If we lived in a world where money men were willing to keep paying until an MMO was finished before releasing it, it might be fair for customers to expect a high level of polish and a high level of content. We don't live in that world. I am not complaining that it is unfair from a "business" standpoint, I am just pointing out that customer expectations, understandable or not, are simply not realistic, and if they bothered to pause and think about it, they would know their expectations are unreasonable. That being said, I fully agree that if a game basically tries to imitate WoW, it should fail, because why would anybody play an underdeveloped clone of a game that is already out when they have the option of going for the real deal? That is the primary reason that WoW-envy is the biggest problem in the industry right now, all the development dollars that get spent on almost-certain-to-fail WoW clones could be getting spent on games that are new and different enough that players might be willing to forgive the standard release day level of flaws in order to stick around and see how the game's unique elements pan out.
I can understand WoW fans not liking any of the mmo's at launch. But the whole community (except Blizzard) are the victim of the myopia and stubborness and ignorance of WoW fan judging other mmorpg's forever based on what they were like at launch.
Up until patch 3.0 in Oct 2008 I was a devoted WoW player. From 2005 to Oct 2008. Thats 3.5 years. So I tried Vanguard and EQ2. And they were pretty decent games. Only tried levelling and didnt try endgame content but I still enjoyed it and had no problems.
Ok, maybe those games stunk like crap at launch. But at least I was open minded enough to try another game and support a different developer (unfortunately Sony in this case). I'm going to try LotRo, AoC and Warhammer soon and see which one I like the most and give it a good go. Whatever they were like at launch it will not influence my opinion of what they are like today.
I am still amazed at how many folks spend 40+ hours a week sitting on thier butts in front of a pc game & think they are better than the rest of us "casual" players for it.
I am still amazed at how many folks spend 40+ hours a week sitting on thier butts in front of a pc game & think they are better than the rest of us "casual" players for it.
Your body: more than just a chair weight.
Priceless.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
If we lived in a world where money men were willing to keep paying until an MMO was finished before releasing it, it might be fair for customers to expect a high level of polish and a high level of content. We don't live in that world. I am not complaining that it is unfair from a "business" standpoint, I am just pointing out that customer expectations, understandable or not, are simply not realistic, and if they bothered to pause and think about it, they would know their expectations are unreasonable.
I want you to listen to what you are saying and really think about it. Whos expectations are out of line, customers or companies?
Players spend money on a new game that is not finished, untested, missing major features, lacks polish and not enough content to keep players interested, etc. Those players then leave the unfinished game to return to their previous game that offers a better experience.
---or----
Developers who constantly release games months and years before they "get good" when in direction competition with established games that are polished, refined, entertaining and have an established player base. Those developers then expect to receive success rates far beyond what they actually achieve and wonder where everyone went while they spend the next 12-24 months sticking their fingers in the holes springing up in the dam. They think they are delivering a "steak and glass of wine" experience, they are "Led Zepplin" in a comparison of mmos or are delivering the "next generation" mmo experience.
Whos expectations are out of line? Who in this scenario keeps repeating the same mistakes?
I would love to say the problem rests with players and is something that could be adjusted to in time, but it isn't. It is a horrible business practice to release unfinished products to a market and players shouldn't just accept that. Several companies have done well enough to release games that are well done and polished as you claim isn't possible.
For customer standards to be set so low as to expect games to need an extra year after release to become "good" one of two things needs to happen.
1) players need to buy and subscribe to an unfinished game for that year to keep the company in business, which boils down to companies expecting customers to fund the last year of development.
2) players should avoid new games for at least one year. If that is the case, then developers should just stay in closed development in the first place.
I just can't agree that it is somehow a good idea to release a game long before it is ready and somehow the effect of a premature release is somehow the fault of players in any fashion.
If a company wants a players money they need to offer a good reason for sa player to give it to them. Expecting people to not only accept something substandard, but to also pay a reoccuring fee for it is so far beyond a rational expectation I cannot even put the proper words to it.
When WoW was first launched, the major contendor was EQ2 (just launched) and EQ1. UO is dying, every other game pales and fading. WoW brings a lot of additional polish and ideas superior to EQ1 and EQ2, a superb UI, very polished feelings, lore comparable to EQ, and real fun to level. I have fun levelling in WoW, much more so than levelling in EQ2. Much much more so. My first month of EQ2 was almost over when I got my hands on WoW, and I never returned to EQ2 till 2007. ...
You missed the whole point of my post. My point was that the people throwing hissy fits saying that mmo's like Warhammer have no content are the same people who didn't come to WoW until at least 2006 and had never played an mmorpg before. Of course games like Warhammer are not helped by a relentless hype machine. But simply put if you took a bunch of WoW fanbois and put them on a WoW server at release in late Nov 2004 they would hate it. Thats NOT to say WoW was bad at launch but that the WoW fanbois have unrealistic expectations of what an mmo can offer at launch. When 98% of WoW's current players were not there for WoW's launch, then how do they know what a launch is like?
When WoW launched it was very successful and most of the people who tried WoW out were EQ, SWG, AO, UO players . IE mostly people who have played an mmorpg before and had realistic expectations.
But by the time the masses arrived to WoW Blizzard had polished the game, made improvements and released a truckload of content. For example during 2005 and the 1st week of Jan 2006 Blizzard released the PvP system, 3 battlegrounds, Blackwing Lair, Zul'Gurrub, 6 world bosses, the AQ war effort event and AQ20 and AQ40. 5/9 classes also had talent reviews. So obviously by Jan 2006, 14 months after it was released WoW was a much improved game.
But the WoW fanbois write off games like Vanguard, AoC and Warhammer FOREVER because they weren't perfect at launch. Ok,
Ok, look at this. Blackwing Lair was the first 40 man raid instance introduced into WoW after release. It was introduced in patch 1.6 on the 12th July 2005. Now WoW went live about 23rd Nov 2004. So it took Blizzard 8 months to release new raid content.
Warhammer: Age of Reckoning was released on the Sept 18th 2008. It is now May 2009. 8 months after the initial release, same amount of time it took Blizzard to release new raid content for WoW. So obviously theres a double standard here.
But the WoW fans will only ever judge Warhammer by what it was like at release, not what it is today. it wouldnt how many improvements, polish, bug fixes and new content games like Vanguard, AoC and Warhammer release. The WoW fanbois will forever judge them based on what they were like at release.
Why can't I judge WoW forever based on what it was like at release? The diehard WoW fans get to do it with every other mmorpg.
I do not really understand what you are trying to work out, so lets try to reason step by step.
First when WoW was out it was a fraction of what it now is. That actually proves one thing, Blizz took the monthly and expand on/polish the game. Is that good? yes. For those who decided to stay and enjoyed the new bits and pieces their $15 a month pays off.
Second, new WoW players (don't call them fanboys, I will talk about this more below) are different from the first batch of WoWers upon launch. Is it good? Yes, new people coming in to keep up the vigor, as we old man fade out. Why not? More sub money, more new faces, new demands, new reactions ... it keeps the world moving.
Ok you said WoW fanboys judge whatever. That is a gross statement. WoW community is diversed. 12million or whatever million does not think like one. I got the feeling that more than half of them has some kind of games alongside WoW. I have played EQ2, CoX, GW, AoC, WAR, LOTRo (lifetime x 3 in family), and so on after WoW launch, and is still playing EvE. Friend got a different repetoire, and so on. Each WoWer or fanboy has his/her own views about new and old games. No sweeping statement applies.
I cannot talk for any other WoW fanboy, so I start talking with my personal feelings.
Hypothetically: If I am now going to play WoW at launch now with the current mindset, I cannot tell. I would guess its still fun if I got brainwashed about the starter quests. Of course, if you mean starting an alt now, knowing what WoW 2009 is all about and play WoW 2004 it will not be that exciting. But then this scenario is stupid.
If I am now given a game which is exactly WoW 2004 in a different skin, no new whatever, just different names of quests, mobs and map, will I like it? I doubt. Once novelty wears out I believe you are right, this new game will fail. So? It just means a new developer should at least inject his own version of creativity in any new game. Champions online is one just game with a promise for something new. CoX and EvE has their own form of novelty. They have far less scope than WoW, but they attracted me with their own uniqueness.
