What does World of Warcraft do better than Cox?

[EggKookoo]

One of my biggest fears for the future of the MCU is that Disney kicks Feige upstairs. Iger is stepping down in 2022 (I think?).

[Abraxus]

One of my biggest fears for the future of the MCU is that Disney kicks Feige upstairs. Iger is stepping down in 2022 (I think?).

 

Agreed!  8)

[Charistoph]

Oh, it's much more than that.  Big Corps provide the basic funds the banks use to create loans.  No big corps, no money bags to get loans from, no loans for start ups to work with.

That's not actually true.

 

Once upon a time, it was actually all the little people saving their nickels and dimes that gave most banks the majority of the assets they could issue loans against.

 

But nowadays, there's this little thing called quantitative easing.  Banks no longer have to have assets in 1:1 ratio to the loans they give out - they are allowed to, in essence, create money out of thin air.

 

And that's why savings accounts pay sh_t interest nowadays.  It used to be, the bank would offer 2% , 3%, sometimes even 4% for a passbook savings account, with maybe fifty dollars in it.  Because they needed hundreds of thousands of people to save a few hundred apiece, so that they could loan Moneybacgs McCEO two million for his latest capital venture.

 

They don't need the small depositors anymore.  So they stopped offering those interest rates as enticements to deposit your savings with THEM instead of the bank down the block.

 

You should probably review what Quantitative Easing is.

 

Even then 1:1 ratio can be exploited rather significantly.  Either way, the Big Corps have the Big Cash, and it isn't stored under mattresses.  With everything going to digital transactions, banks need less incentive for people to store their money with them.

 

One of my biggest fears for the future of the MCU is that Disney kicks Feige upstairs. Iger is stepping down in 2022 (I think?).

 

Best example of mismanagement is Star Wars.  Don't always expect the big chairs to know what is best and who to have in charge of a project.

[Abraxus]

Best example of mismanagement is Star Wars.  Don't always expect the big chairs to know what is best and who to have in charge of a project.

 

That's assuming, of course, that everyone is in agreement that the latest chapters in the saga are just universally bad.  There are some of us who enjoy them, while also acknowledging that they are not quite the same as the Star Wars I grew up with.  Doesn't make them inherently bad, just different.  :)

[Ozryk]

I'm going to modify 'better' to different, because I think that many of the differences offered by both titles are more in the line of trade-offs than raw improvement. Here's what WoW does which really distinguishes itself from CoH:

 

1) Curated encounters. Their raid and dungeon content, especially in later material, is much more unique, with lots of special mechanics which shake up the usual pummel-party that the regular gameplay offers. But before we run away with that, sprinkling in lots of weird mechanics presents problems as well. Basically, the regular game teaches players a very simple, not-too-challenging set of mechanics, then dunks players headfirst into an overcomplicated square-dance where one false decision will wipe your entire 25 man raid. Surely it would be better to focus on making the core mechanics dynamic and engaging enough to keep everyone interested, instead of turning every boss battle into a research project.

2) Art direction. City of Heroes had great graphics for its time, and a wide variety of choices, but lots of them are, to put it bluntly, bland and/or ugly. WoW has a more consciously designed aesthetic, and while it might not be to everyone's taste, it's definitely more coherent, and much more interesting to look at. Later CoH content compares quite well, however, and stuff from Praetoria and the Rogue Isles looks pretty solid, but then again, I don't think I've ever seen as pretty or amazing as stuff I've seen in Ulduar or The Nighthold in WoW.

3) Feature Creep. Mounts. Toys. Pet Battles. Jousting. Darkmoon Faire. The game is positively brimming with little minigames and stuff that they've added over the years. This stuff is interesting, but I question whether the game is actually better for it. That said, I would not say no to a City of Heroes vehicle system, so that you're not reduced to taking the bus everywhere.

4) A more continguous world. There are very few hard zone boundaries in WoW. You can fly across the entire continent. In some ways this is good as it grounds you in the sense that Azeroth and such is a real place. On the other hand it's kind of bad, because the idea that you can traverse an entire continent in 60 minutes can have the effect of making the world seem dinky. On balance, I think I prefer CoH's choice of portraying a huge city, but I can't argue that Azeroth feels more seamless.

