"I'm tired of AAA themepark games like WoW, GW2 and FF XIV. Developers should start making niche games for niche audiences. They should make a game for people like me, who want [insert niche here]."
"Niche" is a very broad word, if used literally. However, I think its definition is pretty clear in this case, although there are some borderline cases, such as EVE. I don't think arguing about them being niche or not is productive.
Originally posted by Tamanous
A niche game doesn't mean it has to be a broke indie company.
UO was a niche game.
EQ was a niche game.
AC was a niche game.
...
I don't think you can compare the way the market was back then with the way it is now.
For example, I'd love to play a modern version of UO, but I highly doubt it's possible without a rather big budget. I mean a really modern version, with good 3D graphics and combat on par with other modern titles. AA seems to have many of UO's features, but it's got a huge budget. Yes, it's not as expensive as Western games tend to be, but considering Korean labor costs...
Korean labor costs? Are you serious? South Korea is not China.. i don't know exact numbers, but i guess the average income is somewhat higher in comparsion to US.
The billion polygon human is going to be a lot more expensive to produce. Comparing the previous generation of Unreal graphics to the current generation of Unreal graphics, it takes six times longer to create the models, textures, and animations for people who know what they are doing*. This is more of a limiting factor for indie games than the skill of the people producing the graphics.
It is going to take people who know what they are doing longer to make a model because they have to make a lower polygon model.
Not a higher one.
A human with over a million polygons can be whipped out almost instantly.
Try drawing a realistic looking back side of a human. If you can just draw a circle you can do it in a snap.. Now draw it out of 3 lines.
Its gonna look like crap, or you're gonna spend some time and get creative.
more is NOT better. more polygons take more resources to run and in an MMORPG especially can quickly run up the total polygon count a player's computer has to render when a lot of models are on screen.
if you had to hire an artist and you had two applicants.
One that could make a realistic human model out of 10 million polygons in an hour.
One that could make just as realistic a human model out of 10 thousand polygons in an hour.
Originally posted by DavisFlight Originally posted by ScalplessI don't think you can compare the way the market was back then with the way it is now.For example, I'd love to play a modern version of UO, but I highly doubt it's possible without a rather big budget. I mean a really modern version, with good 3D graphics and combat on par with other modern titles. AA seems to have many of UO's features, but it's got a huge budget. Yes, it's not as expensive as Western games tend to be, but considering Korean labor costs...
You absolutely can compare them. It has only gotten easier over the years to make MMOs. Hardware is better, internet is faster. Art assets take more time but so long as you aren't shooting for photorealism that's not really the big issue. The big issue is design is hard, but the early MMO designers were good at it.
People want to minimize the art assets, but that's one of the biggest time sinks when it comes to game development. Unless a developer wants to make a game with graphics that look five years old, they need to spend a lot of time on the modeling. It's actually an issue for the entire industry and one of the reasons that development costs have sky rocketed.
Look at some indie games. The ones that look really good will have cut corners someplace. They'll have far fewer models than a more expensive game, and it will be obvious because you'll seen clones of many things.
This is a big deal for a game like UO, where you could sit down at a chess board and play chess, or move around sixty different types of chairs. It would take a huge budget, even cutting corners to make anything close to what UO was capable of in a five year development time frame.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
"Niche" is a very broad word, if used literally. However, I think its definition is pretty clear in this case, although there are some borderline cases, such as EVE. I don't think arguing about them being niche or not is productive.
(...)
Forums are rarely productive, if ever.
It is however very relevant to point out that you may have missunderstood what the people asking for "niche MMOs" were asking for. They were not necessarely asking for indie niche MMOs .
You absolutely can compare them. It has only gotten easier over the years to make MMOs. Hardware is better, internet is faster. Art assets take more time but so long as you aren't shooting for photorealism that's not really the big issue. The big issue is design is hard, but the early MMO designers were good at it.
And you absolutely can compare them. The question dev need to answer is whether to make MMOs that top out at 200-300k players (UO), or 500k users (EQ), or go for million sellers like GW2, or just abandon MMO and make MOBA, and instanced based online games.
Yes, you have a good point there, they targetted several niches, some more successful than others. Specially the esport dreams have so far been a failure.
Do those niches altogether form a group of niches that is too large in comparison to the whole MMORPG market to be considered a niche? I very much doubt so. They certainly did not target the largest part of the MMORPG market which is the vertical progression people.
Perhaps you are mixing up the terms "niche" and "independent" (also known as "indie"), GW2 was certainly not an indie game.
No, I'm using your definition of "niche". GW2 targets a range of market segments, not one specific group of players. If GW2 targets a range of players rather than one specific group, it is not a niche game.
GW2 sold over two million copies of the game shortly after the game was released. Not many other MMORPG have achieved this. Size wise, GW2 is not a niche game either.