WAR VG and AoC failed not because they were lesser in scale than WoW. Wrong. CoX is even smaller in scale, but it keeps me going back. It has its own kind of fun. VG, I was in closed and then open beta. The game is so unplayable that the guild I was in (over 100) vanished within 2 weeks of launch. We worked hard reporting bugs after bugs. Our hopes dashed when we found every bug slamming our face upon launch. Compounded with almost unplayable lag and sudden freezes. I understand you argument that after 14 months VG could be better, the point is, if I have a good game (say WoW or CoX or Eve) enjoying every bit of them for 14 months, should I sub to VG and wait for 14 months before going to play? I can retry VG when they fix it 14 months later, but then it is their job to present a great game and attract me away from my current games. If my current trio and my other social activities are so much fun, then sorry VG, you missed your chance.
AoC is quite the same story. After lvl 20, the game falls flat. WAR is a different story. Its polished, bug free, but the game somehow failed to fire up. I am more pve than pvp player, and after enough PQs, I feel I am ready to stop playing. I still recommend WAR to ppl who likes intense pvp, just not for me.
Now does that means no new games forever? NO. LOTRo comes, I joined closed beta, open beta, and I still have 3x lifetime memberships. So if a game cuts it, I pay and play. I am not married to WoW, I can have other affairs with other games, and WoW won't kick me out of bed.
Stop blaming WoW community when other games fail. WoW community is only 12million, there are billions more human beings to market to. If no one wants the new game, its the 12million WoWers and the billions of others that collectively reject the game. There are enough WoW "haters" for the new game to try to sell to. Try Darkfall, its trying to sell to the WoW haters, but most of these WoW haters ended up hating DF. So is WoW responsible for the death of DF?
Even if you intend to sell to the WoW community, a new game need to come up with something of its own, so that the WoW community find it worth the money to keep both WoW and the new game under sub. I sub to 3 or 4 games concurrently, and multiple account for family. I can afford the money easily. But I need to feel like paying. Give me a good game. I will buy Champion online and Diablo 3 (stop telling me its not MMO, I don't care, I play what I like, not what ppl classifies). That about says it all. If your product is good, you will have your market share. If it sucks, you will face the door.
Actually, new games have their best chance for success during launch. With the element of novelty at work, new features of the game can hit our nerves best. I like LOTRo the moment I walked into shire. I know the tutorial is not the best, but as a new game I will go thru it to see. Once I entered Shire, I know my wallet is going to lose some weight. Almost a year after that, when LOTRo launches, all elements of novelty are lost, but my first moment at shire alone prompted me to buy 3 copies of collectors' edition and then life time sub. Yes me and family agree LOTRo at launch is far smaller than WoW, but that does not stop us from shelling out almost 1 grand.
Well you have to call people diehard WoW fans? Do you? How many WoW players are married to WoW. From what I noticed, not many. Fact is half of our guild people are going in and out of WoW, play for a few months, unsub and go to another game, and almost invariable come back to WoW. They have tried other games, they keep trying other games, but ... they keep coming back. This means what? The other games failed to retain the WoWers.
Blame the other games, not blame us. The other games are in the business to attract us. If they cannot attract us, they failed, not us. We pay to enjoy and we stick with what we enjoyed most. Is it a crime to chose to buy what we enjoy most? If it takes a new game 14 months to get to the point of polishness and feature completeness, then expect no business until then. Gamers can wait for 14 months, they can wait for 14 years for that matter, BUT NOT PAYING for 14 months while the developer polish it.
If we lived in a world where money men were willing to keep paying until an MMO was finished before releasing it, it might be fair for customers to expect a high level of polish and a high level of content. We don't live in that world. I am not complaining that it is unfair from a "business" standpoint, I am just pointing out that customer expectations, understandable or not, are simply not realistic, and if they bothered to pause and think about it, they would know their expectations are unreasonable. That being said, I fully agree that if a game basically tries to imitate WoW, it should fail, because why would anybody play an underdeveloped clone of a game that is already out when they have the option of going for the real deal? That is the primary reason that WoW-envy is the biggest problem in the industry right now, all the development dollars that get spent on almost-certain-to-fail WoW clones could be getting spent on games that are new and different enough that players might be willing to forgive the standard release day level of flaws in order to stick around and see how the game's unique elements pan out.
Now that is unfair. Try a corollary.
I am currently shopping for a house. That is real. Now I am going to check out your new house, you are a builder. You showed me a house not the same as the cosy one I am about to depart. But still the new house is done, paints dry, roof not leaking and the toilet flush works. I see a kitchen I know I can cook, a living room with light and so on. OK I will talk price with you, even though I noticed that one of the doors to a guest bedroom is not yet installed, and one of the window is stuck from inside. So long as you promised to fix it, in a week, I will drop a deposit and move in.
Now I meet another builder, he has half of the house built, and show me a sketch of the other half. Then he ask me to buy it and live there as he build the rest. Should I? Should I leave my current cosy house and move in? Ok if its free, I can. Why not? A summer house. If its a token fee, sure, just for the heck of fun. But if its a full blown purchase price? Come on.
Why is it unrealistic to expect new competitors to be at least as good as the current suppliers? That is exactly what competition means. Suppliers compete for sales, they have to show me why they are better than their rivals. Either they are everything as good as the others, or they have their own uniqueness. Failing both, why should I buy them? Failing both, they might not even entice me to a free trial. I won't even do free DF trial, or even if they pay me to play it. If WoW, EvE and CoX makes me smile when I log in, why should I log in a game I do not feel like.
Yes, its a matter of taste, of judgement, and its the job of the developer and his PR team to show me some reasons to give them a trial, even if its a free trial. Free trial still cost time, and time is precious for me, after long hours of work. If their product or their PR fails to catch my attention, too bad. I always insist I expect quality, and quality is in the eye of the beholder. I will not pay for incomplete games without specific redeeming features THAT I FEEL LIKE TO ENJOY even if the rest of the game is partially done. I will play Champions Online when it comes out, cos I like to try super heroes, even if I expect the entire game to be still buggy at start. I will buy. I did not sub to VG after buying a copy at launch, b/c its both incomplete, buggy, and it brings nothing new to me. Whatever VG has I can find in the existing games, which are no longer buggy, no longer incomplete.
I would be an insane man to pay for a new game which is incomplete, or buggy, or what not, which will only be really ready in another 10 or 20 months. I will be a crazy man to keep paying them till they finish it. Why don't their boss pay for the development cost? Why should I pay instead? Why is it that our expectations are unreasonable? Unreasonable to expect the developer to finish their game enough before asking me to try it out? and to pay for it?
Yes you mention new and different games. That alone does not cut it, it has to be different in an attractive way. Tell me which game is different in an attractive way that makes sense?
-- VG: xp grind, xp loss, corpse running, pvp. That is fun?
-- WAR: RvR totally detached from the PvE? Now its not bad, but not as good as the integrated PvE/RvR of DAoC
-- AoC: What new is there? I cannot see.
-- DF: Oh come on, forum trolls?
-- Aion: yes I am thinking of this one, not ruling it out at all. Fact is, if I can get to download it, I will pay for a copy and try.
-- CoS: wait till I can buy it, I have no views at all.
-- you keep filling up the list, and start asking yourself, is this game different enough in a meaning manner to justify time and money? On the other hand, I have my eyes on Champions Online and Diablo 3. I will pay for them, b/c, finished or not, these 2 titles carries new elements I would like to try. Case closed.
