As much as i'd like to agree, you have to remember that most MMOs aren't really games anymore in the traditional sense. They've evolved into something much more grand and different than us 'older gamers' may be used to.
Dungeons aren't ran for the mystery and difficulty anymore. They're plowed through for loot and titles.
Massive expanses of land aren't for traveling and exploring. They're chatrooms.
NPCs no longer hold the importance and knowledge of forthcoming quests and challenges. They're just signposts that players quickly skip through to fill their log books and advance to the endgame.
These games are purley made and maintained for profit. Nothing else.
The developers of these impossibly huge, massive games could care less about their once small, precious pet projects.
They're unstoppable trains filled with money, and they're only traveling faster, and tacking on 'extra content' every so often to lure in the next potential customer.
If you want to feel important, if you want to feel like a hero, if you want the entire game universe to revolve around you, and only you...
No, but smaller companies in it for the love of the game and RPG mechanics as well as making a living do. Companies that are in it for milking cash out of people and just copying other MMOs make worse MMOs.
Isn't what you said simply an opinion of yours? My experience is many of these smaller developers (like Aventurine) are now scrambling to try and find a way to get more people to play the game they made as opposed to developing new systems and the like for the players they do have. What that tells me is that while they haven't folded they must see something wrong with the paycheck at the end of the day.
A better or worse mmorpg is plainly an opinion, just because you hate everything WOW stands for doesn't make it a verifiably worse game than any game you can point to made by a smaller company it just means you prefer that game and it's style of play.
I don't like to jump on anyones bandwagon but logic would tell me if twelve million people are playing WOW then a large portion of the mmorpg playing population wants that type of gameplay, regardless of how you guys rationalize it "these people are just stupid", "they just don't know what a good game is".
It simply means you have tastes that are vastly different than the majority and while that may make you guys all "special" it doesn't make you "better" or "smarter". Hell most folks thinking with an objective mind (meaning not injecting their own personal feeling into any debate) would think it smarter to develop for those 12 million as opposed to the million people.
Do us all a favor though as Moaky07 said there are tons of games like the one you describe begging for more subs to survive instead of wasting your energy trying to constantly shoot down products you don't even care for put that energy into building up your preffered play style, much like I have done by playing WOW,AION,WAR,AOC,LOTRO.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
To the original poster, all you need to survive is 2400 calories, which can be gotten with bad cheap food, a bed, and 2 pieces of cloths, shirt and pants. Any thing more then that you should give to another person(s) who do not have those. If you do not you are a greedy bloodsucking capitalist pig. grow up and welcome to the real world.
Companies need to make money. they can not run the games for free and hope that money falls from the sky so they can pay thier employees, or mayby they can get slaves to work for them. Im sure we can easily enslave you since it appears you like the koolaid.
As others have said, you dont like it, then make the game, you go out and secure the financing, hire the employees, find the space to house the employees, and their is much more. learn about what it takes to run a business.
If not shut the effin up.
now that my rant is done.
Game follow market forces. Great example is Star Wars Galaxies. It was a great game, popular among those who pay for the game and the monthly fee. Sony was making alot of money with this game. Then Sony complety changed the game. Market forces showed that players where unhappy and they moved on. Players moving on to somehting differnt and better is the norm. Only a small percentage of a games player base stay for any lenght of time. So companies need to keep more players. With the over saturation of the MMO market compaines have to find ways to get players into the game. So that will mean that games will get easier or dumbed down if you prefer. Look at games that are harder to play. They have small player bases. If the company is small then this isnt that big a problem, they can make just enough to keep game running, though any new content will not be as forthcoming as larger games.
Also games evolve. This includes playstyles, graphics and many other. Companies can not go backwards. Games like Everquest were great in thier time, but many forget the grief of spending hours to get into groups or to raid.
But the basics of MMO's is to design a form of enterainment that allows a company to make money. If they do not they will fail. If you dont like it, move on, or leave gaming.
It is NOT the MMORPG consumer's job to design, build, finance a game. WE are the ones paying for a service. Because we also have our own RL occupations out there.
As for me and some others out there, the service (MMORPGs this case) that's available is utter CRAP these days. Has been going for years.
And yes, I do agree that things change. Evolve. But for the MMORPG genre, the direction it's taken is a "1 Way Ticket To Hell In A Handbasket."
Actually, I take that back about MMORPGs having evolved. They stopped changing several years ago. '04, maybe '05. Because these days they are all the godd*mn same in gameplay. They all follow the same godd*mn formula. The only differences are models and textures. Even the developers of one of the biggest upcoming titles are proudly touting how they're trying to make their game just like WoW, a game that's been out for 6 years.
The MMORPG genre isn't evolving. Hasn't done so in 5-6 years now. It's not changing directions. It's just spinning it's tires uselessly in the mud with nobody trying anything different.
It may be utter crap in your eyes, but there are plenty of dollars coming in from elsewhere.
Lets just call a spade a spade shall we.....you guys are NOT owed AAA sandbox MMOs.
Get over yourselves already. If a company wanted your sub numbers, then they would be building AAA titles to target you.
An Uncle Owen universe doesnt warrant the gamble required to make it. Instead they can make a themepark, and even if they strike out, they know they will get a huge shot of their money back in box sales alone.
We are yrs away from MMOs being able to perform like SPG games. The latency of the internet, combined with servers accomodating folks. just isnt far enough along to handle 1000s of people on the same server.
Thus you arent going to have the responsiveness of SPGs, nor is it going to allow for all the complex combat systems found in non-MMO games.
If you are talking about Uncle Owen related activities....there is Second Life for those with the technical skills to actually create their own items. If not, then there is Facebook apps ala Farmville....they let ya do virtual chores, while having the ability to interact with others online.
Better yet, there are MMO sandboxes that could use sub numbers. Games like Ryzom, for instance, could use subs, and if it was demonstrated that the sandbox market was viable, then perhaps more would be made.
Instead if it the same complaint & different day around here.
Sorry, nothing you said changes the simple fact that there is no diversity in the MMORPG genre at all these days. Hasn't been for years, like I brought up. And it will not change anytime soon.
You are right however that they don't have to put out a "AAA Sandbox" title.
But I do have the ability to withold my money from the utter cr*p that the companies are shoveling out in spades. And I can voice my complaints about the state of the genre.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Game companies do not exist for altruistic reasons or make games that are for your fantasies. They exist to make money for themselves and pay their employees and give jobs to people who will be out of work if they fail.
They do not make games tailor made for you. If you do not want to pay them there are people like me who will continue to do so to support this genre , I love the genre and what it can be and was or will be or can never be who knows but I take what I get since I cannot make the games myself and need these companies to continue to make them.
Yes sure they are not as innovative or wonderful as we imagine they can be but this is reality and I live here not in some fantasy Aladdin lamp world and without these games there is less joy in my world. So yes I am the sheep that will continue to support mediocre games.
Looking at the numbers of subscribers and this growing genre I am not the only one willing to accept less. Hell I settle for less everyday of my life. If I looked too hard at all the things I get in my life I might not be as content as I am right now with my lot in life.
Game companies do not exist for altruistic reasons or make games that are for your fantasies. They exist to make money for themselves and pay their employees and give jobs to people who will be out of work if they fail.
