Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
When a MMOG becomes "closed to new players"
Koltrane
Member UncommonPosts: 1,049
Someone mentioned here that Asheron's Call was effectively retired because you couldn't find the software in most places and that almost all players are veterans. I'm not certain what the official status of AC1 is, but it does bring up an interesting point. After a time, MMOGs stop becoming new player friendly.
This is not to say that the publishers or the community shut the door on new players, but the game's circumstances change. There are several things that might cause this:
- The game ages and, therefore, is not considered to be worthy of a new purchase
- Newer games get the press, pushing the older game out of the spotlight and off the shelves
- The player community matures to the point that most all active players are at the higher levels
I think we are starting to see this happen with some of the older titles, such as UO and AC. Both games have established communities who are dedicated to the social aspect of the game, but they are all high level characters who have a long history. It is unlikely either game is attracting many new players. Are they, as some have said, not "noob friendly"? If so, how long before the lack of new blood causes them to shrink or fail?
It's interesting to see that after 5 years, both games are still going strong and have a fiercely loyal player community, but with the number of games on the market now and the plethora of high profile releases on the horizon, how long can they hold their own? Will we see these (and other) older games continue for years to come, or will the lack of new players cause their demise?
And how in the world does a publisher get new players interested in an old game? I guess if I had the answer to that question, I'd be a consultant to EA, Turbine, SOE, etc. 
-----
Old timer.
Comments
A fronte precipitium a tergo lupi
EQII
Requiiem, Templar
Neriak
heh, I guess you would, he, anwyas you are right about the lack of new players in many mmog's, i.e. UO, AC, EQ, although, i really dont see this being a problem with UO as it is extremely newb friendly and character creation/development is simple and people will still help you. Anwyas, eanough of the tangent, but yes, retainlers in effect stop carrying the game, i dont remember when the last time i saw AC on the shelves (though i did see, the latest UO expansion at gamestop for 5 bux
).
But moving on, i think a possibility for getting new players would be to redevlop the client, say UO in full 3d, like many of the current games are, you could also play it in 2d isometric, or that gangster 3d that they are doing now, but could move on and do it in 3d. Updating graphics is always a good move. Additionally when making a game like EQ2, or UO2 (sniff, sniff), be sure to make the game backwards compatible. What with new technology in server clusters, it would probably be cheaper to transfer everything onto the new system, and drop the old one, and im sure maintenance costs assoicated with this would be cheaper as well.
example, say people who buy EQ2, will automatically have EQ included, that they could go to via some portal, they play the old game with the updated client, grafx, etc... and they can play the new game as well, now the people who have eq1 will not be able to teleport to eq2, they have to go buy the software, and their old character in eq1 is not playable in eq2, but say their offspring, ancestor, family relative is, and that character retains some special power, or gets some special item, or gets a tatoo on his/her body that non eq1 players will not have, or will get only once they "conquer" eq, meaning get to lvl 65, or 40 what have you. oviously this solution is flawed, and not clearly worked out, but something to think on nonetheless, for the next wave of developers. I mean imagine if AC and AC2 were compatible, it probably wouldnt have been as big of a flop as it was (meaning ac2)
cheers,
- i am www.eljacek.com -
-------
Check out my side project http://lfger.com/ - a mobile lfg tool for any game, any time.
-------
I see where you're going with that statement, however, I don't think they will just "drop off the map" as you say. I think a huge thing to remember with these older games is, as they become out-dated and their populations start to fall the resources behind developement will most likely also be taken away steadily but this is okay because for the most part these old games are at the point where they see almost all profit. Now don't get me wrong; servers, bandwidth, and maintence is very expensive for MMOG's but like I said, resources needed will be dropped also and unless expansion packs are still being pumped out, most major developement costs are paid for and done with. Another thing you might notice is the frequency that EQ pumps out expansions.... I don't know first hand but I guarentee you the tools they use to pump out those expansion are at a point where they can create new content fairly easily at a low cost since they have been developed and used for so long.