5) PVP. This is one where I think WoW does solidly outperforms City of Heroes. While I don't think any MMO PVP is much to get excited about, since these are functionally turn-based games where a die-roll determines winners and losers, I still have to admit that Blizzard executed on delivering a more dynamic, engaging PVP experience. Battlegrounds and Arenas are still governed more by itemization and matchups than player skill, but there's still some counter-play and quick decisionmaking shaking things up in WoW.

[Xaeon]

Superheroes, niche?  Box office numbers both domestic, and worldwide for the superhero movies would suggest otherwise.

 

As compared to sword & sorcery fantasy, yes.

Endgame alone made more money than the entire lord of the rings trilogy combined and the box office for any fantasy series besides that drops incredibly sharply; while the Superhero genre dominates the box office with billion dollar hit after billion dollar hit. The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

There hasn't been a swords and sorcery fantasy film anyone's really given a damn about since the third Hobbit movie while Marvel continues to be the unchallengeable God of the box office that none have come even remotely close to unseating.

 

I'd say swords and sorcery fantasy is the niche nerd thing that has traditionally struggled with transitioning out of its home genre of tabletop and video games (swords and sorcery fantasy owes far more of a thematic debt to Conan the Barbarian and Vance's books which Gary Gygax cited as his primary influence when he made D&D in the 70s; than it really does to Tolkien. Tolkien's influence is rather literally skin deep aesthetics) while Marvel is so successful they can market absolute nobodies like the Guardians of the Galaxy and Antman and still make a megahit that the fantasy genre as a whole could only dream of.

 

If it were about name recognition; the Warcraft Movie would have outdone Guardians of the Galaxy at the box office. That was rather demonstrably not the case.

[Hyperstrike]

I promise I'm not just following you around Hyperstrike...guess we are just interested in the same stuff (although from different view points).

 

I have no problem with you having your own opinion.

 

Everybody's gotta be wrong at some point.

 

And maybe, some day, it'll even be MY turn!

 

;)

 

Seriously though.  As long as everyone stays moderately civil, I have no problem with the conversation, and we can always agree to disagree.

 

I don't think people who don't see things the way I do are inherently evil.  (Well, not much...)  =)

[EggKookoo]

The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

Almost all of the "superhero mania" in mainstream culture is really just driven by the MCU stuff. If that falters, expect superheroes to largely disappear. It's not like superheroes movies didn't exist until Iron Man. They did, quite a bit, and remained niche. What's not niche is MCU, but don't expect it to bleed over to superheroes as a genre.

[justicebeliever]

I promise I'm not just following you around Hyperstrike...guess we are just interested in the same stuff (although from different view points).

 

I have no problem with you having your own opinion.

 

Everybody's gotta be wrong at some point.

 

And maybe, some day, it'll even be MY turn!

 

;)

 

Seriously though.  As long as everyone stays moderately civil, I have no problem with the conversation, and we can always agree to disagree.

 

I don't think people who don't see things the way I do are inherently evil.  (Well, not much...)  =)

 

I was just being silly...but seriously I do agree with this post 100%.  +1 inf

[justicebeliever]

The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

Almost all of the "superhero mania" in mainstream culture is really just driven by the MCU stuff. If that falters, expect superheroes to largely disappear. It's not like superheroes movies didn't exist until Iron Man. They did, quite a bit, and remained niche. What's not niche is MCU, but don't expect it to bleed over to superheroes as a genre.

 

But it has - what about the CW’s Arrowverse (6 shows this year).  Way better than their movie counterparts.  Shazam, WW, and Aquaman did great at the box office.  Sure Marvel was the genesis, but what they proved is something almost no studio was willing to try - you can take a b-level or even c-level property and write a good story with good characterizations and you can make money.  Aqua man did 3X Warcraft’s box office

[EggKookoo]

But it has - what about the CW’s Arrowverse (6 shows this year).  Way better than their movie counterparts.  Shazam, WW, and Aquaman did great at the box office.  Sure Marvel was the genesis, but what they proved is something almost no studio was willing to try - you can take a b-level or even c-level property and write a good story with good characterizations and you can make money.  Aqua man did 3X Warcraft’s box office

 

In the context of my original statement, I mean in the gaming world, and in comparison to "standard" fantasy. Not that superheroes are not popular and not that the game/superhero market is saturated. It's just a more predictable bang for buck to make a game with elves and orcs and dwarves (or SF, that's even better).