They do not make games tailor made for you. If you do not want to pay them there are people like me who will continue to do so to support this genre , I love the genre and what it can be and was or will be or can never be who knows but I take what I get since I cannot make the games myself and need these companies to continue to make them.
Yes sure they are not as innovative or wonderful as we imagine they can be but this is reality and I live here not in some fantasy Aladdin lamp world and without these games there is less joy in my world. So yes I am the sheep that will continue to support mediocre games.
Looking at the numbers of subscribers and this growing genre I am not the only one willing to accept less. Hell I settle for less everyday of my life. If I looked too hard at all the things I get in my life I might not be as content as I am right now with my lot in life.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
That's not to say noone making an MMO should care about profit. They should. The developers need to support themselves and their families. But, the problem with most MMOs todays is that MMOs are being developed with only one goal in mind, to make profit. It used to be that MMOs were developed with the MMO's quality in mind, genuinely making a deep, fun, enjoyable game. If you provided that, then you would natually gravitate toward making a profit per simple logic that a decent game will do well.
Instead today, we get games that seem almost like they have a bigger advertising budget than they do in development. Games that feel half-finished, and most importantly, feel like they have no soul. They lack the feeling of immersiveness and genuine enjoyability that their predessors did. They are quite simply, half-baked ideas, dumbed down to the lowest common denominator and rushed out the door in a cashgrab attempt to sucker the most people out of their money as possible before consumers realize what a steaming pile the game is and how much it's not worth the box price or the monthly subscription price.
Do some people enjoy these games? Sure, some people do. Just like some people enjoy so called "reality TV", which is also considered lowest common denominator entertainment.
Now I'm not trying to bash people who enjoy MMOs that are like this. They have every right to, and I honestly don't care that they do. The problem however, is the the industry seems to almost be wholey trying to cater to this mass market audience in an attempt to milk it out of every penny.
There are next to no true game developers any longer. Most of them are nothing more than regurgitators of disposable entertainment for the purpose of promising consumers something fresh and new, only to serve them the same old gruel that they have been for the past six years. Most consumers just throw money at them and gobble it up, because they're ravenous for something fresh and new... something better. But most of them are too distracted to realize that they just keep letting themselves be fed the same old shit that hasn't gotten any better aside from a prettier package -- graphics.
Advertisement is very very important. The reason many people are even aware of a game is because it is advertised. Yes they have to have a huge budget for it because it sells. You must advertise.
I saw the ad for Halo Reach me who cannot play Half Life without getting FPS headaches in like 15 mins considered getting it because of the awesome ad. Well you can classify me as gullible and stupid but there you have it I was taken in by the ad and wanted to buy it.
I have never tried an RTS in my whole gaming history. I bought Starcraft II based on the awesome ad and became an RTS fan. I have even finished the Dawn of War and Red Alert games thanks to Stracraft II. Ads work.
Advertisement is very very important. The reason many people are even aware of a game is because it is advertised. Yes they have to have a huge budget for it because it sells. You must advertise.
I saw the ad for Halo Reach me who cannot play Half Life without getting FPS headaches in like 15 mins considered getting it because of the awesome ad. Well you can classify me as gullible and stupid but there you have it I was taken in by the ad and wanted to buy it.
I have never tried an RTS in my whole gaming history. I bought Starcraft II based on the awesome ad and became an RTS fan. I have even finished the Dawn of War and Red Alert games thanks to Stracraft II. Ads work.
<PicardFacepalm>
I wasn't saying that advertising isn't important. I was saying that it's a problem when it feels like a company spent for thought, effort, and money on advertising a product, than they did developing the product.
In other words, it feels like a lot of developers are focusing more on hyping up a game, than they are on making sure the game is decent.
Originally posted by Ceridith In other words, it feels like a lot of developers are focusing more on hyping up a game, than they are on making sure the game is decent.
Duh, I wish someone was paying me for hype. I swear I would be hyped like no other...
Well if they have a limited budget they have to decide to spend on the advertising. That is what you seem to be missing .They cut on the game development to spend on advertising because advertising will get them the currency in the form of people to be interested by preordering while they can get more money to develop the game further. Most games do this they sell the game and then patch it up as time progresses. Is this right ,no, but with a limited amount of money you make a choice.
You look at it as if they are spending more on advertisement than on the product development but it is a valid investment. When you make a game and are satisfied in your opinion that the game is good enough to market as playable you spend the money on advertising to get more people to buy your product so that you can spend the money that comes in on further development. No one has an unending supply of cash unless you are Blizzard may be. Every developer has to compromise.
You are talking about game development like it is an Utopian development. The reality is how they have to cut corners. So it does look like they spent more on advertising and hype than on the game but they may not have had a choice in the matter. When you listen or read to the many things that failed games developers say went wrong , they all have dreams and ideas that seemed good but they lack money and time to carry them all out. Some of them make bad decisions on what to cut and they regret so much , none of them want to fail on their ideas but they make choices bad ones at times. I am not sure anyone could simply just by today's standards ever live up to what you are proposing.
In the past games that were being developed were done in isolation and relative lack of competition so they could afford to spend a large portion of their budget on the game itself. These days advertisement is even more important than the game itself. I am not saying that this is right but this is the reality. The unfortunate side effect of this reality is that the game itself might not live up to the hype. Unless you are all convinced that the current crop of developers are all without any great and innovative ideas can you explain then why they do not translate into super games when they are at the helms. In my opinion this happens because they have to compromise.
Goodness just reread what I wrote I sound like an apologist. What I am trying to say is that however much we might lament on the loss of creativity in games these days it is not the sole fault of greed or lack of scruples and disinterest in being ingenious but just plain economics and current gaming atmosphere that dictates the priorities. Sure sucks does it not ?
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic. Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
Your A, B, and C is kinda the right answer here, and what I was getting at. It's very hard to make a profitable MMO, for a very large number of reasons which is probably a thread in itself. I think by and large, nobody is in the game industry (single player, console, or online) - either as a developer or an investor - purely for fiscal gain. An exception is maybe facebook, phone, or advert games. Other than that, profit margins are quite small, and the risks are enormous. But that's just my own personal observation.
The thing about the developer that has enough money to design and distribute is an interesting point. But I think generally speaking a single failed project could be a death sentence for a given company. That's scary stuff! Most independent studios can't absorb the costs of throwing tens of millions into a hole which is the buy-in cost of a triple-A MMO. A bad MMO can be a studio-killers (even studios that were otherwise successful), and there are couple of good recent examples there. The difference is that you're are not shipping a game before its done because the publisher tells you; rather you are shipping the game before it's done because you need the box sales to pay your employees.
The real reason MMOs fail so hard is because "traditional" project management as a software profession is pretty good at shipping features-in-a-box, but it's not necessarily the best way to ship something that needs to be fun and entertaining. And you simply need project management to coordinate hundreds of people and manage 10s of millions of dollars. So there needs to be some balance between games-as-entertainment and games-as-software. And I think the MMO industry (moreso than console or single player PC) is young enough that this isn't a solved problem.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
That would be sound logic, if the theme-park MMOs were financially booming. The only one recently to really make a Boom was WoW, the rest have been following that logic, but failing to produce that same boom. I wouldn't say there haven't been any financially viable theme-parks lately, but they haven't been anywhere near what they were initially aiming for. At this point, I would develop a unique and innovative MMO just to stand out in a crowd of clones.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Originally posted by Nipashnaka The real reason MMOs fail so hard is because "traditional" project management as a software profession is pretty good at shipping features-in-a-box, but it's not necessarily the best way to ship something that needs to be fun and entertaining.
