Check out the patch notes for the v17 Precursor Update here: http://maplestory2.nexon.net/en/news/article/53778/precursor-update-v17
- Last Active
you think that the game are dying ? ... Dragon Nest europe juste closed their doors and stoped the game ... what do you think about the futur of MS2?
personally, i think if they delete the dugeon limitation , alot of people will come back to the game
https://steamcharts.com/app/560380 shows the current trend of the player population. The concurrent player count shows a negative percentage gain every month. The limitations reset on Thursday afternoon/evening PDT/ET. During the week, the player count dips by approximately 20% - 30% until the limitations get reset.
Given this, with no significant changes to the content and gameplay, if the limitations were to be removed we can only expect the player count to not decrease during the week (with perhaps a small increment in the overall concurrent player count). The declining trend would still remain the same and it's only because of the constant addition of small updates and events that the decline isn't going faster. Without a significant overhaul to the overall structure of this game, I do not expect it to last long.
Designing a game that requires players to actually think and strategize paves way for dynamic, non-repetitive gameplay and encourages player cooperation.
By non-repetition in this context, I mean that, although the content is the same, the dynamics are random and the content is designed in such a way that players need to think and strategize. If content were designed so that one is required to memorize a few attack patterns, simply attacking and dodging hits would be the main focus. Not only is this repetitive, there is no sophistication in this.
If you define player cooperation as a few players entering a room and attacking a boss, sure you will be technically correct. However, because the main focus is to dodge attacks (by memorizing attack patterns) and continue attacking, players will simply behave in an individualistic manner. Where is the tank that takes the hits for the party? Where is the cleric/priest that supports the tank from behind? Where is the mage whose role is to stay far away while dealing damage and casting debuffs? How do you achieve this if the objective is to just attack and dodge attacks (usually OHKO attacks by memorizing sequences)?
Fully agree, but let's be serious here, anyone experienced with MMOs knows that questing isn't what keeps MOST modern MMOS's healthy as far as it's player base. The idea of having to slow grind to max level is archaic and doesn't work for the simple fact *more people have begun to realize most of the fun content always seems to start at max level. Also seeing as many MMOs have been in development for multiple years, it means that the content and gear benchmarks have drastically increased. There is a reason why almost every relevant MMO to date has adopted max level boosting potions as an option, especially in the west, as our market needs are very different from the asian community. The biggest things that a player base healthy is the overall gear progression structure,combat,character customization, lightly sprinkled RNG and PvP.
That's because the most popular games are designed that way. If you have a game like WoW that pushes you to max level fairly quickly so that players can enjoy an "endgame" element (aka raiding), and MMO creators see that WoW is successful, you will see many copycat games that adopt this structure; indeed this is a theme of many modern MMOs. This structure has many problems, and, on top of that, the MMO genre is declining in popularity.
This sounds a lot like games I loved playing when I was first introduced to MMO's quite some time ago. (1) Correct me if I'm wrong, but it feels like your suggestions are heavily nostalgia-fueled. To be clear: There is nothing wrong with that, but it is a bit short-sighted.
In general, (2) consumers have changed drastically over the past decade (duh), and the most significant and relevant change is related to how much time we're willing to spend on consumption. (3) No matter your personal stance on the matter; consumers want instant satisfaction (read; ASAP). This is mainly because everything we deal with daily is evolving to the point where you are almost instantly rewarded for your effort, and the effort required is decreasing significantly.
(4) With that in mind, most of your suggestions would not be appreciated by a hefty chunk of the player base.
(1) Sure I'll correct you by first stating bluntly that you are obviously wrong. My suggestions have nothing to do with "nostalgia"; it has to do with the complexity and dynamics of a game. To put it short, a simple, one dimensional game is boring. A game with a layer of sophistication, multitude of variables, and rich set of dynamics is much more interesting. Furthermore, where did you even get the impression that my suggestions are nostalgia-based? What suggestions lead you to think this?