Originally posted by Orthedos Now that is unfair. Try a corollary. I am currently shopping for a house. That is real. Now I am going to check out your new house, you are a builder. You showed me a house not the same as the cosy one I am about to depart. But still the new house is done, paints dry, roof not leaking and the toilet flush works. I see a kitchen I know I can cook, a living room with light and so on. OK I will talk price with you, even though I noticed that one of the doors to a guest bedroom is not yet installed, and one of the window is stuck from inside. So long as you promised to fix it, in a week, I will drop a deposit and move in. Now I meet another builder, he has half of the house built, and show me a sketch of the other half. Then he ask me to buy it and live there as he build the rest. Should I? Should I leave my current cosy house and move in? Ok if its free, I can. Why not? A summer house. If its a token fee, sure, just for the heck of fun. But if its a full blown purchase price? Come on. Why is it unrealistic to expect new competitors to be at least as good as the current suppliers? That is exactly what competition means. Suppliers compete for sales, they have to show me why they are better than their rivals. Either they are everything as good as the others, or they have their own uniqueness. Failing both, why should I buy them? Failing both, they might not even entice me to a free trial. I won't even do free DF trial, or even if they pay me to play it. If WoW, EvE and CoX makes me smile when I log in, why should I log in a game I do not feel like. Yes, its a matter of taste, of judgement, and its the job of the developer and his PR team to show me some reasons to give them a trial, even if its a free trial. Free trial still cost time, and time is precious for me, after long hours of work. If their product or their PR fails to catch my attention, too bad. I always insist I expect quality, and quality is in the eye of the beholder. I will not pay for incomplete games without specific redeeming features THAT I FEEL LIKE TO ENJOY even if the rest of the game is partially done. I will play Champions Online when it comes out, cos I like to try super heroes, even if I expect the entire game to be still buggy at start. I will buy. I did not sub to VG after buying a copy at launch, b/c its both incomplete, buggy, and it brings nothing new to me. Whatever VG has I can find in the existing games, which are no longer buggy, no longer incomplete. I would be an insane man to pay for a new game which is incomplete, or buggy, or what not, which will only be really ready in another 10 or 20 months. I will be a crazy man to keep paying them till they finish it. Why don't their boss pay for the development cost? Why should I pay instead? Why is it that our expectations are unreasonable? Unreasonable to expect the developer to finish their game enough before asking me to try it out? and to pay for it? Yes you mention new and different games. That alone does not cut it, it has to be different in an attractive way. Tell me which game is different in an attractive way that makes sense? -- VG: xp grind, xp loss, corpse running, pvp. That is fun? -- WAR: RvR totally detached from the PvE? Now its not bad, but not as good as the integrated PvE/RvR of DAoC -- AoC: What new is there? I cannot see. -- DF: Oh come on, forum trolls? -- Aion: yes I am thinking of this one, not ruling it out at all. Fact is, if I can get to download it, I will pay for a copy and try. -- CoS: wait till I can buy it, I have no views at all. -- you keep filling up the list, and start asking yourself, is this game different enough in a meaning manner to justify time and money? On the other hand, I have my eyes on Champions Online and Diablo 3. I will pay for them, b/c, finished or not, these 2 titles carries new elements I would like to try. Case closed.
I basicly agrees with you.
However a small point: AoC do have something new and brilliant: collison detection for weapons. Basicly ifyour weapon touch something you hit it. That is actually new and brilliant, no need to aim, just attack in the general direction.
AoC have other shortcommings but that feature is something I hope all MMOs will have in the future, it really adds realism. It is not enough reason to play the game just for it, and AoC needs a lot more content to be a good game but both that feature and the tutorial for new players (Tortage) are brilliant.
Devs need to stop releasing their games a year too early, that is one of the reasons that no other game is close to Wow (closest was Guildwars and it released in good time without buggs). Also if they release a buggy mess they need to fix it fast, 1-2 years will only lead to a failure for the game.
Personally, I found the Tortage portion of AoC to be a very fun experience, with a depth of story based on your archetype that I had not previously experience in an online game. Granted, that was only the first quarter of the game, level wise, but for me it was better than anything in the first quarter of WoW. AoC's major problem was that the leveling curve was so fast that the majority of the player base burned through the first half of the game so fast, they got to the point in the game where the content just wasn't there, because it hadn't been made yet.
It is overly reductionist to present the issue as one of players vs. companies. There are the players, the people actually designing the game, and the people in control of financing the game. It isn't the fault of the people designing the game if the people controlling the money refuse to cough up any more without a release.
The answer to the question of whether it is players or money men whose expectations are out of line is simple: both. It isn't reasonable for customers to expect a game to have tons of polished content at launch, because no online game ever does. It also isn't reasonable for the money men to expect a large number of customers to play an unfinished game when there are games that have been out long enough to have added content and polish.
For those who are content with the current crop of games, there is no problem, but many of those who aren't content with the current games still want a large amount of highly polished content, but in a certain sense they want to have just as much content and polish as WoW, without paying as much for it as WoW's customers have. Most of WoW's content and polish wasn't paid for by the game's original financiers, it was paid for by player subscriptions. It just isn't reasonable to expect new games to spend as much on development before they have any revenue as WoW has spent on development with years worth of millions of subscriptions.
Edit: So to sum up the above, basically nobody is acting reasonably.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
People do not expect the same amount of content from a new game at release as wow currently has. Just like they didn't expect the same amount of content that everquest had to be in warcraft when it launched.
All a game has to have is a decent amount of content, well designed concepts and potential. When games fail to deliver a decent product at launch they spend far more efforts fixing things when they should already be in a mode of expanding and implementing new things to the game.
Wow spent the first year adding tons of content and working on expanding the game as well as tweaking things that didn't turn out as expected. What have most other games done the first 2 years that released before they were ready? Think about that.
You are unjustly laying blame at players feet for something that isn't correct.
Personally, I found the Tortage portion of AoC to be a very fun experience, with a depth of story based on your archetype that I had not previously experience in an online game. Granted, that was only the first quarter of the game, level wise, but for me it was better than anything in the first quarter of WoW. AoC's major problem was that the leveling curve was so fast that the majority of the player base burned through the first half of the game so fast, they got to the point in the game where the content just wasn't there, because it hadn't been made yet. It is overly reductionist to present the issue as one of players vs. companies. There are the players, the people actually designing the game, and the people in control of financing the game. It isn't the fault of the people designing the game if the people controlling the money refuse to cough up any more without a release.
The answer to the question of whether it is players or money men whose expectations are out of line is simple: both. It isn't reasonable for customers to expect a game to have tons of polished content at launch, because no online game ever does. It also isn't reasonable for the money men to expect a large number of customers to play an unfinished game when there are games that have been out long enough to have added content and polish. For those who are content with the current crop of games, there is no problem, but many of those who aren't content with the current games still want a large amount of highly polished content, but in a certain sense they want to have just as much content and polish as WoW, without paying as much for it as WoW's customers have. Most of WoW's content and polish wasn't paid for by the game's original financiers, it was paid for by player subscriptions. It just isn't reasonable to expect new games to spend as much on development before they have any revenue as WoW has spent on development with years worth of millions of subscriptions. Edit: So to sum up the above, basically nobody is acting reasonably.
Agree on AoC, it was not so bad till I hit 30s. I was a bit too sweeping earlier.
As for paying too much for WoW, I disagree. I pay a box then monthly for every game I play. For the same $15, I got the most out of WoW, from patches to new content to graphics upgrade, to UI improvement, to class fiddling (some of those I agree with, even if my ret paly got nerfed to no end). For the same $15, I got much less in terms of enhancement from most other games. Frankly EQ charge me for almost every expansion, and EQ2, damn it they charge me for adding a lvl 30s zone after I hit 50!!!! I forgot the name of the xpac, I was dumbfound.
The world of MMOs are evolving, they charge me $15 anyway. The old generation is gone, and the changes are enjoyed by whoever would go one playing. It is fair that the cost be shouldered by those who are still playing. My views.
It does not depend on whether I am contented with the current crop of games. I am contented with nothing, but that does not mean I need to change my behaviour. I still settle on what I like most today, while watching for possible new games to try out. I am NOT paying nor even wasting time on a new game, unless I see a reason, be it new game elements, or fun expected or whatever. Why am I not acting reasonably?
Why do I need to care how the developer fun himself. I do not care how the farmer grows his wheat, or how the company ships the bread to the store. I do not care how the water supplies authority constructs the pipe or for that matter, how god summon the raincloud. I am only myself and I look after my own interest. I am not pretending I can care for them, nor do I pretend they will care for me as a person, apart from ripping open my wallet.
Let the developers worry about how to provide content or whatever ways to entice my attention. That is their job, and they are very creative. Worry about earning the money to buy whatever attracts the eye.
Yes it is very reasonable to expect the new developers to figure out how to finance their projects, how to learn from WoW and other successful titles AND MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL, how to do a better job, as in new ideas, better implementation or gimmicks. They have the story of blizz and NCSoft fully documented, they can avoid all the mistakes of the predecessors, and working models to copy and improve upon. IF AFTER SEEING SOMEONE'S ELSE CODE AND RUNNING PROGRAMS, I CANNOT WRITE A BETTER ONE, DO YOU THINK MY BOSS WILL PAY MY SALARY NEXT MONTH? I expected to be fired immediately.
Lol, this thread has gone so far off topic, it's kinda funny...
