If you cut out the open world, and did something like warframe, it is no more expensive than a online shooter.
MMOs are not meant to be anything. If so, it would not have abandoned the open world design, and become so solo friendly. It is just another type of game, hoping to make some money.
A "properly designed MMORPG" would retain playerbase, subscription and-or free to play. The reason why today's MMOs do not retain playerbase, is their design.
No sir - retention rates for majority of MMOs have been around 25% after the first month for over 10 years - there are exepctions but this is the average.
This is why cash shop and F2P is king - players can come and go and spend money as they please whenever
Well, a lot of people would say legitimately that there hasn't been a properly designed MMORPG for 10 years.
I know that you worship at the alter of 'F2P' (which we both know is actually hybrid), but it really is not why it is 'king' . You would have to be naive to think that, or just not bothered all that with being intellectually honest.
A lot of people are completely out of touch with games development and design. How many posters here have even talked to an actual game Dev ever?
Im glad for you having an inside track, getting to talk to game devs, but when you start using statements like that. It can come across the wrong way. You dont have to have talked to a game dev to know the pulse of game development. Matter of fact having an outside looking in approach sometimes can give you a better view. The closer you are to the source the narrower your field of view is.
If somewhat knowledgeable about the subject, yes. However, when an architect and an engineer are discussing the cable stress of a bridge based on the weight displacement, and a baker chimes in with what they should have done instead based on their extensive amount of time driving on a bridge, it's rarely 'a better view from someone on the outside'. It's more often than not someone that probably would have benefited more from just listening and learning.
You can take that as an insult or as constructive criticism. It's meant as the latter.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Gaming is an entertainment product, and has similarities to many other industries (in different ways). This industry has a tendency to be incestious and self absorbed with how 'different' it is, rather than trying to find common ground with other industries. This is starting to break down as larger media companies are starting to incorporate gaming as just another product type in their portfolio.
Good. Then perhaps the MMORPG companies will also understand, that in other entertainment products, quality is something that helps to sell said products. The MMORPG playerbase is waiting...
MMO companies are being purchased by multimedia companies, who know a thing or two about selling such products. However, history has shown that QUALITY has very little to do with sales. Some of the best books/movies/tv shows of all time didnt sell very well... and some that have sold the best were actually very low quality.
F2P MMOs don't need high retention rates with all players. They just need high retention rates with whales, which support the rest of the F2P population. Most of the games do this well, even if it comes at the cost of good gameplay for the non-paying population.
They don't even need that .. if they can recruit whales regularly. Given tens of millions of players playing these games, finding even tens of thousands of whales probably are not that big of a deal.
F2P MMOs don't need high retention rates with all players. They just need high retention rates with whales, which support the rest of the F2P population. Most of the games do this well, even if it comes at the cost of good gameplay for the non-paying population.
They don't even need that .. if they can recruit whales regularly. Given tens of millions of players playing these games, finding even tens of thousands of whales probably are not that big of a deal.
Whales? Why take the risk? Just look at the numbers.
Initial F2P Launch : 10M (nice round numbers)
Potential Customers: 1M (10% estimate, which is high)
30 Day Retention: 2.5M (25%)
30 Day Customers: 500k (5% estimate, which is avg for genre)
You can see that even with HUGE losses of the initial customer (brought in by F2P and cheap advertising) you actually end up with more customers for less cost. The huge churn in new customers is primarily in non paying customers, as paying customers become the core demographic for the game.
You can also see the value of the founders packs and such. You can get a huge buy in before any attrition sets in. Half of these customers will leave in the first 30 days, and if not monetized immediately become revenue lost. The other half stay, and have the best overall retention for the long term.
Whales are a great way to INCREASE your revenue, and you should never pass up free money, but they are not something that can be counted on. You have to have a solid business model before you can look to the whales to improve the returns.
Its true though, things have changed drastically in the last decade of MMOs. In today's mmos you level up multiple times an hour fighting mobs you can solo while completing dozens of quest. Meanwhile, these trivial accomplishments speed players through content that took months to create and yield weapons and complete sets of powerful armor for tasks no more complicated than tying your shoe.
This is not the genre I started playing in 1998. The struggle to hit level 20 in Everquest was just as real as the struggle at level 50. The process of acquiring new items at low level was as hard or harder than it even was once you reached level cap (months later). The process of getting to an area where you could gain experience at a good pace was often more dangerous than the actual battle to level up. You felt like the king of the world if a higher level happened to bequeath to you certain trash loots like a fine steel sword. Nothing was free, there were no guarantees, and your virtual life was hanging by a thread at all times. Your only lifeline in old games was your ability to make friends and communicate. After that you can only hope everyone has had their coffee and ready to bring their A-game or you'd likely end the day further from your objective than you started.
Does that really sound like a game you've played lately?
THOSE are the elements that retained players. No one is going to stick around in a game where theres no sense of accomplishment and with players breezing through mounds of trivial content, developers can't possibly be expected to launch expansions fast enough to retain players. Collecting welfare gear is not a feature conducive to longevity.
Those are the elements that *used to* retain players. Today they would only retain a small minority of playerbase and drive away the rest.
The market has changed drastically over the years as playerbase has gotten HUGE - these are not the same players who played EQ1.
Look I LOVE vanilla EQ1 - it remains one of my favorite MMOs of all time - but I am a tiny minority. The vast majority of players today wouldn't last to level 3 in vanilla EQ1 - I actually introduced a group of newer players at work to vanilla EQ1 - they all universally hated the gameplay - said it was too slow, too punishing etc...
Thats your opinion, another one which I disagree with. The truth of the matter is, no game like classic Everquest (classic, not current) has been successfully launched since original EQ. I don't believe a hardcore game like EQ would be for everyone, but I know it would have a following as big or bigger than the original EQ playerbase.
Thats your opinion, another one which I disagree with. The truth of the matter is, no game like classic Everquest (classic, not current) has been successfully launched since original EQ. I don't believe a hardcore game like EQ would be for everyone, but I know it would have a following as big or bigger than the original EQ playerbase.
How would you possibly know? Your opinion is not fact.
So in the last 10 years there has not been a SINGLE "well designed" MMO?
Do you know how absolutely ridiculous that sounds?
How about you start and tell us what you consider to be a well designed MMORPG that has launched in the last decade?
Don't forget that we are talking specifically about retention (and community, at least I have been, because that is core to retention) here in this thread. What are the well designed MMORPGs in terms of those elements?
And please recognise that I said 'could be argued'.
The vast majority of AAA MMORPGs in the last 10 years are well designed games.
Not going to list them as we know which games those are.
In terms of retention and community?
Please, list a few, because I want know your benchmark.
I updated my post - take Aion, Lotro, Rift, FF14AR and imagine them launching in 2000-2003 timeframe - they would all be hugely successful just as gen 1 MMOs were during that time in terms of retention and community.
Having 5-6 games to chose from compared to 100+ makes a huge ddifference.
It's not game design - it's an entirely different market 2015 and 2003 - night and day.
I couldn't disagree more.
While some of the more recent games might have been successful at a time where there were less options, they still wouldn't have fostered the community or retained players like early games did. They are fundamentally different from the ground up and it baffles me that you cannot see how the modern casual breed of MMORPG isn't a night and day difference from games like UO and Everquest.
And that is quite simply more fawning over old games with the proverbial rose coloured glasses. I really get tired of this attitude. Oh they are night and day difference, that is correct. Old graphics, old grindy gameplay, corpse runs, death penalties, PvP ganking, camping etc.
Yes wonderful. Lets all go back to those days. Oh wait a minute! You can!!
Except hardly anyone does. Oh right, the games changed, didn't they. But of course when a game with some of the same features comes out they invariably go down with the rest.
There is good and bad in both old and new. But lets get away from the drooling over UO and EQ. They weren't that good. They were just new and different at the time. DMKano has it right. There is no magic game design that is going to appeal to all players.
Find a game you like and if you can't well that's too bad. Just gonna have to wait for the old days to roll around again, I guess.
I'm really tired of the attitude of people who very obviously never played classic titles back when and claim that somehow the new generation of MMOs are actually a better, evolved model of mmorpg, while overlooking everything thats actually different and lacking.
Theres nothing rose colored about my statements. The fact remains, new games aren't created with multiplayer or community in mind. They are not virtual worlds that suspend your disbelief. They are not hard or rewarding. "Grindy" is just something kids say when they aren't instantly gratified. Grindy is having to stay in the same places doing the same things without alternatives. There was always sufficient content in older games like EQ that you could explore and progress with, without ever having to stay in the same spot for very long. Its the lack of immersive features like corpse runs, death penalties, open worlds and challenging group-oriented content that have left the players in modern games without a compelling reason to keep logging in.
I never claimed that these features would appeal to all players, but its something that appealed to many players back in the infancy of the internet.
I also still play classic EQ/UO/DAoC via emus and have done so with the vast majority of my free time for a decade. I'm just tired of waiting for game studio to pull their heads out of their asses and figure out that you don't have to "appeal to all players" to make a good, profitable game.
The "average gamer" wants a a game that they can "finish" in 4-6 weeks.
The "average MMORPG'er" wants a game they can play (and revisit) for years.
But the "average gamer" is not the "average MMORPG'er". The fans of virtual world games are a small subset of the total game market, and always have been.
Most "average gamers" like playing MOG's (Multiplayer Online Games), but they don't have the mindset for MMORPG's. They want instant action and thrills-by-the-minute. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not compatible to the classic MMORPG design.
Thats your opinion, another one which I disagree with. The truth of the matter is, no game like classic Everquest (classic, not current) has been successfully launched since original EQ. I don't believe a hardcore game like EQ would be for everyone, but I know it would have a following as big or bigger than the original EQ playerbase.
How would you possibly know? Your opinion is not fact.
I know the same way I know if I cut my finger it will bleed. Part experience, part wisdom, part common sense.
Originally posted by Pepeq Who's to say that they aren't already developing them like short-term games? Everyone assumes that just because they release a dungeon or raid two months after the initial release, that it's new content. It was PLANNED FOR and PAID FOR by the original purchase price. It's like taking a full anime movie and dicing it up into a miniseries. The cost was covered in the movie, delivering it to you in bits and pieces makes it appear as though your getting more content than just a movie.
Future plans are companys gonne sell a pixel for 50 bucks promise new pixels through DLC everyday for 5 bucks each:P
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77 CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now)) MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB PSU:Corsair AX1200i OS:Windows 10 64bit
So may be the solution is just plan MMOs like single player games. Play a few weeks, get the money from the whales, and move on to develop another one.
I don't have time to read the whole thread, so excuse me if this has been said already. MMO's at the moment play a lot like single player games and that's why they're not holding on to the player base. Try doing any social activity on your own and you'll soon get bored. MMO's need to be designed like MMO's, instead they keep trying to dumb things down, allow you to progress through the game on your own without so much as a nod to a passing player.
The only time people get together now are for instanced dungeons, but even then they haven't got a clue who they're grouping with, it's just another name that'll be gone once the instance is over. You can't design an MMO like that, it needs to focus on community and bringing players together - MMO gameplay just isn't good enough alone to keep players playing.
and i quote "On average, 6.21% of players who logged in for the first time in the 1st month a game is released will log on 360 days after their first login."
and the second graph is very telling. If you read it carefully, LESS than 25% of players will play a MMO for more than a month, even if they sign up the first month.
So may be the solution is just plan MMOs like single player games. Play a few weeks, get the money from the whales, and move on to develop another one.
BTW, the article is about f2p MMOs, but they are the majority of MMOs anyway.
I can agree on "pure" F2P games. Exception being only Gw2 which however is not F2P, is B2P. Only game of that kind I have been playing for full half year. Now i can not force anymore myself to play again, do not like questing system.
About sub MMO, Wow has my retention rate of aprox 9 years, and Swtor since release. However it is NORMAL to me that I'm not playing 12 months/year. Still returning regularly for few months at time, in meantime I try anything new out there.
and i quote "On average, 6.21% of players who logged in for the first time in the 1st month a game is released will log on 360 days after their first login."
and the second graph is very telling. If you read it carefully, LESS than 25% of players will play a MMO for more than a month, even if they sign up the first month.
So may be the solution is just plan MMOs like single player games. Play a few weeks, get the money from the whales, and move on to develop another one.
BTW, the article is about f2p MMOs, but they are the majority of MMOs anyway.
How about having all the "flavors" of ice cream on the "menu" instead of just the ones you favor? You seem to like coop shooters. I like MMO's. There is no reason either of us should have to sacrifice. There definitely is a place for open world MMO's, just as there are for hop-in, hop-out, coop shooters.
How about look from the point of view of the devs and see where there business is?
Sure, i have no problem if some devs want to cater to you .. but this post is about facts of the market, which clearly will sway devs independent of what you or me want.
Don't design mmorpg based on population statistics that is mostly from league of legends and world of tanks. Everyone with a clue knows that.
Why not? That is where the audience is ... in fact, if you don't think those are MMORPGs ... then the devs probably should not be developing MMORPGs at all.
Just like Blizz has figured it out, and scrapped their new MMOs, and does some other online games.
About sub MMO, Wow has my retention rate of aprox 9 years, and Swtor since release. However it is NORMAL to me that I'm not playing 12 months/year. Still returning regularly for few months at time, in meantime I try anything new out there.
Or they could just make a good MMORPG? This is more caused by the shoody releases of the past 5+ years than anything else. I'd gladly stick with a good game for a year+ but we just haven't had a good one released in a really long time now.
This is the issue with the WoW clone generation of MMORPG. You play through the content once and the game is so uninspired that you quit at that point. This data is also heavily flawed looking at how they got it. I mean if they just looked at logins for F2P games they are looking at games that already failed as subs and went F2P or at games that are not AAA titles to begin with. We haven't had a released F2P AAA title in the MMORPG era yet.
But people do pick a game and stay with it. They just float around until they find that game that strikes their fancy. Since there are so many to choose from there is a lot of floating going on.
One game maker is not going to appeal to everyone everywhere. It's just not possible. An mmo corp should concentrate on doing what it does best and stop worrying about the numbers.
And imagine if all games just stopped completely right now. Let's pretend the world is under one government and it declares a national state of emergency do to terrorist threat. It makes all mmo gaming illegal for six months except for one game and only one game which follows strict government communication rules. Can you image how many people would be playing that one mmo? They'd have the numbers all right. But after the six months were up everyone would leave. Not because that mmo is bad or did anything wrong. Because humans diversify and look around at other things. It's what we do. No one is to blame. It's natural.
Says who? I don't do that. Do you have data to back that up?
In fact, the data shown here is contradictory to what you say. Most people don't care enough to stick around for more than 30 days.
Considering what has released (MMO wise) in the last few years, who would?
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
If you cut out the open world, and did something like warframe, it is no more expensive than a online shooter.
MMOs are not meant to be anything. If so, it would not have abandoned the open world design, and become so solo friendly. It is just another type of game, hoping to make some money.
A "properly designed MMORPG" would retain playerbase, subscription and-or free to play. The reason why today's MMOs do not retain playerbase, is their design.
Agreed to many games with the mmo label are not really mmos IMO, companies are just trying to increase their profit margin with the use of the term which then falsely leads some into thinking real mmos should really be single player games.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Comments
If somewhat knowledgeable about the subject, yes. However, when an architect and an engineer are discussing the cable stress of a bridge based on the weight displacement, and a baker chimes in with what they should have done instead based on their extensive amount of time driving on a bridge, it's rarely 'a better view from someone on the outside'. It's more often than not someone that probably would have benefited more from just listening and learning.
You can take that as an insult or as constructive criticism. It's meant as the latter.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
MMO companies are being purchased by multimedia companies, who know a thing or two about selling such products. However, history has shown that QUALITY has very little to do with sales. Some of the best books/movies/tv shows of all time didnt sell very well... and some that have sold the best were actually very low quality.
They don't even need that .. if they can recruit whales regularly. Given tens of millions of players playing these games, finding even tens of thousands of whales probably are not that big of a deal.
Whales? Why take the risk? Just look at the numbers.
Initial F2P Launch : 10M (nice round numbers)
Potential Customers: 1M (10% estimate, which is high)
30 Day Retention: 2.5M (25%)
30 Day Customers: 500k (5% estimate, which is avg for genre)
You can see that even with HUGE losses of the initial customer (brought in by F2P and cheap advertising) you actually end up with more customers for less cost. The huge churn in new customers is primarily in non paying customers, as paying customers become the core demographic for the game.
You can also see the value of the founders packs and such. You can get a huge buy in before any attrition sets in. Half of these customers will leave in the first 30 days, and if not monetized immediately become revenue lost. The other half stay, and have the best overall retention for the long term.
Whales are a great way to INCREASE your revenue, and you should never pass up free money, but they are not something that can be counted on. You have to have a solid business model before you can look to the whales to improve the returns.
Thats your opinion, another one which I disagree with. The truth of the matter is, no game like classic Everquest (classic, not current) has been successfully launched since original EQ. I don't believe a hardcore game like EQ would be for everyone, but I know it would have a following as big or bigger than the original EQ playerbase.
How would you possibly know? Your opinion is not fact.
I'm really tired of the attitude of people who very obviously never played classic titles back when and claim that somehow the new generation of MMOs are actually a better, evolved model of mmorpg, while overlooking everything thats actually different and lacking.
Theres nothing rose colored about my statements. The fact remains, new games aren't created with multiplayer or community in mind. They are not virtual worlds that suspend your disbelief. They are not hard or rewarding. "Grindy" is just something kids say when they aren't instantly gratified. Grindy is having to stay in the same places doing the same things without alternatives. There was always sufficient content in older games like EQ that you could explore and progress with, without ever having to stay in the same spot for very long. Its the lack of immersive features like corpse runs, death penalties, open worlds and challenging group-oriented content that have left the players in modern games without a compelling reason to keep logging in.
I never claimed that these features would appeal to all players, but its something that appealed to many players back in the infancy of the internet.
I also still play classic EQ/UO/DAoC via emus and have done so with the vast majority of my free time for a decade. I'm just tired of waiting for game studio to pull their heads out of their asses and figure out that you don't have to "appeal to all players" to make a good, profitable game.
The "average gamer" wants a a game that they can "finish" in 4-6 weeks.
The "average MMORPG'er" wants a game they can play (and revisit) for years.
But the "average gamer" is not the "average MMORPG'er". The fans of virtual world games are a small subset of the total game market, and always have been.
Most "average gamers" like playing MOG's (Multiplayer Online Games), but they don't have the mindset for MMORPG's. They want instant action and thrills-by-the-minute. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not compatible to the classic MMORPG design.
I know the same way I know if I cut my finger it will bleed. Part experience, part wisdom, part common sense.
Future plans are companys gonne sell a pixel for 50 bucks promise new pixels through DLC everyday for 5 bucks each:P
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
I don't have time to read the whole thread, so excuse me if this has been said already. MMO's at the moment play a lot like single player games and that's why they're not holding on to the player base. Try doing any social activity on your own and you'll soon get bored. MMO's need to be designed like MMO's, instead they keep trying to dumb things down, allow you to progress through the game on your own without so much as a nod to a passing player.
The only time people get together now are for instanced dungeons, but even then they haven't got a clue who they're grouping with, it's just another name that'll be gone once the instance is over. You can't design an MMO like that, it needs to focus on community and bringing players together - MMO gameplay just isn't good enough alone to keep players playing.
Don't design mmorpg based on population statistics that is mostly from league of legends and world of tanks. Everyone with a clue knows that.
Then again, I should know better than to post in the typical "everything is an MMO" thread created by nariuselldon.
I can agree on "pure" F2P games. Exception being only Gw2 which however is not F2P, is B2P. Only game of that kind I have been playing for full half year. Now i can not force anymore myself to play again, do not like questing system.
About sub MMO, Wow has my retention rate of aprox 9 years, and Swtor since release. However it is NORMAL to me that I'm not playing 12 months/year. Still returning regularly for few months at time, in meantime I try anything new out there.
How about look from the point of view of the devs and see where there business is?
Sure, i have no problem if some devs want to cater to you .. but this post is about facts of the market, which clearly will sway devs independent of what you or me want.
Why not? That is where the audience is ... in fact, if you don't think those are MMORPGs ... then the devs probably should not be developing MMORPGs at all.
Just like Blizz has figured it out, and scrapped their new MMOs, and does some other online games.
You are just one data point.
Or they could just make a good MMORPG? This is more caused by the shoody releases of the past 5+ years than anything else. I'd gladly stick with a good game for a year+ but we just haven't had a good one released in a really long time now.
This is the issue with the WoW clone generation of MMORPG. You play through the content once and the game is so uninspired that you quit at that point. This data is also heavily flawed looking at how they got it. I mean if they just looked at logins for F2P games they are looking at games that already failed as subs and went F2P or at games that are not AAA titles to begin with. We haven't had a released F2P AAA title in the MMORPG era yet.
The short retention issues of all modern mmo titles is simply because they all keep copying wow.
We have all already played wow for many years, going to a game with a new coat of paint but that's basically still wow is the problem.
A good game that inovates well and dares to be different won't have these retention issues, look at Eve etc.
But people do pick a game and stay with it. They just float around until they find that game that strikes their fancy. Since there are so many to choose from there is a lot of floating going on.
One game maker is not going to appeal to everyone everywhere. It's just not possible. An mmo corp should concentrate on doing what it does best and stop worrying about the numbers.
And imagine if all games just stopped completely right now. Let's pretend the world is under one government and it declares a national state of emergency do to terrorist threat. It makes all mmo gaming illegal for six months except for one game and only one game which follows strict government communication rules. Can you image how many people would be playing that one mmo? They'd have the numbers all right. But after the six months were up everyone would leave. Not because that mmo is bad or did anything wrong. Because humans diversify and look around at other things. It's what we do. No one is to blame. It's natural.
Considering what has released (MMO wise) in the last few years, who would?
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Agreed to many games with the mmo label are not really mmos IMO, companies are just trying to increase their profit margin with the use of the term which then falsely leads some into thinking real mmos should really be single player games.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.