competitive counts as part of reasonable gameplay; considering in most of these MMOs, it makes up the majority of the content.