Huh? 'Fun' and 'entertainment' are as subjective customer needs as are utility and usability of any business oriented software.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
That would be sound logic, if the theme-park MMOs were financially booming. The only one recently to really make a Boom was WoW, the rest have been following that logic, but failing to produce that same boom. I wouldn't say there haven't been any financially viable theme-parks lately, but they haven't been anywhere near what they were initially aiming for. At this point, I would develop a unique and innovative MMO just to stand out in a crowd of clones.
So I liken it to this. I enjoy playing blackjack in Vegas. I'm pretty good at blackjack, and actually as long as I am sticking to the $5 bets I rack up a nice pile of $5 chips. But when I start making $50 bets I start losing. And this is purely psychology. What's really interesting is that knowing it's purely psychology and being able to identify that doesn't help me at the tables when it's time to hit on that 15.
When $50 million of your money is on the line, you start making the "safe" bets - which is not always the optimal bets (or even, really, the actually safe bets). In some ways I think it's easier to make good games when you are doing it with publisher money as opposed to your money, because you aren't psychologically attached to it and therefore your judgment doesn't get clouded. But then because it's their money, you have to ship when they tell you to ship and include or cut the features that they say. The really sweet deal is to find a publisher that gives you money no-stringed-attached. Which is kinda Blizzard's situation (I get the feeling).
The real reason MMOs fail so hard is because "traditional" project management as a software profession is pretty good at shipping features-in-a-box, but it's not necessarily the best way to ship something that needs to be fun and entertaining.
Huh? 'Fun' and 'entertainment' are as subjective customer needs as are utility and usability of any business oriented software.
But business software doesn't get sold because it's usable. Business software gets sold due to things like market-share, proprietary formats, and licensing deals between CTOs. In fact, I would go as far as to say that usability is almost secondary. I think Apple has made massive gains in the last decade precisely because they decided to treat the consumer market (which does care about usability) as fundamentally different than the commercial market.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
I read your original post and all i can say is... you are ignorant, and you admit to being such since you do not know about the industry. It is generally wise to keep opinions stated as claims to ones self until familiar with the subject matter.
Also, the use of "capitalist morons" in the subject title is not only seen as provoking for the sake of attention but more so showcasing the potential elitist bias of the topic creator. Bias, is of course, the interference of rational thought.
That said... The way the industry has evolved isnt perfect. Not many industries are. As technology changes, costs go up, game design and target audience become more and more complex... rational thought would conclude it becomes harder to make a "hit". We are not making Pac Man kinds of games anymore, nor simple platformers like Sonic the HedgeHog. We are not limited to 8 bit, with a limitation of only 10 objects per screen.
Essentially the limitation have changed. Going from creating simple 2D sprites to complex 3D models that have to be textured, specular mapped, normal mapped, rigged, animated, given hitboxes, imported and optimized. Shaders, how GPUs process the information, drivers... i mean it just goes on.
Do you realize the leap from simplicity to complexity being made?
Even programming wise, the way in which games are made now a days are so much harder, easier to mess up. One small piece of code can result in bugs, especially when a game goes from being a small side scroller to a MMORPG in 3D space. No longer are programmers working in just 2 axises but 3. X, Y and Z. In 2D space, an object will go from positive or negative X and Y values to create the movement of left and right, up and down. Throw in depth however, the Z plane...and well, complexity goes through the roof. I mean, you really need to take full advantage of advanced calculus formulas, matrix, and logic (math).
Even design theory and principles have changed over time. Developers DO care about the player experience, but its hard when PLAYER CENTRIC design is faced with a variety of different Players. The diversity of players and what they consider fun is making player centric design even more difficult.
While I agree there needs to be improvements, progress is slow and for both good and bad reasons.
Publishers are needed right now to fund these big projects. Sadly, they were created to help spur game development and over time have become large, all controlling necessary evils. They can be both a boon and a bane to any development studio. Console makers like Nintendo are Publishers and 1st party developers. No console =/= no publisher. So with the advent of home consoles, came the publishers as well in order to support third party games.
We have been exposed to so many games over a period of time that the "new and fresh" is now "old and stale" to some, and its hard to change that. Innovation for a multimillion dollar project with a huge dev team is also a huge risk. MMORPGS are a huge risk, and since they are now working with a larger target audience, they cannot be as specialized. Any target audience is limited by the dumbest of them, because they still have to appeal to that person.
What this leads to is one of the great banes of any development studio. Marketing. The marketing departments and executives often like to play the role of creative director, they are not often artists or creative people. Its a constant battle trying to make a game creatively and also fight against the demands of marketing or the executives. If the developer fails by following marketing or the executives.... its not the marketing or executives that gets blamed. The system needs work, but the reason for their actions is because losses are bad for everyone in the long run.
This is why you see less innovation in design and features, there are not a lot of "new ideas" out there, its never as simple as make something "new", because it also has to WORK within the limitations of the target audience.
MMORPGs take a long time to make, and after World of Warcraft, a few studios tried their hand at competing with World of Warcraft. This is a multiyear processes. This experiment showed a few things, 1, that you cannot compete directly with WoW if you cannot match or surpass WoW in terms of design and features, and 2, that you have to either wait for WoW to decline or make something different than WoW that does not try to compete with WoW and not expect WoW's numbers.
Take EVE for example, the game is still alive and doing well. Why? because its a completely different experience from World of Warcraft, they do not have the same target audience as WoW players (majority) and because of this they have created their own niche.
What we see for the future of MMORPGS is either those who are going after a new niche, looking for new mediums (home consoles), or still planning to compete with WoW but waiting until Wow is truly in decline.
Games, both single player and multiplayer have been around long enough, with technology more complex than previous generations, and a system thats only grown and is still going through growing pains, are not going to be magically different than those of the past. We essentially hit a wall. This has nothing to do with economic model (capitalism or anything else). The whole point to create entertainment is for it to be successful, and success must have monetary gains, thus to pain those who worked hard on it, and also fund the next project. Without that fact, games production would die. Just as you cant expect crops without giving them water to grow, and seeds to form for the next season, so too can you not expect games to be produced without funding and a means to live off (income) while working on these projects.
Making games isnt easy, so you need to really give them a break and know that it takes time, years even, for the industry to adapt and mmorpgs to spring up on a level that CAN compete with WoW as well as the user expectations, which, HAVE TO BE REALISTIC.
Originally posted by Terranah We need virtual worlds, not console mmos.
Sadly this is someting I don't think we wil ever see again. Too many people want structured game play; logging in for an hour or two, knowing where to go and what to do for the optimum reward and then logging out again. They don't want their time 'wasted' by having to look for content. A developers seem to be happy making game to suit those sorts of players. It is a lot easier to create easy to access, repeatable content, than it would be to maintain a dynamic world. We really only have ourselves to blame for the current state of the gaming industry.
NO, we DON'T have ourselves to blame, that is if you are a part of the "WE" that enjoys virtual worlds in MMOs.
Watch the video. It explains it all. Best overall "report" on MMOs I have ever seen. Escapist hit the nail on the head with the Triton missile. "We" didn't have anything to do with it.