The only way you're correct in your usage of "niche" in regards to GW2 is that any market segment can be described as a "niche", so all games are in some way a "niche" game, even if the niche is described as "people who play game {x}".
One important thing to note is that if a segment can never be equal to the whole market itself and for all practical purposes a hypothetical segment that almost completely dominates a market, can be considered to be equivalent to the market itself and thus the hypothetical segment would not be an actual segment.
Every market segment can be divided into smaller market segments. So simply because GW2 aimed at different smaller market segments, it doesn't mean that the union of all those segments isn't a market segment.
You would have to elaborate how you draw the conclusion that with 2 million copies sold, GW2 isn't a niche game sizewise. Because "niche" isn't about absolute numbers, it is about relative numbers of a bigger abstract cake.
If they didn't aim to appeal to the grand majority of the current MMORPG market, then they would be niche, yes.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn Originally posted by lizardbones
The billion polygon human is going to be a lot more expensive to produce. Comparing the previous generation of Unreal graphics to the current generation of Unreal graphics, it takes six times longer to create the models, textures, and animations for people who know what they are doing*. This is more of a limiting factor for indie games than the skill of the people producing the graphics.
It is going to take people who know what they are doing longer to make a model because they have to make a lower polygon model.
Not a higher one.
A human with over a million polygons can be whipped out almost instantly.
Try drawing a realistic looking back side of a human. If you can just draw a circle you can do it in a snap.. Now draw it out of 3 lines.
Its gonna look like crap, or you're gonna spend some time and get creative.
more is NOT better. more polygons take more resources to run and in an MMORPG especially can quickly run up the total polygon count a player's computer has to render when a lot of models are on screen.
if you had to hire an artist and you had two applicants.
One that could make a realistic human model out of 10 million polygons in an hour.
One that could make just as realistic a human model out of 10 thousand polygons in an hour.
That second fellow IS worth a LOT more to you.
The second person and the first person are the same person. The process of making a high poly model and the process for making a low poly model isn't radically different. If someone is capable of making good looking high poly models, they will be capable of making good looking low poly models. It just takes a lot longer to make the high poly model.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Most people, regardless of whether they want niche or not, want a quality game. EVE is an example of what people want, and also proof that it is possible. Darkfall doesn't seem to be doing so bad lately, either. But most niche games are made by indie companies. That is not to say that a niche game can't be profitable even for a large company, but meh.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
Originally posted by TwoThreeFour Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by TwoThreeFourOriginally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by TwoThreeFour
(...)Yes, you have a good point there, they targetted several niches, some more successful than others. Specially the esport dreams have so far been a failure. Do those niches altogether form a group of niches that is too large in comparison to the whole MMORPG market to be considered a niche? I very much doubt so. They certainly did not target the largest part of the MMORPG market which is the vertical progression people.Perhaps you are mixing up the terms "niche" and "independent" (also known as "indie"), GW2 was certainly not an indie game. No, I'm using your definition of "niche". GW2 targets a range of market segments, not one specific group of players. If GW2 targets a range of players rather than one specific group, it is not a niche game. GW2 sold over two million copies of the game shortly after the game was released. Not many other MMORPG have achieved this. Size wise, GW2 is not a niche game either. The only way you're correct in your usage of "niche" in regards to GW2 is that any market segment can be described as a "niche", so all games are in some way a "niche" game, even if the niche is described as "people who play game {x}".
One important thing to note is that if a segment can never be equal to the whole market itself and for all practical purposes a hypothetical segment that almost completely dominates a market, can be considered to be equivalent to the market itself and thus the hypothetical segment would not be an actual segment.
Every market segment can be divided into smaller market segments. So simply because GW2 aimed at different smaller market segments, it doesn't mean that the union of all those segments isn't a market segment.
You would have to elaborate how you draw the conclusion that with 2 million copies sold, GW2 isn't a niche game sizewise. Because "niche" isn't about absolute numbers, it is about relative numbers of a bigger abstract cake.
If they didn't aim to appeal to the grand majority of the current MMORPG market, then they would be niche, yes.
I'm using the definition, provided by you, and the example, provided by you. You stated that GW2 satisfies the "horizontal advancement" market segment, so it was a niche game. GW2 doesn't satisfy just that market segment. I'm not even sure that is a market segment. It satisfies several market segments, some of which I named.
Unless you can actually define the market segment that GW2 satisfies, and show that it's somehow unique from other segments of the market, and that GW2 targets that market segment specifically, then it's not a niche game.
Size wise, GW2 is one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW in terms of players. SWToR may have more players, but we can't really be sure since GW2 doesn't publish player numbers.
GW2 doesn't target a specific market segment, and it's one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW. GW2 is not a niche game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by NagelRitter Most people, regardless of whether they want niche or not, want a quality game. EVE is an example of what people want, and also proof that it is possible. Darkfall doesn't seem to be doing so bad lately, either. But most niche games are made by indie companies. That is not to say that a niche game can't be profitable even for a large company, but meh.
Is there a point in here?
Niche game can be profitable for a large company but they won't care to make a small amount of profits. Their management don't have the bandwidth for small amount of money.
I'm using the definition, provided by you, and the example, provided by you. You stated that GW2 satisfies the "horizontal advancement" market segment, so it was a niche game. GW2 doesn't satisfy just that market segment. I'm not even sure that is a market segment. It satisfies several market segments, some of which I named.
Unless you can actually define the market segment that GW2 satisfies, and show that it's somehow unique from other segments of the market, and that GW2 targets that market segment specifically, then it's not a niche game.
Size wise, GW2 is one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW in terms of players. SWToR may have more players, but we can't really be sure since GW2 doesn't publish player numbers.
GW2 doesn't target a specific market segment, and it's one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW. GW2 is not a niche game.
It may be one of the largest game, but it is still not large compared to the total amount of people playing MMORPGs in 2013.
The specific market segment, which we can call A, is a subsegment to the complement to the intersection between the whole MMORPG market and the "I need significant vertical progression in a MMORPG" market section. (mentioning whole MMORPG market was redundant in this case, which you may realize )
If terms like complement and intersection in Set theory are not familiar to you, you may consult wikipedia at
The second person and the first person are the same person. The process of making a high poly model and the process for making a low poly model isn't radically different. If someone is capable of making good looking high poly models, they will be capable of making good looking low poly models. It just takes a lot longer to make the high poly model.
Maybe someone will show up who can explain it better than I. I'll just disagree and leave it at that.
I want not only to have AAA mmorpgs created to cater to my tastes, but additionally I expect for it to stay like that and to send a clear message for other type of players : adapt or gtfo to other game.
This arguing about graphics is just semantics. I stand by my argument that high polygon games are harder to make with smooth animations and that function well on a moderate range of gaming pc's based on the multitude of titles i've seen through the years. I've always had top of the line rig so I know my computer was not the issue. Lower graphic quality games ALWAYS ran smoother and had less clunky animations than the title that were reaching for photorealism. Did those lower graphic quality games cost more to make in the art department than the photorealism ones? To be honest I don't know. I haven't looked up the budgets of every game I've ever played and where it was distributed. I do know however that when the overall budgets of two projects were close and the graphics of the two games were different, it was usually the one with the lower polygons that felt more polished.
I'm more concerned about the other issues that I mentioned. Game developers feel obligated to make these huge worlds, make this massive amount of quests, dungeons and raids, feel like they have to include copious amounts of voice acting for the casual gamers in this current market to feel modern when I know that they can cut corners on these things to have more manageable budgets and give themselves higher profit margins (because they are not the things we REALLY care about and they can make great games for us without them).
Originally posted by Sulaa I want not only to have AAA mmorpgs created to cater to my tastes, but additionally I expect for it to stay like that and to send a clear message for other type of players : adapt or gtfo.
LOL ..
The question, of course, is how do you plan to accomplish that? Or is this just wishful thinking?
Originally posted by Sulaa I want not only to have AAA mmorpgs created to cater to my tastes, but additionally I expect for it to stay like that and to send a clear message for other type of players : adapt or gtfo.
LOL ..
The question, of course, is how do you plan to accomplish that? Or is this just wishful thinking?
Accomplish? LOL indeed.
Not going to accomplish anything and I don't even realistically expect that industry will actually cater to my tastes and because of that I don't expect myself to be playing an MMOPRG anymore ever again and I already do not play them for quite some time.
I've just visited mmorpg.com today first time in some time to laugh a bit from those endless discussions that take place here. This topic is funny and interesting enough - so I've decided to honestly answer OP. I don't actually expect that my posst to achieve anything lol
Niche game can be profitable for a large company but they won't care to make a small amount of profits. Their management don't have the bandwidth for small amount of money.
Rubbish, plenty of businesses do just fine by investing into multiple smaller ventures and could even gain larger profits from that. There also huge differences between companies in the style of management, I am not gonna excuse companies for frequently poor management. Very few businesses actually put all eggs in one basket since if that basket fails, you're really, really screwed.
SW:TOR is a good example of how not to do business.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by RamanadjinnOriginally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardOriginally posted by seacow1g A low polygon game with good art style and animations still costs significantly less than a high polygon game with them.I will have to disagree again. For being in the computer graphics industry these last 20 years, I can say that making something look good with the constraints of having to keep a low polygon count is harder than being able to create something good looking without any polygon limitations.
Absolutely 100% true.Anyone can make a human out of 1 billion polygons that looks great given enough time.Using less to make more? That is where the true art is involved and THAT is where you either spend money to get a real artist, you put out a bad model, or you fill your game with polygons and it runs like crap!Try it yourself.. see how many lines on a piece of paper it takes you to draw a realistic or well-styled human. It is easier to do with 1000 lines than it is to do with 20. Anyone can do this experiment. The billion polygon human is going to be a lot more expensive to produce. Comparing the previous generation of Unreal graphics to the current generation of Unreal graphics, it takes six times longer to create the models, textures, and animations for people who know what they are doing*. This is more of a limiting factor for indie games than the skill of the people producing the graphics. A AAA developer will have ten, twenty or a hundred people to produce graphics for a game. An indie developer will have two guys. The difference in the amount of time it takes to produce the graphics is so extreme that the indie developer has to cut corners someplace or the game will never get finished. Lower the polygon count, lower the total number of models that need to be created by reusing them or something else that is going to have an impact on the finished product. * This is information from people who work in the industry, and a warning included in the UDK training materials. The "bigger" the graphics get, the longer it takes to work with them. Time how long it takes to draw anything with 1,000 lines and how long it takes to draw anything with 20 lines to see the time difference for yourself. ** Concerning High Polygon modeling, from Epic Games, the people who make the Unreal Development Kit: High polygon modeling is a very time consuming task, especially given the detail required to make normal maps really shine. It is helpful to ask around and find out what experience your artists have with high polygon modeling and scale your production estimates accordingly. If your artists have no experience in creating high polygon models, expect up to five to six times as long to create a model in Unreal Development Kit compared to a model for Unreal Engine 2. As artists become more comfortable with UDK, that should drop to four to five times. Finally, expect a seasoned high polygon modeler to take about half as long as that. So from generation 2 to generation 3, it takes 4 to 5 times as long to create models using high polygon models for people with experience. It can take up to 5 or 6 times as long while learning to use the high polygon models. If it takes one day to make a low polygon model, it takes four or five days to make a high polygon model. That's a huge increase in cost for a game developer. http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/DevelopmentKitContentCreation.htmlYou take art as if it was something quantifiable. That's just not true.
Making a barrel look like a good looking real barrel with 1000 polygons is easy, I can do it too, even though I only make tools for artists and am not an artist myself.
Making a barrel look good with a dozen of polygons and low rez textures is much harder. That's something that can't be quantified, it's called talent.
Your selected quotes completely disregard the artistic aspect as if it was something secondary and as if only creating more polygons was important. That couldn't be further away from reality. If that was true, any indie studio could make amazing looking games with low polygon engines. We all know that's definitely not true.
You're acting as if the developer is going to make their choice of engine based on how good the modelers are. A developer isn't going to choose to use a high poly engine and then scrap it for some really good low poly modelers. Besides, if someone is a good modeler, they're going to be good whether they are making low poly models or high poly models. A developer is going to be looking for a good modeler. If they have a low poly engine, they are going to look for examples of the modeler's low poly work, not their high poly work. It's going to be even more specific than that. They're going to look for modelers with experience in the engine they are using for the game, or the tools they are using to create models for the game.
I agree, someone who can make low poly count stuff look great is a good modeler, but they're probably going to be a good high poly modeler too. If they have no experience in high poly count models though, and a developer has decided to use a current generation high poly engine, that modeler isn't great, they're useless.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by TwoThreeFour Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by TwoThreeFourOriginally posted by lizardbones (...)
I'm using the definition, provided by you, and the example, provided by you. You stated that GW2 satisfies the "horizontal advancement" market segment, so it was a niche game. GW2 doesn't satisfy just that market segment. I'm not even sure that is a market segment. It satisfies several market segments, some of which I named. Unless you can actually define the market segment that GW2 satisfies, and show that it's somehow unique from other segments of the market, and that GW2 targets that market segment specifically, then it's not a niche game. Size wise, GW2 is one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW in terms of players. SWToR may have more players, but we can't really be sure since GW2 doesn't publish player numbers. GW2 doesn't target a specific market segment, and it's one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW. GW2 is not a niche game. It may be one of the largest game, but it is still not large compared to the total amount of people playing MMORPGs in 2013.
The specific market segment, which we can call A, is a subsegment to the complement to the intersection between the whole MMORPG market and the "I need significant vertical progression in a MMORPG" market section. (mentioning whole MMORPG market was redundant in this case, which you may realize )
If terms like complement and intersection in Set theory are not familiar to you, you may consult wikipedia at
You still haven't described or even loosely defined the specific market segment that GW2 serves. If GW2 serves a specific market segment, that segment should be definable. You declared that GW2 is a niche game. Since you declared it a niche game, I'm asking you, what is the market specific market segment that GW2 was tailored to serve, and how is that market segment distinct from the rest of the market?
Your statement above describes how it's possible for GW2 to be a niche game, not how it is a niche game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
People claim they want more "niche", yet they don't play the existing ones.
Seems to me they want niche with quality - something which is very unlikely to happen considering the costs of developing a MMORPG. Developers don't spend several years along with top notch technology (motion capture, quality animation, optimized game engine, physics, etc...) to please a couple of thousands of players.
Funny that I want an Asheron's Call remade in modern settings and graphics so until I get that I'll continue to play the original Asheron's Call.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
An Indie Niche game called XYSON is a sandbox game worth checking out. there are no stupid NPC's standing around with signs over their head. When you login there is nothing telling you what to do. Everything is up to you.
We really need to support Indie games like this one. Winter is now over, so you can now see the Lake Tahoe basin in all it's glory.
The OP is confusing niche MMO with indie MMO. Niche MMOs can also be made by established companies that are seeking a limited "niche" audience so as not to compete with established franchises such as WoW.
Examples of Niche MMOs would include Vindictus, Age of Wushu, C9, Perfect World, etc. All good games with AAA quality graphics and features but aren't quite AAA in scope.
Examples of true AAA games are: Rift, SWTOR, and EQ-Next which try to appeal to the widest possible audience.
Indie MMOs are run on a shoestring budget by no name developers. Examples would include Mortal Online, Darkfall, and a dozen other low budget games. EVE started off as an indie but later became an established Niche MMO. EVE's inclusion of high quality personal avatars proves they have moved beyond Indie.
Conclusion: The market is ready for Niche MMOs that are well made. However, the market will not support poorly done indie MMOs.
Originally posted by Sulaa I want not only to have AAA mmorpgs created to cater to my tastes, but additionally I expect for it to stay like that and to send a clear message for other type of players : adapt or gtfo.
LOL ..
The question, of course, is how do you plan to accomplish that? Or is this just wishful thinking?
Accomplish? LOL indeed.
Not going to accomplish anything and I don't even realistically expect that industry will actually cater to my tastes and because of that I don't expect myself to be playing an MMOPRG anymore ever again and I already do not play them for quite some time.
I've just visited mmorpg.com today first time in some time to laugh a bit from those endless discussions that take place here. This topic is funny and interesting enough - so I've decided to honestly answer OP. I don't actually expect that my posst to achieve anything lol
Your post did achieve something. Entertainment for me, and probably you. That is what forums are good for, right?
I don't believe in terms like niche or Indie or Sandbox or Theme park that is all internet lingo that means nothing.
What matters is how much depth you put into each system.I am 99% certain all of these devs know what depth is,they know if they are simply doing the basics dmg/def crit/agi formula's.Imo ALL of them are looking for as many ways to cut out length of development as possible.
That is why so many games have these big lush worlds but no game to back it up.I don't want to spend hours picking hair colors and tatoos only to cover it up with armor/helmets.I don't want to simplyu slap on armor and a sword and begin button mashing 1-2-3-2-1 rinse and repeat.I don't want to play your game just because you tell me you have Raiding or "you can change the world".
What i want is for the developer to put the work into every aspect of the game.I don't want to simply run up to a npc with a yellow marker and run his errand, i want that quest to have more meaning and sub plots and can go in various direction.SWTOR gave us a VERY cheap version of what i mean,example you pick from three choices of dialogue and you might get bonus points,lose points or go neutral.You can do a LOT better than just that simple system that allowed them to repeat it all over the game.
These developers are not stupid,they know full well they are not putting out the effort we expect.They are all waiting for each other to push ,but rather than push ,they rather just copy the same guidelines and give us very mediocre efforts.
I am 100% certain i could make a better game than any of these but not with someone controlling the money and giving me orders and that is how it works in game development.
I will give one VERY good example>>>ECO system.Every dev knows it would be a great idea but they won't do it,too costly to run and design.They rather dot down some mobs and give them all basically the same type Ai.I find it VERY sad that devs are so cheap the yeven have the mobs all carry the exact same aggro distance.It is like 20 yalms and auto aggro.That is just LAZY game design,they know it,i know it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Comments
"I'm tired of AAA themepark games like WoW, GW2 and FF XIV. Developers should start making niche games for niche audiences. They should make a game for people like me, who want [insert niche here]."
I don't see people saying this.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Korean labor costs? Are you serious? South Korea is not China.. i don't know exact numbers, but i guess the average income is somewhat higher in comparsion to US.
It is going to take people who know what they are doing longer to make a model because they have to make a lower polygon model.
Not a higher one.
A human with over a million polygons can be whipped out almost instantly.
Try drawing a realistic looking back side of a human. If you can just draw a circle you can do it in a snap.. Now draw it out of 3 lines.
Its gonna look like crap, or you're gonna spend some time and get creative.
more is NOT better. more polygons take more resources to run and in an MMORPG especially can quickly run up the total polygon count a player's computer has to render when a lot of models are on screen.
if you had to hire an artist and you had two applicants.
One that could make a realistic human model out of 10 million polygons in an hour.
One that could make just as realistic a human model out of 10 thousand polygons in an hour.
That second fellow IS worth a LOT more to you.
People want to minimize the art assets, but that's one of the biggest time sinks when it comes to game development. Unless a developer wants to make a game with graphics that look five years old, they need to spend a lot of time on the modeling. It's actually an issue for the entire industry and one of the reasons that development costs have sky rocketed.
Look at some indie games. The ones that look really good will have cut corners someplace. They'll have far fewer models than a more expensive game, and it will be obvious because you'll seen clones of many things.
This is a big deal for a game like UO, where you could sit down at a chess board and play chess, or move around sixty different types of chairs. It would take a huge budget, even cutting corners to make anything close to what UO was capable of in a five year development time frame.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Forums are rarely productive, if ever.
It is however very relevant to point out that you may have missunderstood what the people asking for "niche MMOs" were asking for. They were not necessarely asking for indie niche MMOs .
And you absolutely can compare them. The question dev need to answer is whether to make MMOs that top out at 200-300k players (UO), or 500k users (EQ), or go for million sellers like GW2, or just abandon MMO and make MOBA, and instanced based online games.
One important thing to note is that if a segment can never be equal to the whole market itself and for all practical purposes a hypothetical segment that almost completely dominates a market, can be considered to be equivalent to the market itself and thus the hypothetical segment would not be an actual segment.
Every market segment can be divided into smaller market segments. So simply because GW2 aimed at different smaller market segments, it doesn't mean that the union of all those segments isn't a market segment.
You would have to elaborate how you draw the conclusion that with 2 million copies sold, GW2 isn't a niche game sizewise. Because "niche" isn't about absolute numbers, it is about relative numbers of a bigger abstract cake.
If they didn't aim to appeal to the grand majority of the current MMORPG market, then they would be niche, yes.
It is going to take people who know what they are doing longer to make a model because they have to make a lower polygon model.
Not a higher one.
A human with over a million polygons can be whipped out almost instantly.
Try drawing a realistic looking back side of a human. If you can just draw a circle you can do it in a snap.. Now draw it out of 3 lines.
Its gonna look like crap, or you're gonna spend some time and get creative.
more is NOT better. more polygons take more resources to run and in an MMORPG especially can quickly run up the total polygon count a player's computer has to render when a lot of models are on screen.
if you had to hire an artist and you had two applicants.
One that could make a realistic human model out of 10 million polygons in an hour.
One that could make just as realistic a human model out of 10 thousand polygons in an hour.
That second fellow IS worth a LOT more to you.
The second person and the first person are the same person. The process of making a high poly model and the process for making a low poly model isn't radically different. If someone is capable of making good looking high poly models, they will be capable of making good looking low poly models. It just takes a lot longer to make the high poly model.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
(...)
Yes, you have a good point there, they targetted several niches, some more successful than others. Specially the esport dreams have so far been a failure. Do those niches altogether form a group of niches that is too large in comparison to the whole MMORPG market to be considered a niche? I very much doubt so. They certainly did not target the largest part of the MMORPG market which is the vertical progression people. Perhaps you are mixing up the terms "niche" and "independent" (also known as "indie"), GW2 was certainly not an indie game.
No, I'm using your definition of "niche". GW2 targets a range of market segments, not one specific group of players. If GW2 targets a range of players rather than one specific group, it is not a niche game. GW2 sold over two million copies of the game shortly after the game was released. Not many other MMORPG have achieved this. Size wise, GW2 is not a niche game either. The only way you're correct in your usage of "niche" in regards to GW2 is that any market segment can be described as a "niche", so all games are in some way a "niche" game, even if the niche is described as "people who play game {x}".
One important thing to note is that if a segment can never be equal to the whole market itself and for all practical purposes a hypothetical segment that almost completely dominates a market, can be considered to be equivalent to the market itself and thus the hypothetical segment would not be an actual segment.
Every market segment can be divided into smaller market segments. So simply because GW2 aimed at different smaller market segments, it doesn't mean that the union of all those segments isn't a market segment.
You would have to elaborate how you draw the conclusion that with 2 million copies sold, GW2 isn't a niche game sizewise. Because "niche" isn't about absolute numbers, it is about relative numbers of a bigger abstract cake.
If they didn't aim to appeal to the grand majority of the current MMORPG market, then they would be niche, yes.
I'm using the definition, provided by you, and the example, provided by you. You stated that GW2 satisfies the "horizontal advancement" market segment, so it was a niche game. GW2 doesn't satisfy just that market segment. I'm not even sure that is a market segment. It satisfies several market segments, some of which I named.
Unless you can actually define the market segment that GW2 satisfies, and show that it's somehow unique from other segments of the market, and that GW2 targets that market segment specifically, then it's not a niche game.
Size wise, GW2 is one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW in terms of players. SWToR may have more players, but we can't really be sure since GW2 doesn't publish player numbers.
GW2 doesn't target a specific market segment, and it's one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW. GW2 is not a niche game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Is there a point in here?
Niche game can be profitable for a large company but they won't care to make a small amount of profits. Their management don't have the bandwidth for small amount of money.
It may be one of the largest game, but it is still not large compared to the total amount of people playing MMORPGs in 2013.
The specific market segment, which we can call A, is a subsegment to the complement to the intersection between the whole MMORPG market and the "I need significant vertical progression in a MMORPG" market section. (mentioning whole MMORPG market was redundant in this case, which you may realize
)
If terms like complement and intersection in Set theory are not familiar to you, you may consult wikipedia at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complement_(set_theory)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersection_(set_theory)
Maybe someone will show up who can explain it better than I. I'll just disagree and leave it at that.
This arguing about graphics is just semantics. I stand by my argument that high polygon games are harder to make with smooth animations and that function well on a moderate range of gaming pc's based on the multitude of titles i've seen through the years. I've always had top of the line rig so I know my computer was not the issue. Lower graphic quality games ALWAYS ran smoother and had less clunky animations than the title that were reaching for photorealism. Did those lower graphic quality games cost more to make in the art department than the photorealism ones? To be honest I don't know. I haven't looked up the budgets of every game I've ever played and where it was distributed. I do know however that when the overall budgets of two projects were close and the graphics of the two games were different, it was usually the one with the lower polygons that felt more polished.
I'm more concerned about the other issues that I mentioned. Game developers feel obligated to make these huge worlds, make this massive amount of quests, dungeons and raids, feel like they have to include copious amounts of voice acting for the casual gamers in this current market to feel modern when I know that they can cut corners on these things to have more manageable budgets and give themselves higher profit margins (because they are not the things we REALLY care about and they can make great games for us without them).
LOL ..
The question, of course, is how do you plan to accomplish that? Or is this just wishful thinking?
Accomplish? LOL indeed.
Not going to accomplish anything and I don't even realistically expect that industry will actually cater to my tastes and because of that I don't expect myself to be playing an MMOPRG anymore ever again and I already do not play them for quite some time.
I've just visited mmorpg.com today first time in some time to laugh a bit from those endless discussions that take place here. This topic is funny and interesting enough - so I've decided to honestly answer OP. I don't actually expect that my posst to achieve anything lol
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
The billion polygon human is going to be a lot more expensive to produce. Comparing the previous generation of Unreal graphics to the current generation of Unreal graphics, it takes six times longer to create the models, textures, and animations for people who know what they are doing*. This is more of a limiting factor for indie games than the skill of the people producing the graphics. A AAA developer will have ten, twenty or a hundred people to produce graphics for a game. An indie developer will have two guys. The difference in the amount of time it takes to produce the graphics is so extreme that the indie developer has to cut corners someplace or the game will never get finished. Lower the polygon count, lower the total number of models that need to be created by reusing them or something else that is going to have an impact on the finished product. * This is information from people who work in the industry, and a warning included in the UDK training materials. The "bigger" the graphics get, the longer it takes to work with them. Time how long it takes to draw anything with 1,000 lines and how long it takes to draw anything with 20 lines to see the time difference for yourself. ** Concerning High Polygon modeling, from Epic Games, the people who make the Unreal Development Kit: High polygon modeling is a very time consuming task, especially given the detail required to make normal maps really shine. It is helpful to ask around and find out what experience your artists have with high polygon modeling and scale your production estimates accordingly. If your artists have no experience in creating high polygon models, expect up to five to six times as long to create a model in Unreal Development Kit compared to a model for Unreal Engine 2. As artists become more comfortable with UDK, that should drop to four to five times. Finally, expect a seasoned high polygon modeler to take about half as long as that.
So from generation 2 to generation 3, it takes 4 to 5 times as long to create models using high polygon models for people with experience. It can take up to 5 or 6 times as long while learning to use the high polygon models. If it takes one day to make a low polygon model, it takes four or five days to make a high polygon model. That's a huge increase in cost for a game developer. http://udn.epicgames.com/Three/DevelopmentKitContentCreation.html
You take art as if it was something quantifiable. That's just not true.
Making a barrel look like a good looking real barrel with 1000 polygons is easy, I can do it too, even though I only make tools for artists and am not an artist myself.
Making a barrel look good with a dozen of polygons and low rez textures is much harder. That's something that can't be quantified, it's called talent.
Your selected quotes completely disregard the artistic aspect as if it was something secondary and as if only creating more polygons was important. That couldn't be further away from reality. If that was true, any indie studio could make amazing looking games with low polygon engines. We all know that's definitely not true.
You're acting as if the developer is going to make their choice of engine based on how good the modelers are. A developer isn't going to choose to use a high poly engine and then scrap it for some really good low poly modelers. Besides, if someone is a good modeler, they're going to be good whether they are making low poly models or high poly models. A developer is going to be looking for a good modeler. If they have a low poly engine, they are going to look for examples of the modeler's low poly work, not their high poly work. It's going to be even more specific than that. They're going to look for modelers with experience in the engine they are using for the game, or the tools they are using to create models for the game.