I have to say, though, that WoW did actually release with quite a bit of content. I was subbed and playing within 2 weeks of its release, and played for 10 solid months (before a year break, followed by another 2 year sub). The fact is, initially it had its problems. Were they so glaring you couldn't play? Nope. The actual immersion level in WoW was quite awesome right off the bat (I absolutely loved the music for each zone as I leveled my first toon - a NE druid. Ashenvale music was just awesome). Also, it seems folks have completely written off Stratholme and Scholomance, as well as LBRS and UBRS as if they were never raid zones themselves. Even blackrock depths was amazing. Never have I seen such a well-designed and elaborate dungeon since (quick check on wowhead shows what, 20 bosses in there). Sure, the first 40-mans were Ony and MC, but UBRS and scholo took solid 15-man groups in the beginning, and were quite fun and challenging. Strat was also quite fun, and all of them gave the formerly coveted ".5 dungeon sets", which of course back then some of them didn't even have 8 piece bonuses. I remember my warlock getting its 8th piece long, long ago and even replacing pieces but saving it to see what the 8 piece bonus would be if they ever fixed it. However you look at it though, getting attuned and keyed for those places, and running them consistantly was crucial back then for gearing up a guild to raid 40-mans. I'll never forget a guy (hunter) ninja'ing the dagger off Rend (felstriker) and being totally blacklisted on my server, and my God how many happy pallies and rogues did that guy make (dal'rend set, Doomsaw)? Who can honestly say they didn't freak out the first time they saw "The Beast" and didn't get a kick out of being punted by him every time you'd run the joint (I'd always make my groups /roll to pull him and get the boot)? How many old-school warlocks prayed for a Headmaster's Charge off Gandling, or (anyone) for a sawbones shirt?
The fact is, even the old stuff was fun, and back in its day, it wasn't so easy. The rewards were memorable, as were the fights. In all, the point is, WoW opened up with plenty of stuff to be done even without the 40-man raids right off the bat. Southshore was always fun for PVP, as was the occassional crossroads battle. Battlegrounds were a huge innovation, which were then improved upon by battlegroups, and later honor rewards. BC's flight, factions, heroic modes and badges were all fun and rewarding to strive for, and felt fairly worth the 2-year wait given the content and fixes introduced in the meantime. I tried other games in my playtime in WoW, and nothing else even felt close to something worth switching to. I've since quit, and moved on, but even still nothing has matched WoW's early days (and it was -not- my first MMO) or its progression through updates, fixes, innovations, or expansions. I'd love to say I'm not a WoW fanboi (I all but refuse to play it ever again) but to think back to it, I've no reason to hate the game at all. They just did everything right (even if it didn't suit every player or wasn't perfect at the start).
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." George Bernard Shaw
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Oscar Wilde
Looking at games released in the last decade I see no straight correlation between budget and polish/quality (there is obviously some). ID software has delivered some of the most polished games out there with a crew you can count on your two hands. Why is Blizzard always late in releasing their games? Because the core development team of each product is tight and small until you do the real work load closer to release (most textures, music etc). Most things that we as players feel as polish are not quantities but qualities - and major work loads are mostly about what you can quantify (and hence push to a date relatively close to release/beta).
Does it bother anyone else with how much the word polish is used now? Is it just me but it seems to be the favorite word for the past year or two. Can we call it something else because I don't know why that is like chalk on a chalkboard. I know I am weird. How about superduper?
I think agreeing to disagree is going to have to become a common element in this thread. I understand the views others are expressing, but I still think there is a large body of players out there who want to have the same return with less investment when it comes to the starting quality of new games.
If it became an industry standard that a game had to have as much, or even 70% as much content as modern WoW, with the same level of polish, before ever releasing and seeing the start of a revenue stream, then most of the MMOs currently in development would not be. Only a few companies would be willing to even consider taking the risk to spend the money/man-hours necessary to get up to that level before releasing. We might see 1-2 new games every 3-4 years, and while they might have a lot of content and a high degree of polish, the amount of money spent on their development would greatly increase the necessary number of players for them to be considered a success. Every time one of them flopped, more projects would get cancelled, until competing with WoW became something nobody with both money and sense would even attempt to do.
At least with the way things currently are, games still get released, and even at fairly low subscriber numbers, manage to pay for themselves and make some profit. Their lower subs mean it takes them longer to fix the game and get it to the point of being polished, but it generally happens eventually as long as the game isn't owned by SOE. If I have to choose between a lot of games getting released unfinished, and the ones with potential taking a little extra time to reach it, or very few games getting released, with many potentially great games being aborted in the planning process, I'll go with the many unfinished games.
You can insist on variety, or you can insist on polish, it just isn't realistic to insist on both, because it is a balancing act, and the more you go toward one, the less you get of the other. I come down on the variety side, though I have a suspicion most of you will probably go with polish.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
See I think the problem with your assumptions is you place such extremes on your examples and treat that is if it is the norm for the vast majority of players. When did the standard get set to people wanting 70% as much content as wow from a brand new game and the same level of refinement?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that most players are happy spending most of their time in whatever the latest expansion area is and ignoring most of the content prior to that expansion, regardless of what the game is. They abandon almost everything else in favor of the new content, because the older content is not longer level/gear appropriate anymore. We can see that over a million people tried each of the big releases last year, so I think they did so with the understanding it would not have 4+ years worth of content at release.
Most of the complaints people are making about new games isn't that they don't have as much quantity as wow, but rather that what they do offer isn't fun, doesn't work or is just flat out broken/incomplete. I think people are generally fine with a game not have as many expansions, continents and zones as a game that is 4 to 10 years old. As long as it offers enough content to keep people interested until content patches can be added or expansions sold then there isn't going to be a problem.
However to blame players for not wanting to play a game that is rushed to market long before it is ready isn't fair. The only people who have control over that is the developers and I think it has been demonstrated to the point that every company should get the picture clearly enough and there are no excuses anymore for repeating the same mistakes. Players are not going to stick around and pay for a substandard product, which is the expectation of a company when they release these games.
If 90% of the customers walked out of a "steak and glass of wine" fine dining establishment upset with their meals would you blame 90% of the customers for having to high of expectations or would you think the restaurant was doing something wrong?
If you want to talk about having to high of expectations, Paul Barnett was betting that warhammer would have over 3 million subscribers. Case closed.
Originally posted by Daffid011 If 90% of the customers walked out of a "steak and glass of wine" fine dining establishment upset with their meals would you blame 90% of the customers for having to high of expectations or would you think the restaurant was doing something wrong?
I wouldn't make any judgement until I had tried the restaurant myself. Without more information about who the particular customers were, I would have no way to know whether or not I should expect more than 10% of them to have good taste.
On the flipside, if a restaurant had to please 90% of its customers in order to stay open, I would be really displeased, because of lot of restaurants that might have great food would get shut down before I had a chance to try them myself.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
People do not expect the same amount of content from a new game at release as wow currently has. Just like they didn't expect the same amount of content that everquest had to be in warcraft when it launched. As I explained in my previous post that the people who came to WoW in Nov 2004 were from other mmorpg's and had more realistic expectations. Lets call them traditional mmorpg players (or hardcores for short). Do you think the majority of people coming to WoW now have had previous mmorpg experience? Absolutely not. Wow spent the first year adding tons of content and working on expanding the game as well as tweaking things that didn't turn out as expected. What have most other games done the first 2 years that released before they were ready? Think about that. Exactly. But the massive influx of non-traditional mmorpg players into WoW (lets call them "casuals" for the sake of argument) didnt occur until Blizzard had polished the game and introduced a lot of new content. Basically a fair amount of time after the game was released.
And to answer your question in the 2nd part of paragraph: I dont know. But I will try other mmorpg's to make my own opinion. The problem is that the devoted WoW fan (hardcore, casual or other) will only ever judge rival mmorpg's on what they were like at launch. It doesn't matter how much content or bug fixes Vanguard will haver. It is forever tarnished by its launch. WoW was fortunate that when it launched there were no casuals in the mmorpg scene. The instant gratification ADHD Ritalin generation were too busy with XBOX and HALO. There were only experienced mmorpg players who knew how the genre worked. Blizzard didn't have to deal with people demanding everything here and now. Back then people would group and create their own fun in an mmorpg. Now its just a theme park and when people login its "ok, im here now entertain me". WoW was allowed time to mature before it was forever judged - and no other mmorpg has had that luxury since. You are unjustly laying blame at players feet for something that isn't correct. I blame everything about WoW's current state on the players. Blizzard is a business and will take measures to make sure it sells as many subscriptions as possible. Though it does beg the question now that WoW is super casual friendly why WotLK has only increased subscriptions by 500,000. Burning Crusader with its nasty and horrible raids increased subscriptions by 2,000,000. So casuals, where the hell are you?