If Escapist is right in their prediction of the future of MMOs, and I think they are right, I might as well leave now rather than watch it happen.
As for looking to the smaller Development Studios for quality and innovation... those small studios days are numbered. Just like in every other area of business or industry, once the big boys take control they will push out or buy out the small guys and that will be the end of the Indys. I have seen it happen over and over again in my half century of life, and it might take a few years, but it will unfortunately happen. Whe it comes to money and profit it doesn't matter what the industry or business is, the tactics and strategies are almost always the same.
I am the Player that wonders... "What the %#*& just happened?!" ............... "I Believe... There should be NO financial connection or portals between the Real World and the Virtual in MMOs. " __Ever Present Cockroach of the MMO Verses__ ...scurrying to and fro... .munching on bits of garbage... always under foot...
My random trolling statement: There's more "innovation" in the MMORPG genre in how to make you pay for the game instead of gameplay and sense of community. I'll go so far as saying gameplay and the sense of being part of an MMORPG's community is becoming worse.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
I read your original post and all i can say is... you are ignorant, and you admit to being such since you do not know about the industry. It is generally wise to keep opinions stated as claims to ones self until familiar with the subject matter.
Also, the use of "capitalist morons" in the subject title is not only seen as provoking for the sake of attention but more so showcasing the potential elitist bias of the topic creator. Bias, is of course, the interference of rational thought.
That said... The way the industry has evolved isnt perfect. Not many industries are. As technology changes, costs go up, game design and target audience become more and more complex... rational thought would conclude it becomes harder to make a "hit". We are not making Pac Man kinds of games anymore, nor simple platformers like Sonic the HedgeHog. We are not limited to 8 bit, with a limitation of only 10 objects per screen.
Essentially the limitation have changed. Going from creating simple 2D sprites to complex 3D models that have to be textured, specular mapped, normal mapped, rigged, animated, given hitboxes, imported and optimized. Shaders, how GPUs process the information, drivers... i mean it just goes on.
Do you realize the leap from simplicity to complexity being made?
Even programming wise, the way in which games are made now a days are so much harder, easier to mess up. One small piece of code can result in bugs, especially when a game goes from being a small side scroller to a MMORPG in 3D space. No longer are programmers working in just 2 axises but 3. X, Y and Z. In 2D space, an object will go from positive or negative X and Y values to create the movement of left and right, up and down. Throw in depth however, the Z plane...and well, complexity goes through the roof. I mean, you really need to take full advantage of advanced calculus formulas, matrix, and logic (math).
Even design theory and principles have changed over time. Developers DO care about the player experience, but its hard when PLAYER CENTRIC design is faced with a variety of different Players. The diversity of players and what they consider fun is making player centric design even more difficult.
While I agree there needs to be improvements, progress is slow and for both good and bad reasons.
Publishers are needed right now to fund these big projects. Sadly, they were created to help spur game development and over time have become large, all controlling necessary evils. They can be both a boon and a bane to any development studio. Console makers like Nintendo are Publishers and 1st party developers. No console =/= no publisher. So with the advent of home consoles, came the publishers as well in order to support third party games.
We have been exposed to so many games over a period of time that the "new and fresh" is now "old and stale" to some, and its hard to change that. Innovation for a multimillion dollar project with a huge dev team is also a huge risk. MMORPGS are a huge risk, and since they are now working with a larger target audience, they cannot be as specialized. Any target audience is limited by the dumbest of them, because they still have to appeal to that person.
What this leads to is one of the great banes of any development studio. Marketing. The marketing departments and executives often like to play the role of creative director, they are not often artists or creative people. Its a constant battle trying to make a game creatively and also fight against the demands of marketing or the executives. If the developer fails by following marketing or the executives.... its not the marketing or executives that gets blamed. The system needs work, but the reason for their actions is because losses are bad for everyone in the long run.
This is why you see less innovation in design and features, there are not a lot of "new ideas" out there, its never as simple as make something "new", because it also has to WORK within the limitations of the target audience.
MMORPGs take a long time to make, and after World of Warcraft, a few studios tried their hand at competing with World of Warcraft. This is a multiyear processes. This experiment showed a few things, 1, that you cannot compete directly with WoW if you cannot match or surpass WoW in terms of design and features, and 2, that you have to either wait for WoW to decline or make something different than WoW that does not try to compete with WoW and not expect WoW's numbers.
Take EVE for example, the game is still alive and doing well. Why? because its a completely different experience from World of Warcraft, they do not have the same target audience as WoW players (majority) and because of this they have created their own niche.
What we see for the future of MMORPGS is either those who are going after a new niche, looking for new mediums (home consoles), or still planning to compete with WoW but waiting until Wow is truly in decline.
Games, both single player and multiplayer have been around long enough, with technology more complex than previous generations, and a system thats only grown and is still going through growing pains, are not going to be magically different than those of the past. We essentially hit a wall. This has nothing to do with economic model (capitalism or anything else). The whole point to create entertainment is for it to be successful, and success must have monetary gains, thus to pain those who worked hard on it, and also fund the next project. Without that fact, games production would die. Just as you cant expect crops without giving them water to grow, and seeds to form for the next season, so too can you not expect games to be produced without funding and a means to live off (income) while working on these projects.
Making games isnt easy, so you need to really give them a break and know that it takes time, years even, for the industry to adapt and mmorpgs to spring up on a level that CAN compete with WoW as well as the user expectations, which, HAVE TO BE REALISTIC.
Very well said! Lately I've been seeing a lot of rationality in this sea of misplaced animosity toward mmos. investors and developers. It's the same point I was trying to make as well:
Do not look toward the industry giants you're damning to be your shining light. Seek out the smaller development houses to keep your flame from exstingushing.
And while it's ok to vent once and a while to "get it off your chest", don' t think for a moment that it will turn the heads of any multi million dollar dev team dreaming up it's next potential payoff. I personally have got to the point in my life where I'd love to find a deep, involving mmo to sink into. But my time restraints of my duty as a father, husband and co-worker will always limit the amount of time I can give at any given moment. Ultima Online was perfect for this because it was a single player mmo that you happen to play along side with other people. I could do a little of everything to build toward my goals.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Originally posted by Nipashnaka But business software doesn't get sold because it's usable. Business software gets sold due to things like market-share, proprietary formats, and licensing deals between CTOs. In fact, I would go as far as to say that usability is almost secondary. I think Apple has made massive gains in the last decade precisely because they decided to treat the consumer market (which does care about usability) as fundamentally different than the commercial market.
Software focused on consumers, isn't really a business software... I talk about CRM, BPM, HRMS, accounting software, ERP and all sorts of enterprise management instruments and groupware solutions, etc.
Proprietary formats and licencing are a matter of revenue, not sales or development, it is pain in the ass for most of the time unless you own significant market share already. To get there though, you need what anyone else does - a product that is usable, good marketing and support.
It is always about the same - customer needs and their satisfaction.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
I read your original post and all i can say is... you are ignorant, and you admit to being such since you do not know about the industry. It is generally wise to keep opinions stated as claims to ones self until familiar with the subject matter.
Also, the use of "capitalist morons" in the subject title is not only seen as provoking for the sake of attention but more so showcasing the potential elitist bias of the topic creator. Bias, is of course, the interference of rational thought.