 

Outside of games, don't let the MCU fool you. It's propping up the entire movie/tv-superhero tent.

[Hyperstrike]

Outside of games, don't let the MCU fool you. It's propping up the entire movie/tv-superhero tent.

 

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

S'TREWTH!

[Seroster01]

Best example of mismanagement is Star Wars.  Don't always expect the big chairs to know what is best and who to have in charge of a project.

 

That's assuming, of course, that everyone is in agreement that the latest chapters in the saga are just universally bad.  There are some of us who enjoy them, while also acknowledging that they are not quite the same as the Star Wars I grew up with.  Doesn't make them inherently bad, just different.  :)

 

I would second this for the most part.  If nothing else, I've enjoyed the first 2 of the new ones more than I remember liking the first 2 of the Prequel Trilogy, though it's kind of a wash.  Phantom Menace was just... bad. Attack of the clones I barely remember.  I did rather like Revenge of the Sith, so that was a positive.

 

In the Sequel Trilogy the first movie was similar to Attack of the Clones for me, imminently forgettable. In what is probably a super unpopular opinion, I rather liked the second movie.

TBH, I liked it about as well as any Star Wars I've seen.  It was basically a movie about imperfect mentors/parental figures who had experienced colossal failure & then having them try to change & be better. Eventually Luke accepts his failures & resolves to press on in spite of them, and he gets a nice little conclusion to his arc.  Now, ole Ben Swolo is a character I really dislike in large part because his arc has been pretty aweful, since it feels (like many things from the 1st to the 2nd movie) they decided to abandon the arc they originally intended for him & as such his actions in the 2nd film feel disjointed &... silly.  It also feels like they really bungled the arc for the super-secret Leaderguy, at least for now...  But there's at least 1 more movie & that could let them end on a strong note.  I'm not burying my opinion on this set of movies just yet.

 

Anyway, there's a lot of poorly thought out plot points & bad acting throughout the whole series. At the very least Hayden Christiansen was worse in the Prequels IMO than anything in the Sequel Trilogy to date. Honestly compared to the Prequels I'm not sure why the Sequel Trilogy gets so much crap.

 

Of course, this is all opinion.  8)

[Charistoph]

Best example of mismanagement is Star Wars.  Don't always expect the big chairs to know what is best and who to have in charge of a project.

 

That's assuming, of course, that everyone is in agreement that the latest chapters in the saga are just universally bad.  There are some of us who enjoy them, while also acknowledging that they are not quite the same as the Star Wars I grew up with.  Doesn't make them inherently bad, just different.  :)

 

I would second this for the most part.  If nothing else, I've enjoyed the first 2 of the new ones more than I remember liking the first 2 of the Prequel Trilogy, though it's kind of a wash.  Phantom Menace was just... bad. Attack of the clones I barely remember.  I did rather like Revenge of the Sith, so that was a positive.

 

In the Sequel Trilogy the first movie was similar to Attack of the Clones for me, imminently forgettable. In what is probably a super unpopular opinion, I rather liked the second movie.

TBH, I liked it about as well as any Star Wars I've seen.  It was basically a movie about imperfect mentors/parental figures who had experienced colossal failure & then having them try to change & be better. Eventually Luke accepts his failures & resolves to press on in spite of them, and he gets a nice little conclusion to his arc.  Now, ole Ben Swolo is a character I really dislike in large part because his arc has been pretty aweful, since it feels (like many things from the 1st to the 2nd movie) they decided to abandon the arc they originally intended for him & as such his actions in the 2nd film feel disjointed &... silly.  It also feels like they really bungled the arc for the super-secret Leaderguy, at least for now...  But there's at least 1 more movie & that could let them end on a strong note.  I'm not burying my opinion on this set of movies just yet.

 

Anyway, there's a lot of poorly thought out plot points & bad acting throughout the whole series. At the very least Hayden Christiansen was worse in the Prequels IMO than anything in the Sequel Trilogy to date. Honestly compared to the Prequels I'm not sure why the Sequel Trilogy gets so much crap.