People do not expect the same amount of content from a new game at release as wow currently has. Just like they didn't expect the same amount of content that everquest had to be in warcraft when it launched. As I explained in my previous post that the people who came to WoW in Nov 2004 were from other mmorpg's and had more realistic expectations. Lets call them traditional mmorpg players (or hardcores for short). Do you think the majority of people coming to WoW now have had previous mmorpg experience? Absolutely not. Wow spent the first year adding tons of content and working on expanding the game as well as tweaking things that didn't turn out as expected. What have most other games done the first 2 years that released before they were ready? Think about that. Exactly. But the massive influx of non-traditional mmorpg players into WoW (lets call them "casuals" for the sake of argument) didnt occur until Blizzard had polished the game and introduced a lot of new content. Basically a fair amount of time after the game was released.
And to answer your question in the 2nd part of paragraph: I dont know. But I will try other mmorpg's to make my own opinion. The problem is that the devoted WoW fan (hardcore, casual or other) will only ever judge rival mmorpg's on what they were like at launch. It doesn't matter how much content or bug fixes Vanguard will haver. It is forever tarnished by its launch. WoW was fortunate that when it launched there were no casuals in the mmorpg scene. The instant gratification ADHD Ritalin generation were too busy with XBOX and HALO. There were only experienced mmorpg players who knew how the genre worked. Blizzard didn't have to deal with people demanding everything here and now. Back then people would group and create their own fun in an mmorpg. Now its just a theme park and when people login its "ok, im here now entertain me". WoW was allowed time to mature before it was forever judged - and no other mmorpg has had that luxury since. You are unjustly laying blame at players feet for something that isn't correct. I blame everything about WoW's current state on the players. Blizzard is a business and will take measures to make sure it sells as many subscriptions as possible. Though it does beg the question now that WoW is super casual friendly why WotLK has only increased subscriptions by 500,000. Burning Crusader with its nasty and horrible raids increased subscriptions by 2,000,000. So casuals, where the hell are you?
I have no idea where you get your opinion....
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
I do not really understand what you are trying to work out, so lets try to reason step by step. Sorry, I can't make it any simpler. I re-read my post and it was written well enough.
Second, new WoW players (don't call them fanboys, I will talk about this more below) are different from the first batch of WoWers upon launch. Is it good? Yes, new people coming in to keep up the vigor, as we old man fade out. Why not? More sub money, more new faces, new demands, new reactions ... it keeps the world moving. But these new players just have idiotic and unrealistic expectations. Also, to them an mmorpg is just like a single player game except in a persistent enviroment. Old school mmorpger's will take initiative and create their own fun. Someone who played UO and SWG will take steps to use the environment to make the game more interesting to him/her. They will make an effort to learn new things. When they can't do something they will make the effort in finding out the information. I used to spend a LOT of time on the EJ forums and I can guarantee you the vast majority people theorycrafting on the EJ forums ARE OLD SCHOOL PLAYERS. Compare that to the typical new WoW player when they come across something difficult they DEMAND and SCREAM at Blizzard to change it for them because they pay $15 a month. The concept that a player would take the initiative and time to improve their own character is as a foreign a concept as a motor vehicle would be to a cave man. Ok you said WoW fanboys judge whatever. That is a gross statement. WoW community is diversed. 12million or whatever million does not think like one. I got the feeling that more than half of them has some kind of games alongside WoW. I have played EQ2, CoX, GW, AoC, WAR, LOTRo (lifetime x 3 in family), and so on after WoW launch, and is still playing EvE. Friend got a different repetoire, and so on. Each WoWer or fanboy has his/her own views about new and old games. No sweeping statement applies. Half of 12 million is 6 million. Thats still a lot of people. And while a lot of the newer WoW players might have played more than one mmorpg very few would have played an mmorpg before playing WoW. Hypothetically: If I am now going to play WoW at launch now with the current mindset, I cannot tell. I would guess its still fun if I got brainwashed about the starter quests. Of course, if you mean starting an alt now, knowing what WoW 2009 is all about and play WoW 2004 it will not be that exciting. But then this scenario is stupid. Stupid to you. Valid point to me since it shows a clear hyprocrisy by a lot of WoW players. Explain to me what new or exciting ideas WoW brought to mmorpg's? Infact, what new ideas has Blizzard brought to games in general? Diablo? That was Blizzard North and those people are loooooooooong gone. Not only did WoW steal most of its ideas from EQ, most of the WoW devs were EQ players. WAR VG and AoC failed not because they were lesser in scale than WoW. Wrong. CoX is even smaller in scale, but it keeps me going back. It has its own kind of fun. VG, I was in closed and then open beta. The game is so unplayable that the guild I was in (over 100) vanished within 2 weeks of launch. We worked hard reporting bugs after bugs. Our hopes dashed when we found every bug slamming our face upon launch. Compounded with almost unplayable lag and sudden freezes. I understand you argument that after 14 months VG could be better, the point is, if I have a good game (say WoW or CoX or Eve) enjoying every bit of them for 14 months, should I sub to VG and wait for 14 months before going to play? I can retry VG when they fix it 14 months later, but then it is their job to present a great game and attract me away from my current games. If my current trio and my other social activities are so much fun, then sorry VG, you missed your chance. I never disputed that AoC and Vanguard had issues at launch. I dont know why you keep banging on and on and on about what they were at launch. BUT WHY SHOULD THOSE ISSUES FOREVER DICTATE PEOPLES OPINIONS OF THOSE GAMES? Go onto your WoW realm and say you also play AoC and Vanguard in trade chat. You will get a plethora of opinions telling you how terrible those games were even though the majority of the people saying that have never played the game or only played it in the first month. And the majority of these players would not have started playing WoW in Nov 2004, especially if you're playing on a realm that was released after launch. Is this concept just too hard for you to understand? You seem absolutely OBSESSED about what a game is like at launch. I dont think you'll ever understand what I'm saying because your too busy thinking about what AoC and Vanguard were like at launch. WoW fanbois only know the issues that Vanguard and AoC had at launch because they were around. But these same people never knew or experienced the issues at launch for WoW or the lack of content for the first 8 months because came to WoW much later. Blame the other games, not blame us. The other games are in the business to attract us. If they cannot attract us, they failed, not us. We pay to enjoy and we stick with what we enjoyed most. Is it a crime to chose to buy what we enjoy most? If it takes a new game 14 months to get to the point of polishness and feature completeness, then expect no business until then. Gamers can wait for 14 months, they can wait for 14 years for that matter, BUT NOT PAYING for 14 months while the developer polish it. It wouldn't matter what the other games are like. Most WoW players these days are too narrow minded to enjoy something else. They cry they want something to WoW but when something is different they complain about the differences. Ok, I'll leave you to reply about how terrible Vanguard and AoC were at launch and how they will be forever terrible.
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
Who is a hardcore? Who is a casual? Is it a class we pick when we join WoW?
Do we pay different monthly fees? Put on different dresses when we log on? or we eat different meals?
Who here classifies the 11.5m into casual and hardcore? How many of the 11.5m are hardcore?
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
Who is a hardcore? Who is a casual? Is it a class we pick when we join WoW?
Do we pay different monthly fees? Put on different dresses when we log on? or we eat different meals?
Who here classifies the 11.5m into casual and hardcore? How many of the 11.5m are hardcore?
this is a good question. VERY good one....
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Comments
I can understand WoW fans not liking any of the mmo's at launch. But the whole community (except Blizzard) are the victim of the myopia and stubborness and ignorance of WoW fan judging other mmorpg's forever based on what they were like at launch.
Up until patch 3.0 in Oct 2008 I was a devoted WoW player. From 2005 to Oct 2008. Thats 3.5 years. So I tried Vanguard and EQ2. And they were pretty decent games. Only tried levelling and didnt try endgame content but I still enjoyed it and had no problems.
Ok, maybe those games stunk like crap at launch. But at least I was open minded enough to try another game and support a different developer (unfortunately Sony in this case). I'm going to try LotRo, AoC and Warhammer soon and see which one I like the most and give it a good go. Whatever they were like at launch it will not influence my opinion of what they are like today.
I am still amazed at how many folks spend 40+ hours a week sitting on thier butts in front of a pc game & think they are better than the rest of us "casual" players for it.