That said... The way the industry has evolved isnt perfect. Not many industries are. As technology changes, costs go up, game design and target audience become more and more complex... rational thought would conclude it becomes harder to make a "hit". We are not making Pac Man kinds of games anymore, nor simple platformers like Sonic the HedgeHog. We are not limited to 8 bit, with a limitation of only 10 objects per screen.
Essentially the limitation have changed. Going from creating simple 2D sprites to complex 3D models that have to be textured, specular mapped, normal mapped, rigged, animated, given hitboxes, imported and optimized. Shaders, how GPUs process the information, drivers... i mean it just goes on.
Do you realize the leap from simplicity to complexity being made?
Even programming wise, the way in which games are made now a days are so much harder, easier to mess up. One small piece of code can result in bugs, especially when a game goes from being a small side scroller to a MMORPG in 3D space. No longer are programmers working in just 2 axises but 3. X, Y and Z. In 2D space, an object will go from positive or negative X and Y values to create the movement of left and right, up and down. Throw in depth however, the Z plane...and well, complexity goes through the roof. I mean, you really need to take full advantage of advanced calculus formulas, matrix, and logic (math).
Even design theory and principles have changed over time. Developers DO care about the player experience, but its hard when PLAYER CENTRIC design is faced with a variety of different Players. The diversity of players and what they consider fun is making player centric design even more difficult.
While I agree there needs to be improvements, progress is slow and for both good and bad reasons.
Publishers are needed right now to fund these big projects. Sadly, they were created to help spur game development and over time have become large, all controlling necessary evils. They can be both a boon and a bane to any development studio. Console makers like Nintendo are Publishers and 1st party developers. No console =/= no publisher. So with the advent of home consoles, came the publishers as well in order to support third party games.
We have been exposed to so many games over a period of time that the "new and fresh" is now "old and stale" to some, and its hard to change that. Innovation for a multimillion dollar project with a huge dev team is also a huge risk. MMORPGS are a huge risk, and since they are now working with a larger target audience, they cannot be as specialized. Any target audience is limited by the dumbest of them, because they still have to appeal to that person.
What this leads to is one of the great banes of any development studio. Marketing. The marketing departments and executives often like to play the role of creative director, they are not often artists or creative people. Its a constant battle trying to make a game creatively and also fight against the demands of marketing or the executives. If the developer fails by following marketing or the executives.... its not the marketing or executives that gets blamed. The system needs work, but the reason for their actions is because losses are bad for everyone in the long run.
This is why you see less innovation in design and features, there are not a lot of "new ideas" out there, its never as simple as make something "new", because it also has to WORK within the limitations of the target audience.
MMORPGs take a long time to make, and after World of Warcraft, a few studios tried their hand at competing with World of Warcraft. This is a multiyear processes. This experiment showed a few things, 1, that you cannot compete directly with WoW if you cannot match or surpass WoW in terms of design and features, and 2, that you have to either wait for WoW to decline or make something different than WoW that does not try to compete with WoW and not expect WoW's numbers.
Take EVE for example, the game is still alive and doing well. Why? because its a completely different experience from World of Warcraft, they do not have the same target audience as WoW players (majority) and because of this they have created their own niche.
What we see for the future of MMORPGS is either those who are going after a new niche, looking for new mediums (home consoles), or still planning to compete with WoW but waiting until Wow is truly in decline.
Games, both single player and multiplayer have been around long enough, with technology more complex than previous generations, and a system thats only grown and is still going through growing pains, are not going to be magically different than those of the past. We essentially hit a wall. This has nothing to do with economic model (capitalism or anything else). The whole point to create entertainment is for it to be successful, and success must have monetary gains, thus to pain those who worked hard on it, and also fund the next project. Without that fact, games production would die. Just as you cant expect crops without giving them water to grow, and seeds to form for the next season, so too can you not expect games to be produced without funding and a means to live off (income) while working on these projects.
Making games isnt easy, so you need to really give them a break and know that it takes time, years even, for the industry to adapt and mmorpgs to spring up on a level that CAN compete with WoW as well as the user expectations, which, HAVE TO BE REALISTIC.
Hmmm hmmm, where to begin my fellow friend? You've started a "rational" argument with quite a few assumptions on where I'm coming from. To begin with, I reject supposing that rationalism is the sole approach to any opinion or arguement. While you may think that you perceive things as they truly are- through hard facts, I might disagree. The essence of things is not inherent to its existence. Thought is a method for perceiving reality, but it does not guarantee us that our opinions are correct.
Great quote by Nietzsche:
"You sober people who feel well armed against passion and fantasies and would like to turn your emptiness into a matter of pride and ornament: you call yourselves realist and hint that the world really is the way it appears to you. As if reality stood unveiled before you only, and you yourselves were the best part of it- O you beloved images of Sais!"
I only bring this up due to your grandious pride, or maybe even "elitist nature, " to introduce an arguement by considering me ignorant.
Anyways, back to MMOs...
To have knowledge of the industry does not automatically discredit anothers opinion. As games are developed primarily for a player base, the opinion of that player base should be quite important if any game wants to be successful. If that weren't the case, we'd all be treated like mice on a treadmill and given games that aren't really fun where we have to do repetitive nonsense while paying $15 a month. Oh wait... That's already happening.
I never argued that games are still simple to create, or that there is no complexity involved. Obviously I believe that creating a virtual world is not a piece of cake, or a cheap piece of cake. I don't see why the majority if your rational argument is based upon something that I agree with myself.
I agree with all of your points on how games are currently run and developed and the difficulties in producing a quality game. I don't reject any of this, as previously stated in other posts I have made in this topic. I think you came into this thread with a motive for disagreement before reading any of what I said.
But even so, MMOs still have to make design choices relating to the player experience, and not just how well a person can jump, swim, or run. I'm not asking MMO developers to start producing mind blowing dungeon experiences, fully original dynamic events every 2 mins, etc. I'm just asking developers to stop taking advantage of the human psyche by trying to get players addicted to an experience that is unoriginal and unfun.
The title of this thread is not a statement against Capitalism in general, it is only a statement against the approach developers and publishers are taking.
And in reality, I don't give a fu*k whether or not any gaming company makes money or not when they are producing garbage. Does Starbucks really deserve to become rich out of the ass because they sell a chemical combination of sugar and caffeine towards millions of overweight people? I think it is important that we as consumers stop being treated as mindless consumers who only care about quick satisfaction, but maybe that is what we really are anyways.
One more thought... If we keep talking about the difficulties, barriers, and cost of making an MMO, without talking about what quality is to begin in, then what would be the point of developing these games to begin with? It seems that many people's idea on what a good MMO is is whether or not it sells well and can possible become a "WoW killer."
Discussion as a player base should revolve more around what quality is in an MMO.
Originally posted by 9216544 As games are developed primarily for a player base, the opinion of that player base should be quite important if any game wants to be successful. If that weren't the case, we'd all be treated like mice on a treadmill and given games that aren't really fun where we have to do repetitive nonsense while paying $15 a month. Oh wait... That's already happening.
You are mistaken cause and consequence. The games are 'treadmills' because people want them to be treadmills, not vice versa.
That is the beauty of rational thinking...no circular reasoning and delusion.
