Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Way too much pressure on lanch day for MMO's
kazson
Member Posts: 224
all these doom threads that pop up lately got me thinking....why is it when a MMO has a crappy lanch no matter how good the game becomes players dont return? i mean patch after patch the dev's pour tons of time and resources into a game but MMO's players would just rather wait for a NEW mmo's instead of giving old ones a try?
examples
Everquest 2,DDO,Vanguard and the more recent Tabula Rasa...all these games are completely different to what they looked like when they lanched and have similar content to WoW but they barely have a dent in the MMO's market even combined...why?...why dont players give the game a try instead of living on message boards waiting for the next "big thing"
im starting to think MMO's need to do "soft lanches", like download only.maybe charge a reduced monthly fee around 5-8 bucks a month...then do a "grand opening" retail lanch lanuch 6 months down the line then charge $15 a month
what do you think?
Comments
I don't think developers add to a game after launch much, they just expand what they already have. By your own example, DDO. I played it at launch and I am back playing it now. I enjoy it, but I don't think they have really added much to the game. It's the same game it was at launch, with just more stuff now. My satisfaction with the game now is the same as it was at launch.
Now on to Tabula Rasa...I was there during beta testing and launch. Quite simply, nothing the devs are willing to expand upon or add will come close to addressing the issues I have with the game. That's because the issues I have with that game are fundamental, and are really core to what makes TR TR. I'd venture a guess and say that's why most people don't give MMOs a second chance. People may say lag and low populations are what cause them to leave Vanguard, and if so, maybe those people really are just simple and chose to not reevaluate their opinions. I left vanguard because the combat system to me (tab-target) is boring. The Vanguard devs can fix the performance issues and population issues, add new areas, classes, races, weapons, etc. None of that will change just how boring I found the combat system to be, so I don't need to give Vanguard a second chance.
I think pay-to-play betas are a bad idea all around. If anything Devs should be paying testers to really go through and find their problems.
Whether they call it a "soft launch" or not, you can't release a game twice, period. The modern day market is WAY too fickle and sensitive for that.
Once you open the game up to download and payments, it will be viewed as a released game by those who don't follow it closely, regardless of how clear the devs make it that it isn't fully realized.
MMO'ers never seem to look back at a game that they weren't happy with.
Mount&Blade did manage to do pre-launch pay pretty well to pay for funding, but then that's not an MMO either and is completely player-moddable and customizable.
It is not the players that set the release date of these games...that is the devs. Being as it is they who are developing the game, telling ppl what to expect, if they cannot do so by the date they set, then they should not set a date.
Many ppl have tried all the old ones, and are looking forward to a bit of a change in the future games.
Your soft launch idea almost sound like an open beta....just makin us pay for it...not really ideal. That would make the players put up with even more problems...but paying for em all the same. If you are gonna make ppl pay for open beta...few will anyway. Fix n polish the game in a free play...then release a decent running game n ppl will stick around.
good points, i dunno i think i just feel bad for Devs, i keep seeing all these patch notes and attempts to bring players to their game but people stay glued to WoW or waiting for Aoc/War mode to notice
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
When people pay to play a shitty game once the last thing they'd ever want to do is pay to play that same shitty game again, even if it's slightly less shitty the second time around.
This is why I don't ever buy MMOs at launch. I haven't seen a game come out for years that wasn't pay to beta for at least the first three months of release.
I don't feel sorry for the devs at all, they know they're releasing an unfinished game and they suffer the consequences of it. And besides, they get paid to make MMOs. Why feel sorry for that?
The so called "Soft Launch" as you describe it sounds like how open beta works nowadays.
A game should be stable enough to handle an open beta with only minor bug-fixes and testing servers etc.
However this is rarely how an open beta turns out nowadays and the reason for that is that the companies are forced to push out their games too early because of lack of funds.
And yea... I agree that a first impression is very important. And as for the games you mentioned, I already have my first impression and would feel like I took a step in the wrong direction if I was to pick up any of those again.
Therefore if '08 fails MMO-wise. I'll probably just give up on the whole genre.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
God Dam right there is pressure, ive spent over $147.00 on AOC already and damed if i want to pay for a beta test come May 20th. Period
MAGA
the pressure should be on as they develop. come launch day there is NOTHING to be worried about (as a developer) unless you know deep down something is wrong with the game. you spent 3+ years working on this game and have spent the last few months (due to delays) polishing it and you agreed to this date to release thus stamping your mark of approval (which pre release is THE best thing you got to judge a game by) and you should be happy to see it release.
on the note of why people leave if it has a bad launch. its all to do with burning out. if they dont like what they see in the firt minute of play they flame the game to death then move on. 5 months down the track they are burnt out again and suddenly feel an inclination to return.
its all about how much people are getting burnt out around games. as for soft launches, we dont need them. no launch is really that crap (Vanguard is an exception) and the people that leave the game are those that flame the game on this site. did LOTRO loose thousands of players due to the so/so launch? nope. did WOW loose most of its beta players due to its bug ridden launch? i met at least 100 beta WOW players who have played since launch in my 2 years.