I agree, someone who can make low poly count stuff look great is a good modeler, but they're probably going to be a good high poly modeler too. If they have no experience in high poly count models though, and a developer has decided to use a current generation high poly engine, that modeler isn't great, they're useless.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I'm using the definition, provided by you, and the example, provided by you. You stated that GW2 satisfies the "horizontal advancement" market segment, so it was a niche game. GW2 doesn't satisfy just that market segment. I'm not even sure that is a market segment. It satisfies several market segments, some of which I named. Unless you can actually define the market segment that GW2 satisfies, and show that it's somehow unique from other segments of the market, and that GW2 targets that market segment specifically, then it's not a niche game. Size wise, GW2 is one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW in terms of players. SWToR may have more players, but we can't really be sure since GW2 doesn't publish player numbers. GW2 doesn't target a specific market segment, and it's one of the largest, if not the largest game that isn't WoW. GW2 is not a niche game.
It may be one of the largest game, but it is still not large compared to the total amount of people playing MMORPGs in 2013.
The specific market segment, which we can call A, is a subsegment to the complement to the intersection between the whole MMORPG market and the "I need significant vertical progression in a MMORPG" market section. (mentioning whole MMORPG market was redundant in this case, which you may realize
)
If terms like complement and intersection in Set theory are not familiar to you, you may consult wikipedia at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complement_(set_theory)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersection_(set_theory)
You still haven't described or even loosely defined the specific market segment that GW2 serves. If GW2 serves a specific market segment, that segment should be definable. You declared that GW2 is a niche game. Since you declared it a niche game, I'm asking you, what is the market specific market segment that GW2 was tailored to serve, and how is that market segment distinct from the rest of the market?
Your statement above describes how it's possible for GW2 to be a niche game, not how it is a niche game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Funny that I want an Asheron's Call remade in modern settings and graphics so until I get that I'll continue to play the original Asheron's Call.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
An Indie Niche game called XYSON is a sandbox game worth checking out. there are no stupid NPC's standing around with signs over their head. When you login there is nothing telling you what to do. Everything is up to you.
We really need to support Indie games like this one. Winter is now over, so you can now see the Lake Tahoe basin in all it's glory.
The OP is confusing niche MMO with indie MMO. Niche MMOs can also be made by established companies that are seeking a limited "niche" audience so as not to compete with established franchises such as WoW.
Examples of Niche MMOs would include Vindictus, Age of Wushu, C9, Perfect World, etc. All good games with AAA quality graphics and features but aren't quite AAA in scope.
Examples of true AAA games are: Rift, SWTOR, and EQ-Next which try to appeal to the widest possible audience.
Indie MMOs are run on a shoestring budget by no name developers. Examples would include Mortal Online, Darkfall, and a dozen other low budget games. EVE started off as an indie but later became an established Niche MMO. EVE's inclusion of high quality personal avatars proves they have moved beyond Indie.
Conclusion: The market is ready for Niche MMOs that are well made. However, the market will not support poorly done indie MMOs.
Your post did achieve something. Entertainment for me, and probably you. That is what forums are good for, right?
I don't believe in terms like niche or Indie or Sandbox or Theme park that is all internet lingo that means nothing.
What matters is how much depth you put into each system.I am 99% certain all of these devs know what depth is,they know if they are simply doing the basics dmg/def crit/agi formula's.Imo ALL of them are looking for as many ways to cut out length of development as possible.
That is why so many games have these big lush worlds but no game to back it up.I don't want to spend hours picking hair colors and tatoos only to cover it up with armor/helmets.I don't want to simplyu slap on armor and a sword and begin button mashing 1-2-3-2-1 rinse and repeat.I don't want to play your game just because you tell me you have Raiding or "you can change the world".
What i want is for the developer to put the work into every aspect of the game.I don't want to simply run up to a npc with a yellow marker and run his errand, i want that quest to have more meaning and sub plots and can go in various direction.SWTOR gave us a VERY cheap version of what i mean,example you pick from three choices of dialogue and you might get bonus points,lose points or go neutral.You can do a LOT better than just that simple system that allowed them to repeat it all over the game.
These developers are not stupid,they know full well they are not putting out the effort we expect.They are all waiting for each other to push ,but rather than push ,they rather just copy the same guidelines and give us very mediocre efforts.
I am 100% certain i could make a better game than any of these but not with someone controlling the money and giving me orders and that is how it works in game development.
I will give one VERY good example>>>ECO system.Every dev knows it would be a great idea but they won't do it,too costly to run and design.They rather dot down some mobs and give them all basically the same type Ai.I find it VERY sad that devs are so cheap the yeven have the mobs all carry the exact same aggro distance.It is like 20 yalms and auto aggro.That is just LAZY game design,they know it,i know it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.