As games are developed primarily for a player base, the opinion of that player base should be quite important if any game wants to be successful. If that weren't the case, we'd all be treated like mice on a treadmill and given games that aren't really fun where we have to do repetitive nonsense while paying $15 a month. Oh wait... That's already happening.
You are mistaken cause and consequence. The games are 'treadmills' because people want them to be treadmills, not vice versa.
That is the beauty of rational thinking...no circular reasoning and delusion.
Yes, it's a thought I don't want to believe. I want to think that players are in control of their playing habits and do want something of more substantial quality. I'm deluded... I know.
Regardless, I have chosen to resubscribe to Darkfall as I'm amazed by the amount of updates, consistent communication with the player base, etc.
Comments
As much as i'd like to agree, you have to remember that most MMOs aren't really games anymore in the traditional sense. They've evolved into something much more grand and different than us 'older gamers' may be used to.
Dungeons aren't ran for the mystery and difficulty anymore. They're plowed through for loot and titles.
Massive expanses of land aren't for traveling and exploring. They're chatrooms.
NPCs no longer hold the importance and knowledge of forthcoming quests and challenges. They're just signposts that players quickly skip through to fill their log books and advance to the endgame.
These games are purley made and maintained for profit. Nothing else.
The developers of these impossibly huge, massive games could care less about their once small, precious pet projects.
They're unstoppable trains filled with money, and they're only traveling faster, and tacking on 'extra content' every so often to lure in the next potential customer.
If you want to feel important, if you want to feel like a hero, if you want the entire game universe to revolve around you, and only you...
you might want to stick to single player rpgs.
Isn't what you said simply an opinion of yours? My experience is many of these smaller developers (like Aventurine) are now scrambling to try and find a way to get more people to play the game they made as opposed to developing new systems and the like for the players they do have. What that tells me is that while they haven't folded they must see something wrong with the paycheck at the end of the day.
A better or worse mmorpg is plainly an opinion, just because you hate everything WOW stands for doesn't make it a verifiably worse game than any game you can point to made by a smaller company it just means you prefer that game and it's style of play.
I don't like to jump on anyones bandwagon but logic would tell me if twelve million people are playing WOW then a large portion of the mmorpg playing population wants that type of gameplay, regardless of how you guys rationalize it "these people are just stupid", "they just don't know what a good game is".
It simply means you have tastes that are vastly different than the majority and while that may make you guys all "special" it doesn't make you "better" or "smarter". Hell most folks thinking with an objective mind (meaning not injecting their own personal feeling into any debate) would think it smarter to develop for those 12 million as opposed to the million people.
Do us all a favor though as Moaky07 said there are tons of games like the one you describe begging for more subs to survive instead of wasting your energy trying to constantly shoot down products you don't even care for put that energy into building up your preffered play style, much like I have done by playing WOW,AION,WAR,AOC,LOTRO.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Sorry, nothing you said changes the simple fact that there is no diversity in the MMORPG genre at all these days. Hasn't been for years, like I brought up. And it will not change anytime soon.
You are right however that they don't have to put out a "AAA Sandbox" title.
But I do have the ability to withold my money from the utter cr*p that the companies are shoveling out in spades. And I can voice my complaints about the state of the genre.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Game companies do not exist for altruistic reasons or make games that are for your fantasies. They exist to make money for themselves and pay their employees and give jobs to people who will be out of work if they fail.
They do not make games tailor made for you. If you do not want to pay them there are people like me who will continue to do so to support this genre , I love the genre and what it can be and was or will be or can never be who knows but I take what I get since I cannot make the games myself and need these companies to continue to make them.
Yes sure they are not as innovative or wonderful as we imagine they can be but this is reality and I live here not in some fantasy Aladdin lamp world and without these games there is less joy in my world. So yes I am the sheep that will continue to support mediocre games.
Looking at the numbers of subscribers and this growing genre I am not the only one willing to accept less. Hell I settle for less everyday of my life. If I looked too hard at all the things I get in my life I might not be as content as I am right now with my lot in life.
I don't think anyone is trying to imply that game developers necessarily owe consumers anything, or that they should be altruistic.
Rather, what some people, at least what I am, complaining about it the nose-dive in quality and development priorities, which is obviously driven by the industry being taken over by business men who only care about profit.
That's not to say noone making an MMO should care about profit. They should. The developers need to support themselves and their families. But, the problem with most MMOs todays is that MMOs are being developed with only one goal in mind, to make profit. It used to be that MMOs were developed with the MMO's quality in mind, genuinely making a deep, fun, enjoyable game. If you provided that, then you would natually gravitate toward making a profit per simple logic that a decent game will do well.
Instead today, we get games that seem almost like they have a bigger advertising budget than they do in development. Games that feel half-finished, and most importantly, feel like they have no soul. They lack the feeling of immersiveness and genuine enjoyability that their predessors did. They are quite simply, half-baked ideas, dumbed down to the lowest common denominator and rushed out the door in a cashgrab attempt to sucker the most people out of their money as possible before consumers realize what a steaming pile the game is and how much it's not worth the box price or the monthly subscription price.
Do some people enjoy these games? Sure, some people do. Just like some people enjoy so called "reality TV", which is also considered lowest common denominator entertainment.
Now I'm not trying to bash people who enjoy MMOs that are like this. They have every right to, and I honestly don't care that they do. The problem however, is the the industry seems to almost be wholey trying to cater to this mass market audience in an attempt to milk it out of every penny.
There are next to no true game developers any longer. Most of them are nothing more than regurgitators of disposable entertainment for the purpose of promising consumers something fresh and new, only to serve them the same old gruel that they have been for the past six years. Most consumers just throw money at them and gobble it up, because they're ravenous for something fresh and new... something better. But most of them are too distracted to realize that they just keep letting themselves be fed the same old shit that hasn't gotten any better aside from a prettier package -- graphics.
Advertisement is very very important. The reason many people are even aware of a game is because it is advertised. Yes they have to have a huge budget for it because it sells. You must advertise.
I saw the ad for Halo Reach me who cannot play Half Life without getting FPS headaches in like 15 mins considered getting it because of the awesome ad. Well you can classify me as gullible and stupid but there you have it I was taken in by the ad and wanted to buy it.
I have never tried an RTS in my whole gaming history. I bought Starcraft II based on the awesome ad and became an RTS fan. I have even finished the Dawn of War and Red Alert games thanks to Stracraft II. Ads work.
<PicardFacepalm>
I wasn't saying that advertising isn't important. I was saying that it's a problem when it feels like a company spent for thought, effort, and money on advertising a product, than they did developing the product.
In other words, it feels like a lot of developers are focusing more on hyping up a game, than they are on making sure the game is decent.
Duh, I wish someone was paying me for hype. I swear I would be hyped like no other...
Well if they have a limited budget they have to decide to spend on the advertising. That is what you seem to be missing .They cut on the game development to spend on advertising because advertising will get them the currency in the form of people to be interested by preordering while they can get more money to develop the game further. Most games do this they sell the game and then patch it up as time progresses. Is this right ,no, but with a limited amount of money you make a choice.
You look at it as if they are spending more on advertisement than on the product development but it is a valid investment. When you make a game and are satisfied in your opinion that the game is good enough to market as playable you spend the money on advertising to get more people to buy your product so that you can spend the money that comes in on further development. No one has an unending supply of cash unless you are Blizzard may be. Every developer has to compromise.