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
Anyone who played WoW from the beginning knows that the whole premise of this thread is bogus. Good MMO's maintain their players despite retardedly bad coding at launch. Yeah, WoW may not be amazing today, but for it's time it was the best, bar none. It set the standard for what an MMO should be. None-the-less, it had a fucktacular launch. Bandages: incombat and non-channeled. No GCD on Mortal Strike. Non-normalized Melee damage. 20 rage mortal strike without a GCD. Hell, by the time I hit 60, Maraudon was the new instance on the block. Lets not forget about mages teleporting into the air out of melee range and soloing entire instances (btw this bad coding persists today, hence no flying mounts in Old World). Just to a name very very very few bugs/unfinished content.
I'm pretty sure, if AoC is as groundbreaking as they say it is, people will see it. And as long as Funcom looks like they are making progress in fixing shit, people won't care.
Soft launches will only cause a lot of little crappy MMOs. I'm not trying to bash EQ2/TR/DDO/Vanguard, but having tried them all, they pale in comparison to the bar set by WoW. Sure, they are fun because they are different, but when you get down to it, they aren't new. They don't create a new, different experience. It feels like just another MMO, because it IS just another MMO.
AoC is slated (by it's devs and fans alike) to be more. If that's the case, it can have a completely imbalanced, craptacular launch and still retain TONS of players. I personally won't believe it until I see it, and I'll be ingame on the 17th seeing it first hand.
I was just talking to a friend yesterday about how I have seen a lot of doom and gloom threads about AoC, not just on this site but on others as well. With all the negative talk about the game I hope people actually give it a chance at release. I feel like a lot of people seem to be expecting a game without any bugs at all at launch when we all know that is not at all possible. While I will admit that I am looking forward to WAR much more than AoC, I was planning on most likely giving AoC a try at release or open beta just because I am not playing anything at all right now. There have been plenty of people talking about invisible walls and things that wont be ready for launch like battle keeps and crafting, so I'm hoping there will be an open beta and I can see things for myself. I really hope AoC doesn't flop because I don't see the industry going well if another big name game isn't a success.
i agree a game should be ready when it lanches..but the Devs dont always have total control of when a game comes out....a soft launch could bring in some much needed funding to keep a game afloat till its real launch, this could have helped Vanguard?
and i think you drastically underesitmate exactly how many people in the world WOULD pay for a beta...put a AOC/War beta key on ebay and watch how fast it gets bought up
then 6 months later players like myself can buy the retail box game knowing that most major bugs have been dealt with, and with new servers to start fresh with a huge influx of new players...which is a problem with joining older MMO's ...no new servers and not alot of people leveling in newbie lands and dungeons
Everquest2 - when I played it, it was an extremely easy; rather empty; facade of a world. I think this is still very much the case.
DDO - several of my friends tried it; none are playing it; so it can't be that good. I heard it takes very little time to reach max level and then there's nothing left to do
Vanguard - still an overly easy game; the monty haul quest xp and lack of downtime make for boring gameplay. I mean, you log in and some npc tells you to hail them; and when you do he hands you mounds of treasure and xp. I'm exaggerating but you get the point.
POBS - takes two weeks to reach end game; PVP is both gankish and carebear at the same time. Nothing has changed.
The fundamental reasons driving players away are not addressed in any game that I know; even if said game is completely different from its release.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
I think the soft launch is a good idea. I would even go as far as having the first 2 weeks after launch free just to get a gazillion people hooked on the game.
what defines success?
I think the way MMOs seem to be going is sort of scary. Everyone looks over at WoW as what they wish to be. So they produce an amazing game, the get it out there and attempt to get there the EXACT same WAY.
A soft launch is NOT only a good idea its what someone will NEED to do to even attempt to get the Customer Base WoW has. While WoW made some decent money initially at retail they did so based on the success of former titles.
Company B needs to gain renown. What will make their company better or more known than Company A. Simply selling a game and attempting to receive the same reaction is ludicrous.
A quick word on soft launches (which do exist) We call them open beta. If you purchased a Pre-Order ofa game, if you subscribe to FilePlanet. You know what, bunk all that....if you sign up you get in. One ad on TV come to our website and sign up to play >>> Game and you get the first month free and get the Client for the game....all you need to do is purchase a monthly subscription. BAM. Customer Base.
Soft Launch. That was ingenious. Just had to share my thoughts.
Its all about first impressions OP. Humans draw conclusions on a lot of things in the first 30 seconds of meeting new people and trying new things.
In America I have bad teeth. If I lived in England my teeth would be perfect.
There isn't as much pressure on Launch Day....
The Next day when the World wide web is filled with Player views..now that is pressure.
Back on topic. This is how economy works, or should work. If something is crappy people dont buy it. Be it a car or a game or a DVD player. Our western economy (or should i say kapitalism ?) is based on the idea that the market is selfregulating. Weak products vanish and strong products stay. Within that context companies who produce bad and broken games have to vanish. Its the law of economy.
There are two paths to go. Either you dont really care and just want to make money. Thats how fastfood works. Gazillion of people enjoy fastfood. That doesnt mean that fastfood is defining the gastronomy. There are also people who want to enjoy a real meal. If fastfood is taking over so no restaurant is able to survive, then economy failed badly.
The way I look at it SOE (and LA) made a choice that they didn't want me as a customer anymore by changing the game radically in a fashion I didn't personally want. That's cool, it sucks for me, but in turn I can choose to never purchase any of their products again. SOE could launch classic servers, but for me it's far too late to make attempts to do the right thing. I'd much prefer to give my money to a company that doesn't condone tossing out their current player base in the hopes of capturing a different set of gamers.
As for Tabula Rasa, well, it just didn't look like my cup of tea. I didn't dig the background so much.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez