By your logical reasoning, only ford or whatever current #1 seller of cars should be making cars and everyone else, even the folks that make the Bentleys should leave the market. Here's the reality, kiddo, the market is not linear. Say it with me now, the market is not linear. What I mean by that is that there are niches that cannot be readably filled by one company. No company, logically nor empirically, can fulfill the needs of every potential customer. Nor should they do so, because if they attempted, they would wind up looking like a government (slow, stupid, and tyrannical). Companies where there are *many* competitors allow themselves to focus on customers with particular parameters. Lets take WoW, they really focus on the every-person that's mildly curious about MMOs. They want those folks, and they got them. EVE, by comparison, focuses on the old veteran or general player wanting more, especially in the realm of PVP (You can only play so many rounds of CTF before you go bonkers...). All in all, *we* the customers win out when companies don't try to do everything because it means a higher quality of product (or service) at a lower price over all.
So who decided what game is #1 or #2? So since WoW is number one no other games should bother making something else? We should all just play WoW n be happy about it. Cause so many love WoW I hafta love it too n feel it is the only game I should play?
Perhaps we should also say there should only be one or two car companies, n we should all only buy from those two companies. Or only eat at either McDonalds or Taco Bell and no other restaraunts...don't matter if you like it or not...the majority of ppl do so touph.
Stupid thinking all should be the best or not bother.
this thread is nothing more than an entry for "the most usless thread of 2008"
So WoW will be number 1 at the end of the year,no-one can say otherwise,So that leaves 1 spot open...Oh dear with maybe 6/7 AAA+ titles due to release and they can only make 1???
Add to this not every player likes fantasy or sci-fi or (insert your choice)that basically means alot of players will need to wait till next year.....
Again add that maybe say 20 mil people play MMO`s(dont jump on me just a number) and 10 mil play WoW(no game will beat this..maybe even ever) then the other 10mil will have to play the other game(ok minus the people that cant play as no dev made a game as they cant be number 2)All I can say is ...
r.i.p mmo`s
or maybe we just give everyone what they want in small doses(ok except wow yet again)?
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
By what standard are you judging these companies can or cannot make decent MMORPG?
Your own preference?
The Majority Rule?
Whatever reasons you can think of, it is a rediculous, and unfair to all gamers. Why shoulud gamers loses games of their playstyle because it isn't the top #1, #2 on the market for majority of gamers, or one other gamer who doesn't think these games are decent?
I'd actually prefer they STOP trying to reach WoW levels and just make games I enjoy. What floats my boat doesn't have to float everyone else's boat for me to think its dandy.
I know this site depends on user/threads but maybe close this 1 just for the sake of its uslessness...FFS I JUST BUMPED IT
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
If they release a bad clone with some minor variation then not. If the MMO had some innovative stuff then yes. What I would like to see is devs advertising their game by stating what sort of innovation it brings to current MMOs.
Don't forget: Counter-strike started out as a fan made mod for hl1 and it blew every other professional made fps away.
--- Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Almost without exception, no matter what MMO you are calling junk or a waste of time has a loyal following out there. Someone likes the game and thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread. What you are actually asking for is for a game that appeals to enough people to make it number 1 or 2 in the industry. In other words, you are saying if you can't make WoW, don't bother. Personally, I think WoW is a good game, but I thank God for variety.
As a society we have to judge which 2 MMOs would be beneficial for our society.
Since we are talking about video games, we can't seriously think for adults or teens, buf kids goes first.
Thereby, you now have the choice to play Mabinogi (very nice and cute MMO btw, especially if you're 8, wear pink clothing and think Mississipi is a cool word), and Pokemon Online adventure which will start developpment NOW and seize and confiscate all assets/staff/ressources from Blizzard.
LOL.
The more, the merrier. If they belly flop, I can laugh and pinpoint at weakness and feel ubah doing so, like the know-it-all fan. If it succeed, I can appreciate it or be free of all players I find annoying in my MMO. It is a win/win/win case scenario...as long as I have 1 MMO to call my own; not the case atm
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I could not answer the poll because it is phrased in a rather sinister manner that does not reflect my opinion.
The OP equates a good MMORPG with a financially successful one. While I agree there is definitely a link, an MMORPG does not have to be one of the biggest to be one of the best. There are several MMORPGs I feel are excellent that have subscriber totals that are under 50K, 10K, and even 5K. They are profitable, but not exactly what most would call successful, and not even close to being contenders for the top spots in terms of popularity.
If companies only made MMORPGs they felt could hit at least 200,000 North American subscribers, which is roughly what one would need to be number two, we would not see a lot of MMORPGs. Such MMORPGs cost at least $50M to make and market, and the risk involved is massive. I have no idea hat EA Mythic is spending on WAR, but I would not be surprised if its total cost, including what I imagine will be a massive marketing campaign, will be $80M+.
Do offline game developers only make games that will achieve Halo success? No! Very few games would get made if that was the metric for quality and success because it is simply not feasible to always produce a game that breaks sales records. Sometimes you want to make a solid title that only costs $5M to make and may not have a widespread appeal, but will score well with the target demographic and see a return. Look at something like Brain Age for the Nintendo DS - I bet that game cost peanuts to make but it is hugely popular.
Pirates of the Burning Sea is a good example of an MMORPG that would never have been made if it had to contend with WoW or LotRO. It will never be that popular, but its cost to make was less and it will make a lot of people happy as it is different.
In conclusion, I definitely do not support bad MMORPGs being developed or release, but I do support good ones of any scale, so long as the developer keeps that scale in mind. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a game only having 10,000 subscribers if it is a quality, profitable title. There is a large problem with a game only having 10,000 subscribers if its goal was 200,000+ and it has less because it sucks (like Vanguard).
Actually, I didn't know that any MMORPG that isn't WoW or Lineage 2 was a failure.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
How can anyone know if they're going to be numebr one or number two before they release their game?
Duh.
Look, kindergarten postulations are all well and good....when you're in kindergarten. Most people who actually play online games are *not* still in kindergarten.
You can't possibly know your game is not going to be one or two, or is going to be one or two, until after you publish it. Get a grip.
What a thoroughly moronic thread. How can anyone know if they're going to be numebr one or number two before they release their game? Duh. Look, kindergarten postulations are all well and good....when you're in kindergarten. Most people who actually play online games are *not* still in kindergarten. You can't possibly know your game is not going to be one or two, or is going to be one or two, until after you publish it. Get a grip.
I disagree. In most cases you are capable of making estimates like: With a 75% chance our game will not be in the top 3. You cannot say for sure we WILL be #5 because ultimately the choice is with the subscribers.
My point is: A lot of games aren't designed to be #1 or #2. They are designed to be a simple clone with simple mechanics trying to leech off some players from the big original MMOs or trying to get newbies to play your title before they find out how much better the other games are. The Goal is to cover the development and maintenance costs and get a certain margin of profit for a few years.
Still a lot of clones are not only simpler but have sub par graphics, gameplay and content. The MMO devs and programmers of most of these clones are doing such a project for the first time and they repeat the same old mistakes again and again. Why? They simply are not allowed to do innovation and they know it. You try to develop an MMO when your investors say: Rewrite WoW with one tenth of the budget, an unexperienced new staff and make sure you give me back my money+profits or I will sue you.
--- Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
The question is not if you can be the #1 or #2 in terms of copies sold or people online.
The question is, can you as a developer honestly say that your game is better than almost every MMO on the market, even just in your own, possibly overly rosy opinion? If not, or if your answer is something like 'we've got player crafted boats', stop and make something else.
I appreciate trying and failing, but games like LOTRO, Archlord, Vanguard, MXO, Tabula Rasa, Pirates and several others aren't even trying. They are small, bring no innovation, and generally offer nothing good. Why the hell do developers think games like LOTRO or Vanguard are a good idea? Even WAR is an uninspired rip-off of every other MMO on the market, and will probably meet LOTRO's fate for this reason.
Blizzard tried to be the best, and they were rewarded. If you don't try to be the best in your niche, quit the industry and go write database interfaces, because then you'll only need to be good enough to keep your job.
