I have to ask....MMO's

[Fanatical Meat]

Any decent not F2P MMO's on the horizon that aren't WOW clones or complete easy mode games? I know EQ Next is different than WOW but it looks like it's going to be another easy mode, player can't possibly lose game.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

I don't actually know if it will be easy mode, but the combat definitely isn't going to be a true EQ successor.

That said, if it has a good economy focus and if it has things like player built cities, could be nice.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Yeah EQ Next could be real nice I just don't know and the probability of disappointment with MMO's is enormous.

 

[imaheadcase]

Camelot Unchained if 2015 is "on the horizon" enough.

 

[Skott]

They are all WoW like in some way however WoW borrowed from many earlier games as well so all MMOs are basically alike. Different themes maybe but most have some sort of leveling up and etc.,

Pick one that has a pvp server and your problem is solved. Servers where its nothing but a gankfest is as about as hard as they come.

 

[Kadarin]

EVE Online?

 

[MarkT800]

Unfortunately, gaming industry is moving towards casual gaming. Hardcore games are extremely rare nowadays =( The only interesting on-going MMOs are EQ Next and TES Online imho.
EVE online is pretty complex and hardcore, but the gameplay is just boring imho

 

[imaheadcase]

Unfortunately, gaming industry is moving towards casual gaming. Hardcore games are extremely rare nowadays =( The only interesting on-going MMOs are EQ Next and TES Online imho.
EVE online is pretty complex and hardcore, but the gameplay is just boring imho

That is why i mentioned CU. Its not care bear at all, its MMO PVP, they even started voxel based game play before EQ Next announced it. You can dig down and mine minerals, build house from scratch anyway you like, curved structures, etc. Its all based on trading in game to make weapons for combat.

Three realms fighting each other (ala Dark age of camelot), destructible environments, awesome classes so far. Still very much a work in progress, but they got some nice concept stuff already in place. His some very talented people working on it.

 

[TechAZ]

If you're looking for an older school MMO that is open world, no instancing, player housing/cities, and a crafter driven economy, then give The Repopulation a look.

It is an indie MMO coming out, but looks very good so far. Going into Beta soon. Since it's Indie, I can't say that it will turn out good....but so far all of the design decisions really have me intrigued. Graphics look good too, not what I expect when seeing Indie MMO.

 

[ThinClient]

There is no MMO that is both F2P and good.

F2P ruins games.

 

[akahoovy]

That is why i mentioned CU. Its not care bear at all, its MMO PVP, they even started voxel based game play before EQ Next announced it. You can dig down and mine minerals, build house from scratch anyway you like, curved structures, etc. Its all based on trading in game to make weapons for combat.

Three realms fighting each other (ala Dark age of camelot), destructible environments, awesome classes so far. Still very much a work in progress, but they got some nice concept stuff already in place. His some very talented people working on it.

That's a lot to deliver, but sounds absolutely awesome. I have high hopes for that one now.

 

[pathos]

There is no MMO that is both F2P and good.

F2P ruins games.

I have 2 ftp games that I like. I don't think ftp ruins games, as a concept.

It's just the implementation that usually needs work

Of course, what I find acceptable, and what other people find acceptable, don't always connect.

 

[smackababy]

I have 2 ftp games that I like. I don't think ftp ruins games, as a concept.

It's just the implementation that usually needs work

Of course, what I find acceptable, and what other people find acceptable, don't always connect.

f2p by a company that can't afford to give it away without microtransactions (Valve for example) is the only way f2p is done correctly. Otherwise, it is awful. And that is 99% of f2p games. Even the most popular ones are done so poorly (LoL for example). It is all pay2win.

 

[ImpulsE69]

f2p by a company that can't afford to give it away without microtransactions (Valve for example) is the only way f2p is done correctly. Otherwise, it is awful. And that is 99% of f2p games. Even the most popular ones are done so poorly (LoL for example). It is all pay2win.

What is poor about LoL? There is nothing P2Win about it. If you don't like the game itself that's one thing, but there is nothing wrong with the way they do their pay scheme. I've never dropped a dime on the game and I've been playing for over 2 years. (Granted this is not an MMO at all).

Eve Online is as hardcore and deep as it gets.That is what makes it NOT boring. Your pulse will race...all the time once you get out into null sec. However, this game is not f2p.

 

[smackababy]

What is poor about LoL? There is nothing P2Win about it. If you don't like the game itself that's one thing, but there is nothing wrong with the way they do their pay scheme. I've never dropped a dime on the game and I've been playing for over 2 years. (Granted this is not an MMO at all).

Unless they've changed it, you don't get access to every hero unless you buy them. Some heroes are better than others, as with all Dota clones, and not having equal access gives players who have money (or lots of time invested) an advantage. That is pay to win, but in a slightly less win way.

Dota 2 did this a lot better and only charges money for cosmetic items. You get the entire game, with every hero, for free.

 

[OSULugan]

There is no MMO that is both F2P and good.

F2P ruins games.

Great, I think that is why the OP asked for any decent not F2P games...

 

[Skott]

The hardcore games are fine if you like them. However they suffer from a smaller population of players. Most Devs want to lure in the other types of players and to do that they have to make the game not so hard core. To find a Dev who puts quality over quantity is getting harder to find. Today its the casual gamers who rule. They are a much larger group and have more money to fill the Dev's coffers. I think this is where the indie Devs can help though. They are not tainted by the big publishing companies yet. They tend to focus more on the quality of the game itself instead of trying to please every single player out there. They suffer from lack of resources though. The good news is that companies like Kickstarter offers them a way to get their projects funded however so that's a plus in their favor.

 

[Warsam71]

Guild Wars 2 is a good one, came out last year and has had some good reviews. Is not F2P.

If you want to try something different, I suggest World of Warplanes (by Wargaming.net, the same folks that developed and published World of Tank). It is F2P with micro-transactions...

 

[magomago]

Unless they've changed it, you don't get access to every hero unless you buy them. Some heroes are better than others, as with all Dota clones, and not having equal access gives players who have money (or lots of time invested) an advantage. That is pay to win, but in a slightly less win way.

Dota 2 did this a lot better and only charges money for cosmetic items. You get the entire game, with every hero, for free.

Totally disagree - the offerings were* generally balanced, and, as true in any MOBA, knowing how to play the basics of a character and having basic map awareness far outweighs character matchups. I'd argue the minimum player skill may actually be higher because you are forced to expirament and try other characters.

Despite being able to select anyone, the actual varibility in players played in DOTA2 is not high, and dotabuff easily reveals that.


*I played LOL for probably a few months, and then switched to DOTA2 once I got an invite because its so much more punishing at falling behind early. Haven't touched LOL since.