 

Of course, this is all opinion.  8)

 

I won't disagree on the acting, but the basic plot points of the Last Jedi were so absolutely horrible that I found them to be untenable.  When you start getting in to the details of everything, it made it ten times worse.  There were so few things done right in that movie that I would have thought the Three Stooges were trying to right a dramatic war piece.  I could go off on a huge post of details, but there are other who have presented those views better than I can.

[Xaeon]

The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

Almost all of the "superhero mania" in mainstream culture is really just driven by the MCU stuff. If that falters, expect superheroes to largely disappear. It's not like superheroes movies didn't exist until Iron Man. They did, quite a bit, and remained niche. What's not niche is MCU, but don't expect it to bleed over to superheroes as a genre.

The DCEU has done rather well for itself after finding its stride at last and banishing away the influence of Snyder, and both Marvel and DC's television efforts have proven to be highly successful. Meanwhile swords and sorcery fantasy's last big attempt at the box office was the Hobbit Trilogy and the Warcraft movie; the former of which made money but sucked, the latter of which was only saved from box office failure by China.  My hero academia is also the current new hotness in Shonen Anime with a highly active and deeply involved fandom, and One Punch man was also a significant phenomenom in Anime circles; meanwhile most western fantasy influenced animes just come and go with little long term noteworthiness. The idea that it's just Marvel or that Fantasy is a more popular aesthetic outside of nerd spaces simply doesn't bear with reality.

 

Tabletop and Video Gaming (and non-visual literature) are Gygaxian Fantasy's primary redoubts and always have been.  But games traditionally move far fewer units than film (they make more money because unit prices are higher and because of microtransactions, but far more people watch a movie that grossed a billion than played a game that grossed a similar amount). More people watched Aquaman than have ever played world of warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons and Warhammer: Age of Sigmar; the two big tabletop fantasy games (for role playing and wargaming respectively) likely count playerbases in the hundreds of thousands to single digit millions at absolute best.

 

And even in video gaming: swords and sorcery faux-medieval european fantasy is...kind of middling in popularity at most? The current hottest games are by and large set in either modern (or faux-modern/fantastical modern) settings or have a vague sci-fi or outright space fantasy aesthetic. Aesthetics that allow for guns are like; the big thing in gaming and have been for years.

 

 

[RikOz]

On the other hand it's kind of bad, because the idea that you can traverse an entire continent in 60 minutes can have the effect of making the world seem dinky.

Somebody once decided to calculate the size of the Eastern Kingdoms by literally running on foot from Booty Bay to Silvermoon City, in the most direct route possible, estimating the character's running speed, and timing how long the trip took. His ultimate conclusion was that the continent of Eastern Kingdoms was about the size of ... Manhattan.

 

Of course, it was designed without flight in mind, and so they were able to use tricks of geography and terrain to make the whole thing seem much bigger than it actually is, as long as you're ground-bound. I was rather gobsmacked one day when I happened to be in that demon-infested canyon in Ashenvale (can't recall the name off the top of my head, but it's where you have to kill a couple big named demons) on a character capable of flight. I flew straight up out of there and realized I was like 200 yards away from Orgrimmar, as the crow flies. But when you're ground-bound, it feels like those two points are a long way apart.

[Seroster01]

The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

Almost all of the "superhero mania" in mainstream culture is really just driven by the MCU stuff. If that falters, expect superheroes to largely disappear. It's not like superheroes movies didn't exist until Iron Man. They did, quite a bit, and remained niche. What's not niche is MCU, but don't expect it to bleed over to superheroes as a genre.

The DCEU has done rather well for itself after finding its stride at last and banishing away the influence of Snyder, and both Marvel and DC's television efforts have proven to be highly successful. Meanwhile swords and sorcery fantasy's last big attempt at the box office was the Hobbit Trilogy and the Warcraft movie; the former of which made money but sucked, the latter of which was only saved from box office failure by China.  My hero academia is also the current new hotness in Shonen Anime with a highly active and deeply involved fandom, and One Punch man was also a significant phenomenom in Anime circles; meanwhile most western fantasy influenced animes just come and go with little long term noteworthiness. The idea that it's just Marvel or that Fantasy is a more popular aesthetic outside of nerd spaces simply doesn't bear with reality.

 

Tabletop and Video Gaming (and non-visual literature) are Gygaxian Fantasy's primary redoubts and always have been.  But games traditionally move far fewer units than film (they make more money because unit prices are higher and because of microtransactions, but far more people watch a movie that grossed a billion than played a game that grossed a similar amount). More people watched Aquaman than have ever played world of warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons and Warhammer: Age of Sigmar; the two big tabletop fantasy games (for role playing and wargaming respectively) likely count playerbases in the hundreds of thousands to single digit millions at absolute best.

 

And even in video gaming: swords and sorcery faux-medieval european fantasy is...kind of middling in popularity at most? The current hottest games are by and large set in either modern (or faux-modern/fantastical modern) settings or have a vague sci-fi or outright space fantasy aesthetic. Aesthetics that allow for guns are like; the big thing in gaming and have been for years.

 

I'm not going to disagree with any of your over-arching points, but the habits & interests of people who are likely to play MMOs is really what we're discussing here, not the "overall" popularity of Fantasy vs. Superheroes.  Whether Joe Blow on the street likes Superheroes & FPS games more than Fantasy games doesn't really matter if he's not willing to pony up $15 a month to be "allowed" to spend days worth of playing & planning time trying to eke out optimal performance on individual characters.  Joe Blow is not the target audience for MMOs, because Joe wants to drop into a game for 30 minutes at a time, shoot some dudes in the face & then quit playing after 2 months & move on to the Next Big Game.

 

MMOs are designed for Nerdy McNerdyson, who wants  to devote significant amounts of his time to making his character kick Infinite Ass.  Nerdy Mcnerdyson is almost always an RPG enthusiast, because RPGs & MMOs are designed & targeted at the same primary audience. Now, these days there's quite a bit of overlap between genres, but the overwhelming majority of mainstream & even indie games that are promoted as RPGs are either completely medieval fantasy or medieval fantasy + various levels of Steampunk.  It's certainly not exclusively so, but think of the following; have you ever seen a Superhero-themed RPG that wasn't an MMO?  Cause I can't think of a single one.  Maybe someone else can tell me one?

 

So yes, the issue of which genre is more popular & monetarily valuable would undoubtedly go to Superheroes. The problem with applying that to the discussion at hand is that the Venn Diagram of people who like Superheroes & the people who like to play MMOs seems to have much less overlap than the diagram of people who like medieval fantasy & like to play MMOs.

[Primantis]

The MCU is so ridiculously dominant in the box office it's even completely eclipsed Star Wars as a box office draw.

 

Almost all of the "superhero mania" in mainstream culture is really just driven by the MCU stuff. If that falters, expect superheroes to largely disappear. It's not like superheroes movies didn't exist until Iron Man. They did, quite a bit, and remained niche. What's not niche is MCU, but don't expect it to bleed over to superheroes as a genre.

The DCEU has done rather well for itself after finding its stride at last and banishing away the influence of Snyder, and both Marvel and DC's television efforts have proven to be highly successful. Meanwhile swords and sorcery fantasy's last big attempt at the box office was the Hobbit Trilogy and the Warcraft movie; the former of which made money but sucked, the latter of which was only saved from box office failure by China.  My hero academia is also the current new hotness in Shonen Anime with a highly active and deeply involved fandom, and One Punch man was also a significant phenomenom in Anime circles; meanwhile most western fantasy influenced animes just come and go with little long term noteworthiness. The idea that it's just Marvel or that Fantasy is a more popular aesthetic outside of nerd spaces simply doesn't bear with reality.

 

Tabletop and Video Gaming (and non-visual literature) are Gygaxian Fantasy's primary redoubts and always have been.  But games traditionally move far fewer units than film (they make more money because unit prices are higher and because of microtransactions, but far more people watch a movie that grossed a billion than played a game that grossed a similar amount). More people watched Aquaman than have ever played world of warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons and Warhammer: Age of Sigmar; the two big tabletop fantasy games (for role playing and wargaming respectively) likely count playerbases in the hundreds of thousands to single digit millions at absolute best.

 

And even in video gaming: swords and sorcery faux-medieval european fantasy is...kind of middling in popularity at most? The current hottest games are by and large set in either modern (or faux-modern/fantastical modern) settings or have a vague sci-fi or outright space fantasy aesthetic. Aesthetics that allow for guns are like; the big thing in gaming and have been for years.

 

 

I would also argue that a lot of Japanese media is very super heroish in nature. Without being a blatant "Super Hero" anime/manga etc.

 

Let's look at the Magical Girl genre. Usually known for super powered girls fighting either other super powered girls or cosmic terrors. They seldom want others to know they are magical girls so they dress up and try to conceal their identities. Have to put up with daily life at school etc and deal with other social complexities while they save the world.

 

Sounds like a lot of super hero stories to me.

 

Then you got things like Super Sentai/Power Rangers, Kamen Rider etc. Even Godzilla himself is more super hero than generic fantasy.

 

Even smash hits like Dragon Ball. While it started out a bit more fantasyesque, its full blown 'super hero antics' now.

 

I guess it really begs the question "What qualifies as a super hero story"

[Captain Powerhouse]

How can anyone bring up super hero manga and ignore the best?

 

[Xaeon]

How can anyone bring up super hero manga and ignore the best?

 

I specifically brought up One Punch Man and MHA/BNHA. :P

[EggKookoo]

So yes, the issue of which genre is more popular & monetarily valuable would undoubtedly go to Superheroes. The problem with applying that to the discussion at hand is that the Venn Diagram of people who like Superheroes & the people who like to play MMOs seems to have much less overlap than the diagram of people who like medieval fantasy & like to play MMOs.

 

Yes, this is what I was getting at. The topic of popularity was in the context of game markets, and in the broader sense of "what does WoW do better?" WoW tapped a larger game market.

 

Independently of this, I do think the current trend of superhero popularity is, well, not quite an illusion, but isn't quite as self-generated as it might seem. It's mostly the popularity of the MCU, and a lot of other studios and companies are along for the ride. And the MCU is mostly popular due to the creative efforts of people like Feige and the talents of people like RDJR. The movies are well-written/made and the actors are winners. It becomes a question of sustainability. Everything is temporary, and Marvel is no exception.

[Xaeon]

If we're playing that game, the faux-medieval european fantasy genre is dying in video games.

 

People hate Bethesda so much and have largely grown wise to how stagnant Bethesda is as a developer that they've turned TES VI into a scornful meme and TES VI is expected to finally break the trend of each TES game outselling the last by leaps and bounds, World of Warcraft has been withering for years and is down to only 1.6 million subscribers, dark souls is a concluded trilogy, CDPR is moving onto other things after the Witcher, and nobody is expecting good things out of Bioware for Dragon Age IV after so many disappointments in a row. The genre's not quite dead yet, but it's on life support and while Japanese fantasy series like the Legend of Zelda, Fire Emblem, and Final Fantasy are doing okay; the sword and sorcery RPG seems to have seen the sun set on it forever.

 

What is popular?

 

Stuff with guns, people love shooty shooty bang bang settings with dakka galore. Post-apocalyptia, scifi, technothrillers, space fantasy, modern fantasy etc; medieval fantasy is almost quaint and passe and the genre as a whole is often scornfully mocked as dated and goofy compared to the kinds of settings used in shooters. Even in the RPG genre; aesthetics that allowo for the usage of guns are increasingly crowding out swords and sorcery. CDPR is moving onto Cyberpunk, Bethesda's heavy into fallout and is moving into space with Starfield, Obsidian is going for the space western and so on so forth. 

 

I expect swords and sorcery fantasy to largely disappear from the triple A space in the 2020s and most future RPGs to move onto shooter rather than melee focused gameplay to follow the zeitgeist.

 

[EggKookoo]

What is popular?

 

Stuff with guns, people love shooty shooty bang bang settings with dakka galore. Post-apocalyptia, scifi, technothrillers, space fantasy, modern fantasy etc; medieval fantasy is almost quaint and passe and the genre as a whole is often scornfully mocked as dated and goofy compared to the kinds of settings used in shooters. Even in the RPG genre; aesthetics that allowo for the usage of guns are increasingly crowding out swords and sorcery. CDPR is moving onto Cyberpunk, Bethesda's heavy into fallout and is moving into space with Starfield, Obsidian is going for the space western and so on so forth.