Comments
By your logical reasoning, only ford or whatever current #1 seller of cars should be making cars and everyone else, even the folks that make the Bentleys should leave the market. Here's the reality, kiddo, the market is not linear. Say it with me now, the market is not linear. What I mean by that is that there are niches that cannot be readably filled by one company. No company, logically nor empirically, can fulfill the needs of every potential customer. Nor should they do so, because if they attempted, they would wind up looking like a government (slow, stupid, and tyrannical). Companies where there are *many* competitors allow themselves to focus on customers with particular parameters. Lets take WoW, they really focus on the every-person that's mildly curious about MMOs. They want those folks, and they got them. EVE, by comparison, focuses on the old veteran or general player wanting more, especially in the realm of PVP (You can only play so many rounds of CTF before you go bonkers...). All in all, *we* the customers win out when companies don't try to do everything because it means a higher quality of product (or service) at a lower price over all.
-- Brede
So who decided what game is #1 or #2? So since WoW is number one no other games should bother making something else? We should all just play WoW n be happy about it. Cause so many love WoW I hafta love it too n feel it is the only game I should play?
Perhaps we should also say there should only be one or two car companies, n we should all only buy from those two companies. Or only eat at either McDonalds or Taco Bell and no other restaraunts...don't matter if you like it or not...the majority of ppl do so touph.
Stupid thinking all should be the best or not bother.
this is basically a request to stop developing MMO's all together.
nobody has the power to project the success of their project.
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
get rid of rpg
this thread is nothing more than an entry for "the most usless thread of 2008"
So WoW will be number 1 at the end of the year,no-one can say otherwise,So that leaves 1 spot open...Oh dear with maybe 6/7 AAA+ titles due to release and they can only make 1???
Add to this not every player likes fantasy or sci-fi or (insert your choice)that basically means alot of players will need to wait till next year.....
Again add that maybe say 20 mil people play MMO`s(dont jump on me just a number) and 10 mil play WoW(no game will beat this..maybe even ever) then the other 10mil will have to play the other game(ok minus the people that cant play as no dev made a game as they cant be number 2)All I can say is ...
r.i.p mmo`s
or maybe we just give everyone what they want in small doses(ok except wow yet again)?
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
By what standard are you judging these companies can or cannot make decent MMORPG?
Your own preference?
The Majority Rule?
Whatever reasons you can think of, it is a rediculous, and unfair to all gamers. Why shoulud gamers loses games of their playstyle because it isn't the top #1, #2 on the market for majority of gamers, or one other gamer who doesn't think these games are decent?
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
....
I'd actually prefer they STOP trying to reach WoW levels and just make games I enjoy. What floats my boat doesn't have to float everyone else's boat for me to think its dandy.
WHY DID YOU BUMP THIS THREAD??!!!
It was dead because no one cared, or still cares, about your stupid f%*@kin' flamebait.
For the same reason you did.
Lack of better things to do.
I know this site depends on user/threads but maybe close this 1 just for the sake of its uslessness...FFS I JUST BUMPED IT
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
It depends.
If they release a bad clone with some minor variation then not. If the MMO had some innovative stuff then yes. What I would like to see is devs advertising their game by stating what sort of innovation it brings to current MMOs.
Don't forget: Counter-strike started out as a fan made mod for hl1 and it blew every other professional made fps away.
---
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Almost without exception, no matter what MMO you are calling junk or a waste of time has a loyal following out there. Someone likes the game and thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread. What you are actually asking for is for a game that appeals to enough people to make it number 1 or 2 in the industry. In other words, you are saying if you can't make WoW, don't bother. Personally, I think WoW is a good game, but I thank God for variety.
As a society we have to judge which 2 MMOs would be beneficial for our society.
Since we are talking about video games, we can't seriously think for adults or teens, buf kids goes first.
Thereby, you now have the choice to play Mabinogi (very nice and cute MMO btw, especially if you're 8, wear pink clothing and think Mississipi is a cool word), and Pokemon Online adventure which will start developpment NOW and seize and confiscate all assets/staff/ressources from Blizzard.
LOL.