Your body: more than just a chair weight.
Priceless.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I want you to listen to what you are saying and really think about it. Whos expectations are out of line, customers or companies?
Players spend money on a new game that is not finished, untested, missing major features, lacks polish and not enough content to keep players interested, etc. Those players then leave the unfinished game to return to their previous game that offers a better experience.
---or----
Developers who constantly release games months and years before they "get good" when in direction competition with established games that are polished, refined, entertaining and have an established player base. Those developers then expect to receive success rates far beyond what they actually achieve and wonder where everyone went while they spend the next 12-24 months sticking their fingers in the holes springing up in the dam. They think they are delivering a "steak and glass of wine" experience, they are "Led Zepplin" in a comparison of mmos or are delivering the "next generation" mmo experience.
Whos expectations are out of line? Who in this scenario keeps repeating the same mistakes?
I would love to say the problem rests with players and is something that could be adjusted to in time, but it isn't. It is a horrible business practice to release unfinished products to a market and players shouldn't just accept that. Several companies have done well enough to release games that are well done and polished as you claim isn't possible.
For customer standards to be set so low as to expect games to need an extra year after release to become "good" one of two things needs to happen.
1) players need to buy and subscribe to an unfinished game for that year to keep the company in business, which boils down to companies expecting customers to fund the last year of development.
2) players should avoid new games for at least one year. If that is the case, then developers should just stay in closed development in the first place.
I just can't agree that it is somehow a good idea to release a game long before it is ready and somehow the effect of a premature release is somehow the fault of players in any fashion.
If a company wants a players money they need to offer a good reason for sa player to give it to them. Expecting people to not only accept something substandard, but to also pay a reoccuring fee for it is so far beyond a rational expectation I cannot even put the proper words to it.
You missed the whole point of my post. My point was that the people throwing hissy fits saying that mmo's like Warhammer have no content are the same people who didn't come to WoW until at least 2006 and had never played an mmorpg before. Of course games like Warhammer are not helped by a relentless hype machine. But simply put if you took a bunch of WoW fanbois and put them on a WoW server at release in late Nov 2004 they would hate it. Thats NOT to say WoW was bad at launch but that the WoW fanbois have unrealistic expectations of what an mmo can offer at launch. When 98% of WoW's current players were not there for WoW's launch, then how do they know what a launch is like?
When WoW launched it was very successful and most of the people who tried WoW out were EQ, SWG, AO, UO players . IE mostly people who have played an mmorpg before and had realistic expectations.
But by the time the masses arrived to WoW Blizzard had polished the game, made improvements and released a truckload of content. For example during 2005 and the 1st week of Jan 2006 Blizzard released the PvP system, 3 battlegrounds, Blackwing Lair, Zul'Gurrub, 6 world bosses, the AQ war effort event and AQ20 and AQ40. 5/9 classes also had talent reviews. So obviously by Jan 2006, 14 months after it was released WoW was a much improved game.
But the WoW fanbois write off games like Vanguard, AoC and Warhammer FOREVER because they weren't perfect at launch. Ok,
Ok, look at this. Blackwing Lair was the first 40 man raid instance introduced into WoW after release. It was introduced in patch 1.6 on the 12th July 2005. Now WoW went live about 23rd Nov 2004. So it took Blizzard 8 months to release new raid content.
Warhammer: Age of Reckoning was released on the Sept 18th 2008. It is now May 2009. 8 months after the initial release, same amount of time it took Blizzard to release new raid content for WoW. So obviously theres a double standard here.
But the WoW fans will only ever judge Warhammer by what it was like at release, not what it is today. it wouldnt how many improvements, polish, bug fixes and new content games like Vanguard, AoC and Warhammer release. The WoW fanbois will forever judge them based on what they were like at release.
Why can't I judge WoW forever based on what it was like at release? The diehard WoW fans get to do it with every other mmorpg.
I do not really understand what you are trying to work out, so lets try to reason step by step.
First when WoW was out it was a fraction of what it now is. That actually proves one thing, Blizz took the monthly and expand on/polish the game. Is that good? yes. For those who decided to stay and enjoyed the new bits and pieces their $15 a month pays off.
Second, new WoW players (don't call them fanboys, I will talk about this more below) are different from the first batch of WoWers upon launch. Is it good? Yes, new people coming in to keep up the vigor, as we old man fade out. Why not? More sub money, more new faces, new demands, new reactions ... it keeps the world moving.
Ok you said WoW fanboys judge whatever. That is a gross statement. WoW community is diversed. 12million or whatever million does not think like one. I got the feeling that more than half of them has some kind of games alongside WoW. I have played EQ2, CoX, GW, AoC, WAR, LOTRo (lifetime x 3 in family), and so on after WoW launch, and is still playing EvE. Friend got a different repetoire, and so on. Each WoWer or fanboy has his/her own views about new and old games. No sweeping statement applies.
I cannot talk for any other WoW fanboy, so I start talking with my personal feelings.
Hypothetically: If I am now going to play WoW at launch now with the current mindset, I cannot tell. I would guess its still fun if I got brainwashed about the starter quests. Of course, if you mean starting an alt now, knowing what WoW 2009 is all about and play WoW 2004 it will not be that exciting. But then this scenario is stupid.
If I am now given a game which is exactly WoW 2004 in a different skin, no new whatever, just different names of quests, mobs and map, will I like it? I doubt. Once novelty wears out I believe you are right, this new game will fail. So? It just means a new developer should at least inject his own version of creativity in any new game. Champions online is one just game with a promise for something new. CoX and EvE has their own form of novelty. They have far less scope than WoW, but they attracted me with their own uniqueness.
WAR VG and AoC failed not because they were lesser in scale than WoW. Wrong. CoX is even smaller in scale, but it keeps me going back. It has its own kind of fun. VG, I was in closed and then open beta. The game is so unplayable that the guild I was in (over 100) vanished within 2 weeks of launch. We worked hard reporting bugs after bugs. Our hopes dashed when we found every bug slamming our face upon launch. Compounded with almost unplayable lag and sudden freezes. I understand you argument that after 14 months VG could be better, the point is, if I have a good game (say WoW or CoX or Eve) enjoying every bit of them for 14 months, should I sub to VG and wait for 14 months before going to play? I can retry VG when they fix it 14 months later, but then it is their job to present a great game and attract me away from my current games. If my current trio and my other social activities are so much fun, then sorry VG, you missed your chance.
AoC is quite the same story. After lvl 20, the game falls flat. WAR is a different story. Its polished, bug free, but the game somehow failed to fire up. I am more pve than pvp player, and after enough PQs, I feel I am ready to stop playing. I still recommend WAR to ppl who likes intense pvp, just not for me.
Now does that means no new games forever? NO. LOTRo comes, I joined closed beta, open beta, and I still have 3x lifetime memberships. So if a game cuts it, I pay and play. I am not married to WoW, I can have other affairs with other games, and WoW won't kick me out of bed.
Stop blaming WoW community when other games fail. WoW community is only 12million, there are billions more human beings to market to. If no one wants the new game, its the 12million WoWers and the billions of others that collectively reject the game. There are enough WoW "haters" for the new game to try to sell to. Try Darkfall, its trying to sell to the WoW haters, but most of these WoW haters ended up hating DF. So is WoW responsible for the death of DF?
Even if you intend to sell to the WoW community, a new game need to come up with something of its own, so that the WoW community find it worth the money to keep both WoW and the new game under sub. I sub to 3 or 4 games concurrently, and multiple account for family. I can afford the money easily. But I need to feel like paying. Give me a good game. I will buy Champion online and Diablo 3 (stop telling me its not MMO, I don't care, I play what I like, not what ppl classifies). That about says it all. If your product is good, you will have your market share. If it sucks, you will face the door.
Actually, new games have their best chance for success during launch. With the element of novelty at work, new features of the game can hit our nerves best. I like LOTRo the moment I walked into shire. I know the tutorial is not the best, but as a new game I will go thru it to see. Once I entered Shire, I know my wallet is going to lose some weight. Almost a year after that, when LOTRo launches, all elements of novelty are lost, but my first moment at shire alone prompted me to buy 3 copies of collectors' edition and then life time sub. Yes me and family agree LOTRo at launch is far smaller than WoW, but that does not stop us from shelling out almost 1 grand.