You are talking about game development like it is an Utopian development. The reality is how they have to cut corners. So it does look like they spent more on advertising and hype than on the game but they may not have had a choice in the matter. When you listen or read to the many things that failed games developers say went wrong , they all have dreams and ideas that seemed good but they lack money and time to carry them all out. Some of them make bad decisions on what to cut and they regret so much , none of them want to fail on their ideas but they make choices bad ones at times. I am not sure anyone could simply just by today's standards ever live up to what you are proposing.
In the past games that were being developed were done in isolation and relative lack of competition so they could afford to spend a large portion of their budget on the game itself. These days advertisement is even more important than the game itself. I am not saying that this is right but this is the reality. The unfortunate side effect of this reality is that the game itself might not live up to the hype. Unless you are all convinced that the current crop of developers are all without any great and innovative ideas can you explain then why they do not translate into super games when they are at the helms. In my opinion this happens because they have to compromise.
Goodness just reread what I wrote I sound like an apologist. What I am trying to say is that however much we might lament on the loss of creativity in games these days it is not the sole fault of greed or lack of scruples and disinterest in being ingenious but just plain economics and current gaming atmosphere that dictates the priorities. Sure sucks does it not ?
Let me ask you this:
Imagine you had $50 million dollars to invest in a game. But, if the game tanked you were in the poor-house and would go deep in debt and were done ever investing again. Would you make an innovative game that may or may not be financially successful, or would you make a theme-park game whose feature set was driven by careful market analysis which (you felt) gave you the best chance of a return on your investment?
In my opinion, I would:
A. Not make an MMO
B. If Not A, then make a single player game
C. Invest my money in more profitable industries
We're starting to blurr the line between developer and publisher a little too much. If the developer has enough money to design and distribute the game, they can probably afford more risk because whatever risk that there is, they can manage through their own team without deadlines and pressure from higher ups.
But again, I dunno jack about the gaming industry other then what I observe as a player.
Your A, B, and C is kinda the right answer here, and what I was getting at. It's very hard to make a profitable MMO, for a very large number of reasons which is probably a thread in itself. I think by and large, nobody is in the game industry (single player, console, or online) - either as a developer or an investor - purely for fiscal gain. An exception is maybe facebook, phone, or advert games. Other than that, profit margins are quite small, and the risks are enormous. But that's just my own personal observation.
The thing about the developer that has enough money to design and distribute is an interesting point. But I think generally speaking a single failed project could be a death sentence for a given company. That's scary stuff! Most independent studios can't absorb the costs of throwing tens of millions into a hole which is the buy-in cost of a triple-A MMO. A bad MMO can be a studio-killers (even studios that were otherwise successful), and there are couple of good recent examples there. The difference is that you're are not shipping a game before its done because the publisher tells you; rather you are shipping the game before it's done because you need the box sales to pay your employees.
The real reason MMOs fail so hard is because "traditional" project management as a software profession is pretty good at shipping features-in-a-box, but it's not necessarily the best way to ship something that needs to be fun and entertaining. And you simply need project management to coordinate hundreds of people and manage 10s of millions of dollars. So there needs to be some balance between games-as-entertainment and games-as-software. And I think the MMO industry (moreso than console or single player PC) is young enough that this isn't a solved problem.
That would be sound logic, if the theme-park MMOs were financially booming. The only one recently to really make a Boom was WoW, the rest have been following that logic, but failing to produce that same boom. I wouldn't say there haven't been any financially viable theme-parks lately, but they haven't been anywhere near what they were initially aiming for. At this point, I would develop a unique and innovative MMO just to stand out in a crowd of clones.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Huh? 'Fun' and 'entertainment' are as subjective customer needs as are utility and usability of any business oriented software.
So I liken it to this. I enjoy playing blackjack in Vegas. I'm pretty good at blackjack, and actually as long as I am sticking to the $5 bets I rack up a nice pile of $5 chips. But when I start making $50 bets I start losing. And this is purely psychology. What's really interesting is that knowing it's purely psychology and being able to identify that doesn't help me at the tables when it's time to hit on that 15.
When $50 million of your money is on the line, you start making the "safe" bets - which is not always the optimal bets (or even, really, the actually safe bets). In some ways I think it's easier to make good games when you are doing it with publisher money as opposed to your money, because you aren't psychologically attached to it and therefore your judgment doesn't get clouded. But then because it's their money, you have to ship when they tell you to ship and include or cut the features that they say. The really sweet deal is to find a publisher that gives you money no-stringed-attached. Which is kinda Blizzard's situation (I get the feeling).
I read your original post and all i can say is... you are ignorant, and you admit to being such since you do not know about the industry. It is generally wise to keep opinions stated as claims to ones self until familiar with the subject matter.
Also, the use of "capitalist morons" in the subject title is not only seen as provoking for the sake of attention but more so showcasing the potential elitist bias of the topic creator. Bias, is of course, the interference of rational thought.
That said... The way the industry has evolved isnt perfect. Not many industries are. As technology changes, costs go up, game design and target audience become more and more complex... rational thought would conclude it becomes harder to make a "hit". We are not making Pac Man kinds of games anymore, nor simple platformers like Sonic the HedgeHog. We are not limited to 8 bit, with a limitation of only 10 objects per screen.
Essentially the limitation have changed. Going from creating simple 2D sprites to complex 3D models that have to be textured, specular mapped, normal mapped, rigged, animated, given hitboxes, imported and optimized. Shaders, how GPUs process the information, drivers... i mean it just goes on.
Do you realize the leap from simplicity to complexity being made?
Even programming wise, the way in which games are made now a days are so much harder, easier to mess up. One small piece of code can result in bugs, especially when a game goes from being a small side scroller to a MMORPG in 3D space. No longer are programmers working in just 2 axises but 3. X, Y and Z. In 2D space, an object will go from positive or negative X and Y values to create the movement of left and right, up and down. Throw in depth however, the Z plane...and well, complexity goes through the roof. I mean, you really need to take full advantage of advanced calculus formulas, matrix, and logic (math).
Even design theory and principles have changed over time. Developers DO care about the player experience, but its hard when PLAYER CENTRIC design is faced with a variety of different Players. The diversity of players and what they consider fun is making player centric design even more difficult.
While I agree there needs to be improvements, progress is slow and for both good and bad reasons.
Publishers are needed right now to fund these big projects. Sadly, they were created to help spur game development and over time have become large, all controlling necessary evils. They can be both a boon and a bane to any development studio. Console makers like Nintendo are Publishers and 1st party developers. No console =/= no publisher. So with the advent of home consoles, came the publishers as well in order to support third party games.
We have been exposed to so many games over a period of time that the "new and fresh" is now "old and stale" to some, and its hard to change that. Innovation for a multimillion dollar project with a huge dev team is also a huge risk. MMORPGS are a huge risk, and since they are now working with a larger target audience, they cannot be as specialized. Any target audience is limited by the dumbest of them, because they still have to appeal to that person.
What this leads to is one of the great banes of any development studio. Marketing. The marketing departments and executives often like to play the role of creative director, they are not often artists or creative people. Its a constant battle trying to make a game creatively and also fight against the demands of marketing or the executives. If the developer fails by following marketing or the executives.... its not the marketing or executives that gets blamed. The system needs work, but the reason for their actions is because losses are bad for everyone in the long run.