The more, the merrier. If they belly flop, I can laugh and pinpoint at weakness and feel ubah doing so, like the know-it-all fan. If it succeed, I can appreciate it or be free of all players I find annoying in my MMO. It is a win/win/win case scenario...as long as I have 1 MMO to call my own; not the case atm
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I could not answer the poll because it is phrased in a rather sinister manner that does not reflect my opinion.
The OP equates a good MMORPG with a financially successful one. While I agree there is definitely a link, an MMORPG does not have to be one of the biggest to be one of the best. There are several MMORPGs I feel are excellent that have subscriber totals that are under 50K, 10K, and even 5K. They are profitable, but not exactly what most would call successful, and not even close to being contenders for the top spots in terms of popularity.
If companies only made MMORPGs they felt could hit at least 200,000 North American subscribers, which is roughly what one would need to be number two, we would not see a lot of MMORPGs. Such MMORPGs cost at least $50M to make and market, and the risk involved is massive. I have no idea hat EA Mythic is spending on WAR, but I would not be surprised if its total cost, including what I imagine will be a massive marketing campaign, will be $80M+.
Do offline game developers only make games that will achieve Halo success? No! Very few games would get made if that was the metric for quality and success because it is simply not feasible to always produce a game that breaks sales records. Sometimes you want to make a solid title that only costs $5M to make and may not have a widespread appeal, but will score well with the target demographic and see a return. Look at something like Brain Age for the Nintendo DS - I bet that game cost peanuts to make but it is hugely popular.
Pirates of the Burning Sea is a good example of an MMORPG that would never have been made if it had to contend with WoW or LotRO. It will never be that popular, but its cost to make was less and it will make a lot of people happy as it is different.
In conclusion, I definitely do not support bad MMORPGs being developed or release, but I do support good ones of any scale, so long as the developer keeps that scale in mind. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a game only having 10,000 subscribers if it is a quality, profitable title. There is a large problem with a game only having 10,000 subscribers if its goal was 200,000+ and it has less because it sucks (like Vanguard).
By this logic, we have 2 MMOGs to play.
How utterly boring.
I dont know of any company that tries to be #30. many games have aspects that are good and each have failings.
Torrential
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
Eve isn't number one or number 2.
Huh. What a failure.
Actually, I didn't know that any MMORPG that isn't WoW or Lineage 2 was a failure.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
What a thoroughly moronic thread.
How can anyone know if they're going to be numebr one or number two before they release their game?
Duh.
Look, kindergarten postulations are all well and good....when you're in kindergarten. Most people who actually play online games are *not* still in kindergarten.
You can't possibly know your game is not going to be one or two, or is going to be one or two, until after you publish it. Get a grip.
My point is: A lot of games aren't designed to be #1 or #2. They are designed to be a simple clone with simple mechanics trying to leech off some players from the big original MMOs or trying to get newbies to play your title before they find out how much better the other games are. The Goal is to cover the development and maintenance costs and get a certain margin of profit for a few years.
Still a lot of clones are not only simpler but have sub par graphics, gameplay and content. The MMO devs and programmers of most of these clones are doing such a project for the first time and they repeat the same old mistakes again and again. Why? They simply are not allowed to do innovation and they know it. You try to develop an MMO when your investors say: Rewrite WoW with one tenth of the budget, an unexperienced new staff and make sure you give me back my money+profits or I will sue you.
---
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
The question is not if you can be the #1 or #2 in terms of copies sold or people online.
The question is, can you as a developer honestly say that your game is better than almost every MMO on the market, even just in your own, possibly overly rosy opinion? If not, or if your answer is something like 'we've got player crafted boats', stop and make something else.
I appreciate trying and failing, but games like LOTRO, Archlord, Vanguard, MXO, Tabula Rasa, Pirates and several others aren't even trying. They are small, bring no innovation, and generally offer nothing good. Why the hell do developers think games like LOTRO or Vanguard are a good idea? Even WAR is an uninspired rip-off of every other MMO on the market, and will probably meet LOTRO's fate for this reason.
Blizzard tried to be the best, and they were rewarded. If you don't try to be the best in your niche, quit the industry and go write database interfaces, because then you'll only need to be good enough to keep your job.