Well you have to call people diehard WoW fans? Do you? How many WoW players are married to WoW. From what I noticed, not many. Fact is half of our guild people are going in and out of WoW, play for a few months, unsub and go to another game, and almost invariable come back to WoW. They have tried other games, they keep trying other games, but ... they keep coming back. This means what? The other games failed to retain the WoWers.
Blame the other games, not blame us. The other games are in the business to attract us. If they cannot attract us, they failed, not us. We pay to enjoy and we stick with what we enjoyed most. Is it a crime to chose to buy what we enjoy most? If it takes a new game 14 months to get to the point of polishness and feature completeness, then expect no business until then. Gamers can wait for 14 months, they can wait for 14 years for that matter, BUT NOT PAYING for 14 months while the developer polish it.
Now that is unfair. Try a corollary.
I am currently shopping for a house. That is real. Now I am going to check out your new house, you are a builder. You showed me a house not the same as the cosy one I am about to depart. But still the new house is done, paints dry, roof not leaking and the toilet flush works. I see a kitchen I know I can cook, a living room with light and so on. OK I will talk price with you, even though I noticed that one of the doors to a guest bedroom is not yet installed, and one of the window is stuck from inside. So long as you promised to fix it, in a week, I will drop a deposit and move in.
Now I meet another builder, he has half of the house built, and show me a sketch of the other half. Then he ask me to buy it and live there as he build the rest. Should I? Should I leave my current cosy house and move in? Ok if its free, I can. Why not? A summer house. If its a token fee, sure, just for the heck of fun. But if its a full blown purchase price? Come on.
Why is it unrealistic to expect new competitors to be at least as good as the current suppliers? That is exactly what competition means. Suppliers compete for sales, they have to show me why they are better than their rivals. Either they are everything as good as the others, or they have their own uniqueness. Failing both, why should I buy them? Failing both, they might not even entice me to a free trial. I won't even do free DF trial, or even if they pay me to play it. If WoW, EvE and CoX makes me smile when I log in, why should I log in a game I do not feel like.
Yes, its a matter of taste, of judgement, and its the job of the developer and his PR team to show me some reasons to give them a trial, even if its a free trial. Free trial still cost time, and time is precious for me, after long hours of work. If their product or their PR fails to catch my attention, too bad. I always insist I expect quality, and quality is in the eye of the beholder. I will not pay for incomplete games without specific redeeming features THAT I FEEL LIKE TO ENJOY even if the rest of the game is partially done. I will play Champions Online when it comes out, cos I like to try super heroes, even if I expect the entire game to be still buggy at start. I will buy. I did not sub to VG after buying a copy at launch, b/c its both incomplete, buggy, and it brings nothing new to me. Whatever VG has I can find in the existing games, which are no longer buggy, no longer incomplete.
I would be an insane man to pay for a new game which is incomplete, or buggy, or what not, which will only be really ready in another 10 or 20 months. I will be a crazy man to keep paying them till they finish it. Why don't their boss pay for the development cost? Why should I pay instead? Why is it that our expectations are unreasonable? Unreasonable to expect the developer to finish their game enough before asking me to try it out? and to pay for it?
Yes you mention new and different games. That alone does not cut it, it has to be different in an attractive way. Tell me which game is different in an attractive way that makes sense?
-- VG: xp grind, xp loss, corpse running, pvp. That is fun?
-- WAR: RvR totally detached from the PvE? Now its not bad, but not as good as the integrated PvE/RvR of DAoC
-- AoC: What new is there? I cannot see.
-- DF: Oh come on, forum trolls?
-- Aion: yes I am thinking of this one, not ruling it out at all. Fact is, if I can get to download it, I will pay for a copy and try.
-- CoS: wait till I can buy it, I have no views at all.
-- you keep filling up the list, and start asking yourself, is this game different enough in a meaning manner to justify time and money? On the other hand, I have my eyes on Champions Online and Diablo 3. I will pay for them, b/c, finished or not, these 2 titles carries new elements I would like to try. Case closed.
I basicly agrees with you.
However a small point: AoC do have something new and brilliant: collison detection for weapons. Basicly ifyour weapon touch something you hit it. That is actually new and brilliant, no need to aim, just attack in the general direction.
AoC have other shortcommings but that feature is something I hope all MMOs will have in the future, it really adds realism. It is not enough reason to play the game just for it, and AoC needs a lot more content to be a good game but both that feature and the tutorial for new players (Tortage) are brilliant.
Devs need to stop releasing their games a year too early, that is one of the reasons that no other game is close to Wow (closest was Guildwars and it released in good time without buggs). Also if they release a buggy mess they need to fix it fast, 1-2 years will only lead to a failure for the game.
Personally, I found the Tortage portion of AoC to be a very fun experience, with a depth of story based on your archetype that I had not previously experience in an online game. Granted, that was only the first quarter of the game, level wise, but for me it was better than anything in the first quarter of WoW. AoC's major problem was that the leveling curve was so fast that the majority of the player base burned through the first half of the game so fast, they got to the point in the game where the content just wasn't there, because it hadn't been made yet.
It is overly reductionist to present the issue as one of players vs. companies. There are the players, the people actually designing the game, and the people in control of financing the game. It isn't the fault of the people designing the game if the people controlling the money refuse to cough up any more without a release.
The answer to the question of whether it is players or money men whose expectations are out of line is simple: both. It isn't reasonable for customers to expect a game to have tons of polished content at launch, because no online game ever does. It also isn't reasonable for the money men to expect a large number of customers to play an unfinished game when there are games that have been out long enough to have added content and polish.
For those who are content with the current crop of games, there is no problem, but many of those who aren't content with the current games still want a large amount of highly polished content, but in a certain sense they want to have just as much content and polish as WoW, without paying as much for it as WoW's customers have. Most of WoW's content and polish wasn't paid for by the game's original financiers, it was paid for by player subscriptions. It just isn't reasonable to expect new games to spend as much on development before they have any revenue as WoW has spent on development with years worth of millions of subscriptions.
Edit: So to sum up the above, basically nobody is acting reasonably.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
People do not expect the same amount of content from a new game at release as wow currently has. Just like they didn't expect the same amount of content that everquest had to be in warcraft when it launched.
All a game has to have is a decent amount of content, well designed concepts and potential. When games fail to deliver a decent product at launch they spend far more efforts fixing things when they should already be in a mode of expanding and implementing new things to the game.
Wow spent the first year adding tons of content and working on expanding the game as well as tweaking things that didn't turn out as expected. What have most other games done the first 2 years that released before they were ready? Think about that.
You are unjustly laying blame at players feet for something that isn't correct.
Agree on AoC, it was not so bad till I hit 30s. I was a bit too sweeping earlier.
As for paying too much for WoW, I disagree. I pay a box then monthly for every game I play. For the same $15, I got the most out of WoW, from patches to new content to graphics upgrade, to UI improvement, to class fiddling (some of those I agree with, even if my ret paly got nerfed to no end). For the same $15, I got much less in terms of enhancement from most other games. Frankly EQ charge me for almost every expansion, and EQ2, damn it they charge me for adding a lvl 30s zone after I hit 50!!!! I forgot the name of the xpac, I was dumbfound.
The world of MMOs are evolving, they charge me $15 anyway. The old generation is gone, and the changes are enjoyed by whoever would go one playing. It is fair that the cost be shouldered by those who are still playing. My views.
It does not depend on whether I am contented with the current crop of games. I am contented with nothing, but that does not mean I need to change my behaviour. I still settle on what I like most today, while watching for possible new games to try out. I am NOT paying nor even wasting time on a new game, unless I see a reason, be it new game elements, or fun expected or whatever. Why am I not acting reasonably?
Why do I need to care how the developer fun himself. I do not care how the farmer grows his wheat, or how the company ships the bread to the store. I do not care how the water supplies authority constructs the pipe or for that matter, how god summon the raincloud. I am only myself and I look after my own interest. I am not pretending I can care for them, nor do I pretend they will care for me as a person, apart from ripping open my wallet.
Let the developers worry about how to provide content or whatever ways to entice my attention. That is their job, and they are very creative. Worry about earning the money to buy whatever attracts the eye.
Yes it is very reasonable to expect the new developers to figure out how to finance their projects, how to learn from WoW and other successful titles AND MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL, how to do a better job, as in new ideas, better implementation or gimmicks. They have the story of blizz and NCSoft fully documented, they can avoid all the mistakes of the predecessors, and working models to copy and improve upon. IF AFTER SEEING SOMEONE'S ELSE CODE AND RUNNING PROGRAMS, I CANNOT WRITE A BETTER ONE, DO YOU THINK MY BOSS WILL PAY MY SALARY NEXT MONTH? I expected to be fired immediately.
