Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Editorial: The 600lb Gorilla
Dana
Member Posts: 2,415
Jeremy Starley pens this new editorial that gives developers tips on how to learn from, but not rip off World of Warcraft.
;) The flood of recent articles written about or by MMORPG developers on the subject of how to capture more players - and, by default, more money - has led me to believe that most developers still do not quite grasp the concepts that have driven the sales of one of the most popular MMORPGs of all time: World of Warcraft (WoW). Article after article, I read ideas that have little to nothing to do with the very simple reasons WoW is the 600lb gorilla in the mist that is the MMORPG market.
Fear not, oh lost developers. I'm going to point out three simple things you can do to have your very own gorilla. |
The whole article is here.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Comments
LOL, retarded this article be. Warcraft relies heavily on the name, theres hundreds of thousands of fanbois , not unlike Finaly Fantasy fanbois, who will buy anything Blizzard. Also it's a solid game, easy to play. It's not a work of genius, just a franchise name with a decent gameplay on top of it.
Editorials inherintly suck, so lets stop this garbage.
It's better be hated for who you are, than loved for who you aren't.
Whilst this article strikes quite a few true notes, WoW IS NOT briming with content unless you love grinding faction or finding 39 other robots to do instance runs, in fact the whole thing wow is missing is gameplay which does not in anyway affect the ability of your character to perform better in PvE or PvP such as housing and house outfitting, or the ability to tailor the look or color of you armor. Crafting is also sadly lacking in WoW, it seems quite a few of the devs at blizzard subscribe to the view that 'content isn't worth a damn'.
A decent editiorial that is ruined by using WoW as the basis for the point of the editorial, WoW is the 600ld gorilla because it doesn't get down to the nice little things that change a MMO from just a game to an alternate world, but instead treats every change or addition as a 10,000 foot level change that affects much more than the problem they are attempting to solve at the time.
Daoc was my first game and I loved the housing expansion for that and spent a fortune equipping the house, of which nothing helped in actual gameplay.
Blizzard has a long way to go yet to produce a true MMORPG, yes I enjoy WoW but if another game hits that DOES give the easy pick up combined with a LOT more depth I wont loose any sleep over cancelling my WoW account.
Does this guy work for Blizzard? Just wondering.
And I was able to handle the "editorial" until this sentence spewed out:
By having a completely open "sandbox" game, where players are forced to make up almost all of their own content, you severely limit the re-playability, and consequently the longevity, of the game.
This is where he confirmed that he has as much of a clue as to what he's talking about as most of us. And that's no clue.
I agree with a LOT of points in this article. However, I play EQ2 more than WoW(I like the EQ2 community a bit better). He is right that EQ2's biggest problem is the graphics (Takes way too powerful of a machine to be able to run it effectively).
Accessible graphics is very important if you want to sell to a large audience. Most people do not have a super powerful machine. I think the game that does best is one that is aimed to shine with a medium specced machine.
I had the exact same experience with Eve (and I am a programmer). The tutorial was WAAAAY too long. Both WoW and EQ2 have near perfect learning curves.
I agree on Content to some extent. I think the best mix is A lot of content with some sandboxing (allowing for Users to do their own thing if they want..but providing lots and lots of unique places, monsters, spells, effects, etc) to experience. WoW's problem is that there is no sandboxing at all.
WoW is the 600lb gorrilla because of a few other things:
1) Blizzard has an amazing reputation for making games. Therefore, people are willing to try their games out because the game will at least be 'good'.
2) Blizzard is so popular in certain Asian countries there are actually television shows about their games.
3) They built off of a very reputable brand (Warcraft).
Also, their art direction is top notch. I might not agree with the 'look' all the time, but it definitly makes the best use of minimal hardware.
One thing on the easy to learn item - one of WoW's great features is the mouse move interface. It quickly becomes easy and natural to move your character by simply pressing both mouse buttons and moving your mouse around. Not ultra controlled, but quick, easy, natural, fun. DAoC, for example, lacks this, and is consequently quite difficult to even get past the tutorial. So I would put having a WoW-like easy mouse move interface right at the top of the first item.
I think I may be jumping on the bandwagon and calling you on content, Jeremy. Overall, you make some very good points, but content, in the sense of quests and story-arcs created for the players to experience, isn't worth a crap.