This is why you see less innovation in design and features, there are not a lot of "new ideas" out there, its never as simple as make something "new", because it also has to WORK within the limitations of the target audience.
MMORPGs take a long time to make, and after World of Warcraft, a few studios tried their hand at competing with World of Warcraft. This is a multiyear processes. This experiment showed a few things, 1, that you cannot compete directly with WoW if you cannot match or surpass WoW in terms of design and features, and 2, that you have to either wait for WoW to decline or make something different than WoW that does not try to compete with WoW and not expect WoW's numbers.
Take EVE for example, the game is still alive and doing well. Why? because its a completely different experience from World of Warcraft, they do not have the same target audience as WoW players (majority) and because of this they have created their own niche.
What we see for the future of MMORPGS is either those who are going after a new niche, looking for new mediums (home consoles), or still planning to compete with WoW but waiting until Wow is truly in decline.
Games, both single player and multiplayer have been around long enough, with technology more complex than previous generations, and a system thats only grown and is still going through growing pains, are not going to be magically different than those of the past. We essentially hit a wall. This has nothing to do with economic model (capitalism or anything else). The whole point to create entertainment is for it to be successful, and success must have monetary gains, thus to pain those who worked hard on it, and also fund the next project. Without that fact, games production would die. Just as you cant expect crops without giving them water to grow, and seeds to form for the next season, so too can you not expect games to be produced without funding and a means to live off (income) while working on these projects.
Making games isnt easy, so you need to really give them a break and know that it takes time, years even, for the industry to adapt and mmorpgs to spring up on a level that CAN compete with WoW as well as the user expectations, which, HAVE TO BE REALISTIC.
NO, we DON'T have ourselves to blame, that is if you are a part of the "WE" that enjoys virtual worlds in MMOs.
Watch the video. It explains it all. Best overall "report" on MMOs I have ever seen. Escapist hit the nail on the head with the Triton missile. "We" didn't have anything to do with it.
(http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/1906-The-Future-of-MMOs)
If Escapist is right in their prediction of the future of MMOs, and I think they are right, I might as well leave now rather than watch it happen.
As for looking to the smaller Development Studios for quality and innovation... those small studios days are numbered. Just like in every other area of business or industry, once the big boys take control they will push out or buy out the small guys and that will be the end of the Indys. I have seen it happen over and over again in my half century of life, and it might take a few years, but it will unfortunately happen. Whe it comes to money and profit it doesn't matter what the industry or business is, the tactics and strategies are almost always the same.
I am the Player that wonders... "What the %#*& just happened?!"
...............
"I Believe... There should be NO financial connection or portals between the Real World and the Virtual in MMOs. "
__Ever Present Cockroach of the MMO Verses__
...scurrying to and fro... .munching on bits of garbage... always under foot...
My random trolling statement: There's more "innovation" in the MMORPG genre in how to make you pay for the game instead of gameplay and sense of community. I'll go so far as saying gameplay and the sense of being part of an MMORPG's community is becoming worse.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
Very well said! Lately I've been seeing a lot of rationality in this sea of misplaced animosity toward mmos. investors and developers. It's the same point I was trying to make as well:
Do not look toward the industry giants you're damning to be your shining light. Seek out the smaller development houses to keep your flame from exstingushing.
And while it's ok to vent once and a while to "get it off your chest", don' t think for a moment that it will turn the heads of any multi million dollar dev team dreaming up it's next potential payoff. I personally have got to the point in my life where I'd love to find a deep, involving mmo to sink into. But my time restraints of my duty as a father, husband and co-worker will always limit the amount of time I can give at any given moment. Ultima Online was perfect for this because it was a single player mmo that you happen to play along side with other people. I could do a little of everything to build toward my goals.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Software focused on consumers, isn't really a business software... I talk about CRM, BPM, HRMS, accounting software, ERP and all sorts of enterprise management instruments and groupware solutions, etc.
Proprietary formats and licencing are a matter of revenue, not sales or development, it is pain in the ass for most of the time unless you own significant market share already. To get there though, you need what anyone else does - a product that is usable, good marketing and support.
It is always about the same - customer needs and their satisfaction.
Hmmm hmmm, where to begin my fellow friend? You've started a "rational" argument with quite a few assumptions on where I'm coming from. To begin with, I reject supposing that rationalism is the sole approach to any opinion or arguement. While you may think that you perceive things as they truly are- through hard facts, I might disagree. The essence of things is not inherent to its existence. Thought is a method for perceiving reality, but it does not guarantee us that our opinions are correct.
Great quote by Nietzsche:
"You sober people who feel well armed against passion and fantasies and would like to turn your emptiness into a matter of pride and ornament: you call yourselves realist and hint that the world really is the way it appears to you. As if reality stood unveiled before you only, and you yourselves were the best part of it- O you beloved images of Sais!"
I only bring this up due to your grandious pride, or maybe even "elitist nature, " to introduce an arguement by considering me ignorant.
Anyways, back to MMOs...
To have knowledge of the industry does not automatically discredit anothers opinion. As games are developed primarily for a player base, the opinion of that player base should be quite important if any game wants to be successful. If that weren't the case, we'd all be treated like mice on a treadmill and given games that aren't really fun where we have to do repetitive nonsense while paying $15 a month. Oh wait... That's already happening.
I never argued that games are still simple to create, or that there is no complexity involved. Obviously I believe that creating a virtual world is not a piece of cake, or a cheap piece of cake. I don't see why the majority if your rational argument is based upon something that I agree with myself.
I agree with all of your points on how games are currently run and developed and the difficulties in producing a quality game. I don't reject any of this, as previously stated in other posts I have made in this topic. I think you came into this thread with a motive for disagreement before reading any of what I said.
But even so, MMOs still have to make design choices relating to the player experience, and not just how well a person can jump, swim, or run. I'm not asking MMO developers to start producing mind blowing dungeon experiences, fully original dynamic events every 2 mins, etc. I'm just asking developers to stop taking advantage of the human psyche by trying to get players addicted to an experience that is unoriginal and unfun.
The title of this thread is not a statement against Capitalism in general, it is only a statement against the approach developers and publishers are taking.
And in reality, I don't give a fu*k whether or not any gaming company makes money or not when they are producing garbage. Does Starbucks really deserve to become rich out of the ass because they sell a chemical combination of sugar and caffeine towards millions of overweight people? I think it is important that we as consumers stop being treated as mindless consumers who only care about quick satisfaction, but maybe that is what we really are anyways.
One more thought... If we keep talking about the difficulties, barriers, and cost of making an MMO, without talking about what quality is to begin in, then what would be the point of developing these games to begin with? It seems that many people's idea on what a good MMO is is whether or not it sells well and can possible become a "WoW killer."
Discussion as a player base should revolve more around what quality is in an MMO.
You are mistaken cause and consequence. The games are 'treadmills' because people want them to be treadmills, not vice versa.
That is the beauty of rational thinking...no circular reasoning and delusion.
Yes, it's a thought I don't want to believe. I want to think that players are in control of their playing habits and do want something of more substantial quality. I'm deluded... I know.
Regardless, I have chosen to resubscribe to Darkfall as I'm amazed by the amount of updates, consistent communication with the player base, etc.