Lol, this thread has gone so far off topic, it's kinda funny...
I have to say, though, that WoW did actually release with quite a bit of content. I was subbed and playing within 2 weeks of its release, and played for 10 solid months (before a year break, followed by another 2 year sub). The fact is, initially it had its problems. Were they so glaring you couldn't play? Nope. The actual immersion level in WoW was quite awesome right off the bat (I absolutely loved the music for each zone as I leveled my first toon - a NE druid. Ashenvale music was just awesome). Also, it seems folks have completely written off Stratholme and Scholomance, as well as LBRS and UBRS as if they were never raid zones themselves. Even blackrock depths was amazing. Never have I seen such a well-designed and elaborate dungeon since (quick check on wowhead shows what, 20 bosses in there). Sure, the first 40-mans were Ony and MC, but UBRS and scholo took solid 15-man groups in the beginning, and were quite fun and challenging. Strat was also quite fun, and all of them gave the formerly coveted ".5 dungeon sets", which of course back then some of them didn't even have 8 piece bonuses. I remember my warlock getting its 8th piece long, long ago and even replacing pieces but saving it to see what the 8 piece bonus would be if they ever fixed it. However you look at it though, getting attuned and keyed for those places, and running them consistantly was crucial back then for gearing up a guild to raid 40-mans. I'll never forget a guy (hunter) ninja'ing the dagger off Rend (felstriker) and being totally blacklisted on my server, and my God how many happy pallies and rogues did that guy make (dal'rend set, Doomsaw)? Who can honestly say they didn't freak out the first time they saw "The Beast" and didn't get a kick out of being punted by him every time you'd run the joint (I'd always make my groups /roll to pull him and get the boot)? How many old-school warlocks prayed for a Headmaster's Charge off Gandling, or (anyone) for a sawbones shirt?
The fact is, even the old stuff was fun, and back in its day, it wasn't so easy. The rewards were memorable, as were the fights. In all, the point is, WoW opened up with plenty of stuff to be done even without the 40-man raids right off the bat. Southshore was always fun for PVP, as was the occassional crossroads battle. Battlegrounds were a huge innovation, which were then improved upon by battlegroups, and later honor rewards. BC's flight, factions, heroic modes and badges were all fun and rewarding to strive for, and felt fairly worth the 2-year wait given the content and fixes introduced in the meantime. I tried other games in my playtime in WoW, and nothing else even felt close to something worth switching to. I've since quit, and moved on, but even still nothing has matched WoW's early days (and it was -not- my first MMO) or its progression through updates, fixes, innovations, or expansions. I'd love to say I'm not a WoW fanboi (I all but refuse to play it ever again) but to think back to it, I've no reason to hate the game at all. They just did everything right (even if it didn't suit every player or wasn't perfect at the start).
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Oscar Wilde
I never heard anyone say that before.
We should just agree to disagree Zorn
Looking at games released in the last decade I see no straight correlation between budget and polish/quality (there is obviously some). ID software has delivered some of the most polished games out there with a crew you can count on your two hands. Why is Blizzard always late in releasing their games? Because the core development team of each product is tight and small until you do the real work load closer to release (most textures, music etc). Most things that we as players feel as polish are not quantities but qualities - and major work loads are mostly about what you can quantify (and hence push to a date relatively close to release/beta).
Does it bother anyone else with how much the word polish is used now? Is it just me but it seems to be the favorite word for the past year or two. Can we call it something else because I don't know why that is like chalk on a chalkboard. I know I am weird. How about superduper?
I think agreeing to disagree is going to have to become a common element in this thread. I understand the views others are expressing, but I still think there is a large body of players out there who want to have the same return with less investment when it comes to the starting quality of new games.
If it became an industry standard that a game had to have as much, or even 70% as much content as modern WoW, with the same level of polish, before ever releasing and seeing the start of a revenue stream, then most of the MMOs currently in development would not be. Only a few companies would be willing to even consider taking the risk to spend the money/man-hours necessary to get up to that level before releasing. We might see 1-2 new games every 3-4 years, and while they might have a lot of content and a high degree of polish, the amount of money spent on their development would greatly increase the necessary number of players for them to be considered a success. Every time one of them flopped, more projects would get cancelled, until competing with WoW became something nobody with both money and sense would even attempt to do.
At least with the way things currently are, games still get released, and even at fairly low subscriber numbers, manage to pay for themselves and make some profit. Their lower subs mean it takes them longer to fix the game and get it to the point of being polished, but it generally happens eventually as long as the game isn't owned by SOE. If I have to choose between a lot of games getting released unfinished, and the ones with potential taking a little extra time to reach it, or very few games getting released, with many potentially great games being aborted in the planning process, I'll go with the many unfinished games.
You can insist on variety, or you can insist on polish, it just isn't realistic to insist on both, because it is a balancing act, and the more you go toward one, the less you get of the other. I come down on the variety side, though I have a suspicion most of you will probably go with polish.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
See I think the problem with your assumptions is you place such extremes on your examples and treat that is if it is the norm for the vast majority of players. When did the standard get set to people wanting 70% as much content as wow from a brand new game and the same level of refinement?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that most players are happy spending most of their time in whatever the latest expansion area is and ignoring most of the content prior to that expansion, regardless of what the game is. They abandon almost everything else in favor of the new content, because the older content is not longer level/gear appropriate anymore. We can see that over a million people tried each of the big releases last year, so I think they did so with the understanding it would not have 4+ years worth of content at release.
Most of the complaints people are making about new games isn't that they don't have as much quantity as wow, but rather that what they do offer isn't fun, doesn't work or is just flat out broken/incomplete. I think people are generally fine with a game not have as many expansions, continents and zones as a game that is 4 to 10 years old. As long as it offers enough content to keep people interested until content patches can be added or expansions sold then there isn't going to be a problem.
However to blame players for not wanting to play a game that is rushed to market long before it is ready isn't fair. The only people who have control over that is the developers and I think it has been demonstrated to the point that every company should get the picture clearly enough and there are no excuses anymore for repeating the same mistakes. Players are not going to stick around and pay for a substandard product, which is the expectation of a company when they release these games.
If 90% of the customers walked out of a "steak and glass of wine" fine dining establishment upset with their meals would you blame 90% of the customers for having to high of expectations or would you think the restaurant was doing something wrong?
If you want to talk about having to high of expectations, Paul Barnett was betting that warhammer would have over 3 million subscribers. Case closed.
I wouldn't make any judgement until I had tried the restaurant myself. Without more information about who the particular customers were, I would have no way to know whether or not I should expect more than 10% of them to have good taste.
On the flipside, if a restaurant had to please 90% of its customers in order to stay open, I would be really displeased, because of lot of restaurants that might have great food would get shut down before I had a chance to try them myself.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
I have no idea where you get your opinion....
I have been with WoW since beta....it has always catered to the casual gamer. The hardcore gamer focused on PvP...or the lack therein....but your figures and the outcome of your opinion is flawed. It's always been easy to play...and easy to master. Which equals "casual"...period
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
Who is a hardcore? Who is a casual? Is it a class we pick when we join WoW?
Do we pay different monthly fees? Put on different dresses when we log on? or we eat different meals?
Who here classifies the 11.5m into casual and hardcore? How many of the 11.5m are hardcore?
Well, WoW has catered to both. Or are you going to tell me AQ40 and lvl 60 Naxxramas catered to casuals? Yup, 4 horseman was something a casual guild could do.
Were Vashj and Kael "casual" friendly pre 2.3? Nope. Was Sunwell Plateau casual friendly? M'uru is regarded as one of the most challenging but still correctly tuned raid bosses ever.
Top end raiding in WoW required more skill than any other mmorpg. I dont care about 72 hour tank and spank fights in FFXI. If thats your definition of "hardcore" then you'r opionions do not count. Time does not equal skill.
Proved my point
Only the top end hard core content catered to the non "casual" player.
Thanx...cause that leaves around 75% of the player base to dance in a full'ish nude
Who is a hardcore? Who is a casual? Is it a class we pick when we join WoW?
Do we pay different monthly fees? Put on different dresses when we log on? or we eat different meals?
Who here classifies the 11.5m into casual and hardcore? How many of the 11.5m are hardcore?
this is a good question. VERY good one....
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."