You're probably aware that there is no way that the developers can keep generating content at a rate sufficient to keep up with players consuming it. It's just not possible; The development cycle takes longer than the play cycle. Sure, for a relatively new player, there'll be a lot there that's new to them.. But it's all been done before, and they've got to deal with more experienced players telling them exactly how to do it.. I've seen this in every game with "content", most notably horrid in DDO, but that was because it was very severely lacking in content, compared to most MMOs. I saw it in WoW quite a bit, even though I was mostly solo, and never, ever did a single raid. What I hear from those who regularly take part in raid content makes me shiver with horror at the idea.
So your second point needs to be either scrapped, or better yet.. redefined. Content needs to be dynamic, and engaging. You should be able to master strategies, but not to master "content". When I say dynamic, I mean entirely dynamic. Not just that a given quest can be a little different each time.. But that each quest can be quite different, so that different tactics and different preparations will be optimal for each.. WoW has none of this, or didn't when I quit, and ongoing reports from friends who still play haven't changed my opinion a whit.
Now, I'll agree that a pure 'sandbox' isn't going to do it for the majority of players. I like 'em alright myself, but I make no illusions about my preferences being at all universal. But a hamsterwheel with differing names, faces and art is still a hamsterwheel. There has to be a middle ground between "content" and sandbox. That's where anyone who wants to challenge WoW is going to need to go.
As for other respondents to this article.. Chill. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you should disrespect them.
hollow fluff, contrived by people who seem to be aggresively negative
and biased for no real reason. The writer took their time and
explained their opinion about the topic. Just because some dislike
whatever comparisons were made there is no reason for disrespectful and
possibly hurtful comments towards a writer which is obviously someone
who cared alot about and put alot of effort into the editorial. If I may make a
suggestion, probably in vane; but before before making a post, think
critically about things, perhaps think about the other person on the
recieving end, on the other side of the "interwebbings" of your verbal
barrage. If you do not then I believe and many others will to, think that you are indeed "retarded".
You can't flame a troll, they'll just self destruct and spew crap all over the place. Just let it go man.
WoW had content for about one year of game play. I think they have taken way too long on adding additional content that players will always question WoW from this perspective in future expansions. The end game content does become very mundane with grinding faction and running 40 person instances where most players are on autopilot. Dont know if the expansion will fix that as we will still have faction grinding and 15/25 robots instead.
The one thing WoW could use as pointed out here is a little bit of a sandbox. SWG was way too much of a sandbox, but it was enjoyable for a bit. People were great, but people ran out things to do very fast. Player or guild housing in WoW would bring the game to a new level that will be even more difficult to beat by the up coming games.
Triston Master Carbine/Master Swords (SWG Eclipse)
Triston 29 Warden (EQ2 Permafrost)
Weland 70 Hunter (WoW Hellscream)
Suidan 36 Cleric (Vanguard Flamehammer)
Suidan 50 Champion (LOTR Gladden)
make up almost all of their own content, you severely limit the
re-playability, and consequently the longevity, of the game."
A sandbox has no re-playability because you never restart the game; it just keeps going. And if it just keeps going on endlessly then obviously there is no problem with longevity. Your defenition of "sandbox" seems to be SWG (pre-cu), thats only one expample of a sandbox (and not a very good imo).
Trashing on EVE was where this guy lost me. Eve does take intelligence to learn. But there is more fun in Eve than WOW will ever have. Its the generation of MMO's "sandbox" where the players create and govern themselves. You stick with WOW and continue to wipe the brown off your nose. Maybe they will slip you some cash on the side...NOT, since they don't give a crap about their players or the press. They are making so much money that you would think they could listen their player base a little...
He is correct, WOW is easy and runs on a 5 year old machine. Those of us who are veterans of MMO's usually have a fast enough computer to run something that doesn't look like a cartoon. It was the MMO that broke open the genre.
WOW is the Fisher Price of MMO's its bright, colorful, bubbly, and breaks after about 5 minutes.
The lack of end game and mind numbing raiding have left the MMO world gasping for something else. There is some innovation out there, but it's not going to come from Blizzard.
Sandbox games don't mean that ALL the content is created by the player. It just means they are able to create content and in certain areas can govern themselves. Think the Ryzom Ring from Saga of Ryzom. SOR may not be the greatest game in the world, but their idea is Innovative. There is a balance that needs to be maintained between PVE and PVP, there has to be great content coming from the developers, but the ability for the players to venture forth and make their own destiny. Do that, and you have a game that doesn't "end at level 60".
Also, please name one thing in WoW that is hard to master.
1. wow sucks
2.raph rules
this article speaks of how wow has changed the mmo marketplace. for the worst i fear.
This article was dead on. Any developer that want's to capture an audience larger than around 100-200K subs would do well to heed the advice presented. A lot of the folks that come to this site are hardcore PC gamers with screaming hot shit rigs and the pateince and spare time of a nursing home retiree. They are absolutley not going to get this article and not going to see why every deveoper that releases a game that:
(1) lacks structured content,
(2) less than 5% of the PCs currently in homes can run well, and/ or
(3) doesn't become remotely fun until you've put 5-40 hours into it...
is severely restricting their target audience.
Sure, sandbox games with a steep learning curve can be quite rewarding if you have the patience to get into them. However, John Q. American does not. John Q. American is the resaon that WoW has been a smash hit, not the whiny elitists that hang out on site like this (myself included, doh!).
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
What ever happened to that one guy's outside the box articles? They were much more interesting.
-doro
I'm not sure if I want to hire you to be my personal assistant or sue you for reading my mind...
Agent_X7 AKA J Star
[/URL]
Notice: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of MMORPG.com or its management.
I think the editorial made at least Three good points:
1) Easy to Learn = mass market appeal
2) Easy on computer hardware requirements = mass market acceptance
3) Gameplay is much more important than the gaming community.
I don't agree with the examples he used or most of his other conclusions.
I am not sure WoW is a "difficult to master" game, but then how many games are really difficult to master?
D&D Online is somewhat difficult to master because there is a lot of learning to do before you know how to build effective characters. Once you learn the character building pitfalls to avoid, you can discover there are relatively few build archetypes and they are easy to build with the right knowledge. DDO is nowhere near as complex as EVE Online's learning curve though.
Everquest 1 requires an unusual amount of social skills if you wanted to build a good guild or join one of the most sucessful guilds. Social playing skills also could lead to your character getting loot drops and loot trades sooner than somone else. EQ1 also rewards strategic planning and often requires it for the raids.
Guild Wars has an amazing amount of combat interaction. You see the skills your opponents are using and you (and your team) can use this information to form a counter-strategy. You can interrupt or otherwise control the effectiveness of skills that your opponents use, and you can do this as a part of a coordinated team strategy. GW is extremely easy to learn such that it often seems too simple to some gamers, but I think these same gamers do not delve into the complexities of GW so they never appreciate the Mastery level of GW gameplay.
City of Heroes is an example of a game that starts off pretty easy to learn and play and never gets significantly more difficult. You get new powers that are higher damage but otherwise similar to previous powers, or the new powers might be area of effect rather than single target. But the game remains a fairly simple button pusher to control and damage your opponents.
Would you say that WoW is more like a City of Heroes or a Guild Wars as far as gameplaying Mastery?
It's the name, and aggressive marketing , that made WoW a big hit, nothing else.
All the things listed in that "editorial" have existed for a LONG time in a game called Dark Age of Camelot.
Not graphicaly intensive, but still looks nice.
Easy to start playing (and actualy has a helpful community)
Lots of replay value, roll a different class and you will have a completely different experience.
And it has something WoW doesn't...A GOOD END GAME.
You mmorpg.com people need to stop grabbing editorial writers from the WoW forums already.
This article is 100% true. Having played all the games mentioned, and more, I can say that every comparison and summation is valid.
Last current Stinker to ignore these 3 truths : D&D Online
Next current Stinker likely to ignore these 3 truths : Vanguard : Saga of Heroes
For the WoW haters out there, what game have YOU been playing for the last two years? EQ2, which came out at the same time as WoW, and failed even though it had 'Superior Graphics' and 'Superior Content'? Ever been to an EQ2 city lately? To boost performance they piled all the NPCs in the city into little clumps.
How about City of Heroes / City of Villains. All but a few servers are empty for the most part. But, by God, they made dang SURE that you had to group to proceed in that game. No dang Solo players going to be allowed past level 20 in CoH/CoV!!!
Oh, I know, you all are playing Saga of Ryzom. Or maybe Dark Age of Camelot (who's subscriber numbers have gone down 90% since WoW was released). Wonder where THEY all went?
Bottom line is this, WoW haters. You are for all intents and purposes ALONE in your opiniions. Which is ok, as long as you realize you are out on the fringe and not mainstream at all.
For me, I will take a FUN game over a Pain-In-The-Ass game every time. Ya, I do not like the WoW End Game at all! I don't Raid. So, I play other characters in the 1 to 60 game. Suits me. Especially after having tried all those other games (sometimes multiple times, to see if they got better).
Happy Gaming, if you can find it
mythic, and they've done a great job keeping it up to date) and the
replay value (among the best on the market).
However DAoC has never been as easy to get into as WoW. When the
game launched, the beginner quests were about on par with those in
EQ. The only difference was trhat you didn't find yourself lost
and trying to get out of your newbie city for your first hour of play
(i.e., at least you could find your way around). Things have been
improved somewhat, but I would argue that the newbie quests that are
currently in game stink. They are confusing to a new player and
can easilly become broken due to poor scripting. In addition to
that, DAoC has several traps for the new player. One of the major
ones is that there are an overwhyelming number of classes to choose
from, and you are not given enough information about them to choose
well on the character startup screen if you've never
played. In fact, if you choose poorly you may find that you have
a character that is nearly impossible to make good progress with
solo. You are also forced very early to make hard decisions about
how to spec your character and given very little information to do it
with. In WoW you can look at all the trees and at least get some
idea of what different spec lines offer. In DAoC there is no way
of knowing what abilities you will gain or give up in game by choosing
a particular spec line. In WoW spec line enahances your core
abilities, in DAoC specline determines your core abilities. I
could go on, but the fact of the matter is that DAoC is not nearly as
esy to get into for someone that's never played a MMOPRG as WoW.
I'm not bashing DAoC, I love it. It's easilly a better overall
game than WoW. But it takes hours to figure out what is going on the
first you play.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Meh - some good points in general, but I don't think they apply to WoW's success in particular. WoW is basically the Titanic of gaming - lightning in a bottle, no one's sure if it's possible to repeat it's success.
WoW is derivative, it's taken the same formula as every other leveling MMO and added a high degree of polish (at least at it's release) such that players got a smooth and bug-free experience. Experienced MMO players are phenominally tolerant of bugs and problems in a game's early life - and that's something the general populace isn't willing to stomach. Basically, the biggest contribution to WoW's success is the fact that Blizzard waited to release until the game was done - something that every MMO community screams for when a game is nearing release.
The more troubling thing about the article is the inherrent assumption that an MMO is a pathetic failure if it doesn't equal or better WoW. Bigger is not necessarily better, and WoW has to some extent been a victim of it's own success. They have had to spend so much time improving the technical gear and adding servers that there isn't much more content now than there was at launch.
As long as an MMO is able to cover it's costs with a small profit that can be reinvested, and keep turning out "things to do" in decent time, that MMO is a success. After all, once a gamer uses up all the content in WoW (and contrary to opinion, replaying as a different class is not more content) they need something different to go to - if all games are trying to ape WoW they're not likely to capture the secondary market there.
The arguement of content is off target too. Frankly if there's one thing that developers need to accept it's that static content is a horrible thing to implement. They'd be much further ahead providing systems and tools that allow the players to continually do "something". A quest done once is useless to that player, and requires the developer to create a new quest for the player to do next. In contrast, a system which allows a player to constantly do something of value (for instance, a hunting / tracking system designed to provide needed goods for a crafting economy) is something designed once but repeated endlessly by the players. A much more useful way to spend limited development resources.
Yes, the article is correct when pointing out that developers in general need to re-evaluate some of the customs of the genre - however the specifics and especially the capitolist attitude of failure unless cornering the market are way off mark in my opinion.
1. WoW is junk. This is what is basically being said and that its name is what draws on average 25x the amount to play it then does the next biggest game.
If this were true SWG and any other game with a name behind that comes along such as Star Trek that Perpetual Ent. is doing and StarGate that Cheyenne Mountain is doing should have the player base WoW does correct? SWG even right after launch had nowhere near WoW's numbers. The name alone thing can then be discounted.
If name alone was also true then DDO would have a subscrition base well over what WoW has. Turbine and their lack of anything related to support goes a long way to run people off but the name of DDO sure didnt help them any.
2. No content. Content goes further than just how much of something there is. With the ease it takes to level in WoW and the way certain types of people would rather blow through levels instead of actually looking at things it beomces apparent that "content or lack of" isnt something they would really know anything about. Factor in the various types of content there is and it also become clear that some people just do not know what they speak of.
3. Ease of play over what EVE offers. HMmm not hard to actually figure this out from the numbers of people who use a trial accoun at EVE and delete it and the ones that purchase oW and actually stick to it. EVE announcned that it now owns the largest server cluster of its kind in the world. That doesnt mean much when you only have around 40,000 account being played. If ad when it hits the 100,000 mark please feel free to use them as a good exmaple of anything.
I am not a fan of WoW. I tried it for a few months and got rid of it. I do think that what was written about it has nailed things in a pretty good manner.