 

Yup, I even said as much upthread. SF > fantasy > superheroes in the game space.

 

I expect swords and sorcery fantasy to largely disappear from the triple A space in the 2020s and most future RPGs to move onto shooter rather than melee focused gameplay to follow the zeitgeist.

 

That sounds about right.

[Seroster01]

If we're playing that game, the faux-medieval european fantasy genre is dying in video games.

 

People hate Bethesda so much and have largely grown wise to how stagnant Bethesda is as a developer that they've turned TES VI into a scornful meme and TES VI is expected to finally break the trend of each TES game outselling the last by leaps and bounds, World of Warcraft has been withering for years and is down to only 1.6 million subscribers, dark souls is a concluded trilogy, CDPR is moving onto other things after the Witcher, and nobody is expecting good things out of Bioware for Dragon Age IV after so many disappointments in a row. The genre's not quite dead yet, but it's on life support and while Japanese fantasy series like the Legend of Zelda, Fire Emblem, and Final Fantasy are doing okay; the sword and sorcery RPG seems to have seen the sun set on it forever.

 

What is popular?

 

Stuff with guns, people love shooty shooty bang bang settings with dakka galore. Post-apocalyptia, scifi, technothrillers, space fantasy, modern fantasy etc; medieval fantasy is almost quaint and passe and the genre as a whole is often scornfully mocked as dated and goofy compared to the kinds of settings used in shooters. Even in the RPG genre; aesthetics that allowo for the usage of guns are increasingly crowding out swords and sorcery. CDPR is moving onto Cyberpunk, Bethesda's heavy into fallout and is moving into space with Starfield, Obsidian is going for the space western and so on so forth. 

 

I expect swords and sorcery fantasy to largely disappear from the triple A space in the 2020s and most future RPGs to move onto shooter rather than melee focused gameplay to follow the zeitgeist.

 

I'll believe TES6 is a financial flop when I see it, and not before.  There's an exceptionally vocal portion of internet fandom that shits all over Bethesda constantly, & Fallout 76 was a terrible idea from the get-go, but they've released 99 million versions of Skyrim because people keep buying them.  Until TES6 crashes & burns you can color me skeptical that the majority of gamers care about most of the things that Bethesda keeps getting mocked for.

 

As to the death of the Fantasy genre, you may very well be right, & I'll really miss it.  But that doesn't really have much effect on what we're specifically discussing. For whatever reason, people who like MMOs like medieval fantasy. Maybe that will change in the long-term, perhaps it already would've if there were more interest in the MMO genre currently.  But TBQH, I think MMOs are going to go the way of the dodo much faster than Fantasy RPGs.  Still, even if things have changed or would change, at the time when WoW & CoX were competing MMOs & RPGs = fantasy settings, and to this day fantasy-based MMOs seem much more widespread & successful than any other genre of MMO.

 

Just like I said last time, the question isn't at all about what "most people" like, it's about what the people who like to play MMOs like, or more specifically what they liked from 2005-2012.  For whatever reason, that seems to be medieval fantasy. /shrug

[PaxArcana]

There's an exceptionally vocal portion of internet fandom that shits all over Bethesda constantly, [...]

Absolutely this.  It has long been fashionable to hate on Bethesda.  The last time they weren't hated, was Morrowind ... in 2002, long enough ago that many of the Bethesda-haters weren't even born, and I daresay MOST of them were likely too young for a drivers' license, and probably young enough they still thought the opposite sex had "cooties".

 

[...] & Fallout 76 was a terrible idea from the get-go, [...]

Eeeeeeh, no, I think the idea was okay.  It's the execution that really fell apart.  People have been asking for multiplayer Fallout since F3 (even while the "old-school" Fallout fans largely panned the idea of Fallout as a first-person shooter).

 

(Note, however, that I never bought F76 - the lack of private servers and risk of rampant PvP-dickishness warned me off, and the troubles the game has had since have kept me warned off ...)