(2) Here you make an unsupported assumption that has been overused in this forum and other forums, and one that is almost never substantiated. Let me guess, you assume people grow older, lead busier lives, and don't have much time for games right? Well, let me ask you this one: did you ever consider the idea that there's a flow in (consisting primarily of a younger audience) counteracting a flow out (consisting primarily of an older audience) and that it isn't as simple as stating "players are growing older"? Moreover, did you ever consider what the actual target audience is? People who have little time to spare tend to gravitate towards more casual games like mobile games, while people who are more hardcore tend to seek out PC games and MMOs. Your argument also implies that people either no longer want to invest much time into gaming in general, or people aren't willing to invest small incremental amounts to an MMO compared to small micro "instant satisfactions" that amount to the same total time. Both have little merit in the context of MMOs. For the former, an MMO is a horrible idea considering the time, resources, and investment into developing an MMO simply to have players come and go after a short time frame. For the latter, those types of players usually play casual mobile games not deliberately seeking out MMOs. Amount of time invested also clearly doesn't matter for the latter case. Furthermore, game dynamics and style of play have a very prominent role in attracting and retaining players which further dispels the notion that most players, particularly MMO players, seek "instant gratification". Look at OSRS for example; it's hardly an "instant gratification" game.
(3) If by "instant satisfaction" you refer to a very simplistic, watered down game then your assumption apparently is that MMO players now prefer very simple games with little to no depth. This is another point that is overused, and is linked to (2), and is touted by someone who has probably played a few MMOs and feels like they can speak for the rest of the MMO and gaming community, or simply tries to adopt an authoritative tone in an effort to appear credible. There is little justification for the "instant satisfaction" argument because it relies too much on what the perceived mindset or goals of the players are. If these people are willing to game for, say, 2-3 hours a day, then clearly time invested doesn't matter. If amount of time invested doesn't matter, where does the notion that players want a few quick moments of "instant satisfaction" over small incremental time investment leading to a huge milestone achievement come from? If time invested does matter, i.e. players are putting on average less time into games, why make MMOs? Furthermore, your argument doesn't define what "instant satisfaction" is. "Instant satisfaction" in what context, and for whom? Does "instant satisfaction" mean killing a dungeon boss in a few minutes? Or getting to +15 Leg in two months? Or holding down a skill key and wait a few seconds for surrounding mobs to die? What if this isn't "satisfaction" to some people at all, but rather a bland game lacking in any form of creativity? How would we determine the percentage of people who proclaim "wow I held down a skill key and everything died... so cool!!!" versus those who find this style boring and lacking in depth? What if "instant satisfaction" for the latter is the process of getting a thrill from a set of dynamics that require a certain level of thought, decision making and cooperation? Your argument here clearly fails because it assumes that there is one very specific idea of "instant satisfaction" that happens to be what everyone wants.
(4) I mean the vast majority of the playerbase left within the first 3 months so I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.
Do you realize there are a lot of things wrong with what you suggested? Let's analyze your ideas.
There is no need to rewamp the skills as it is now.
You should also realize that removing stats and skill reset will outrage peoples. The max for one stat is 100 attributes points, and skill points can be changed and allow for more builds with the free reset that we have.
No need for attack and defense types.
Also no need to remove pets and gem system. Enhancement system is fine as it is. Why not use Peachy? Why not read my excellent guide?
If there was no Gear Score, the game would be insanely easy. So, it is fine as it is.
No need for the last four ideas of the equipment.
No need for dungeon removal or for main quest EXP reduction.
Scaling would require too much work. Size of all maps is fine as it is. Also, fast travel shouldn't be removed, it would be really frustrating.
Life skill can be improved, but there is no need for an complete rewamp.
In all of all of this, it sounds like hypocrisy for you to suggest them.
I give your "analysis" an F.
It has almost no intellectual substance whatsoever.