I believe many of these games we see today and are referring to will stick around for 5 or even 10 more years but with a smaller, niche group. Take a look at Meridian 59, Underlight, The Realm, and the other older graphical online games that I'm sure exist and are still around. They are still here, with their small but strong supporting communities. The thing with the games I mentioned last sentence is they wouldn't even be considered MMOG's by our standards today.. so scale that to UO and AC and all the others, then skip 5 years... I think they'll be around in one form or another
----------------------
Jake
KO - Harrold the Rogue
I'd hate to die twice. It's so boring
- Richard P. Feynman, 1988
I think in conjunction with what your saying about UO and AC being older titles and possibley not "N00b" friendly is: What is the expected life of an MMO ?? When a developer makes the committment, how long should they be expected to support and grow the game ? What as players, should our realistic expectations be with respect to a games life ??
Assuming a game is made well, it has all the content a community could ask for, and receives timely updates, how long should the community expect the game to continue ? 5years? 10 years? I am interested in what people think about this.
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.
UO has released many expansions, to bring it up with a lot of other games, UO still has quite a few nebs in it, and its still one of hte largest.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
My son (15) tells me that he got AC with Dungeon Siege, but he didn't install it. His perception is that it is an "old" game, and he'd rather play a "new" game. He feels the same way about EQ, which he did play for a while. He's looking at the next generation of games, and says he'll just wait. He's just getting to be the point of being a target consumer-- young, single male with disposable income-- so his opinion probably counts more than mine.
I think these older games will hang on for quite a long time. I don't know what kind of growth potential that they have.
Before I quit, I ran into a surprising number of real newbies in EQ, but I was just as likely to encounter whole groups of twinks being controlled by one or two people, because they felt they needed to level a cleric or shaman or enchanter or Class X. EQ is clearly an aging game, but it still seems to be drawing in some new players here and there, and many people have multiple accounts. (We had a total of 6 accounts for 4 people in our household, for instance.) I don't know that it is growing anymore in terms of real players, but it seems to be hanging in there.
I played AC for a while early on in that game. I thought it was a good game, but I ended up staying where my friends were (EQ). I wouldn't go to AC now though. With so many new games around the corner, I can't say that there's much that would attract me to one of these old games.
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
EQ is about the same age as other "closed to new player" games. Yet, it's still open? Why, New exp packs, graphic engine upgrades, and other new features are constantly being added.
As much as I like to see EQ die, VI has been very smart about adding new things to keep the game fresh and improve gameplay. At this point they are adding new exp packs every 6 months.
I think the answer is, never stop adding new features. Never allow your player base to achieve there goals "to quickly".
There may be some truth to the old vs new type mindset, but those are generally younger players. Adults hate change, once hooked they stick around. MMORPG's aren't like games, where you play for few weeks or months, then go buy another one. MMORPG's become a hobby unto themselves. Your time invested is much higher. As such MMORPG's appeal to older demographic. typically MMORPG's market for those 21+.
It almost seems the secret to keeping a MMORPG alive, is simply not given your users enough reasons to leave. Even if newer better games users won't stop playing, unless something goes horrible wrong. I'm always in shock to the loyalty people have games.
-=-=-=-=-
Chess the original hardcore PvP game!
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
Yee: Ach: 85% GRE: 65% AFF: 15% Imm 15% Test Click here to learn about it.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
I would say that is true enough. I played EQ for years, while my kids got bored and left after only a few months. And I know many people see the game as a hobby that they have a huge investment in (mainly in time).
I am a bit odd in the sense that I don't consider any game an investment of anything. I ditched a level 50 warrior when it got boring, I ditched a level 65 shadowknight just before I quit. It doesn't much matter to me; I paid my $13 a month to have fun. It was worth it when it was fun, and when it wasn't fun, I just walked away. But *most* people form a huge attachment to their characters and talk about all the "work" they put into those characters. (I was one of those people once. And then my reality check came in the mail.)
Getting people to feel that way is really a little bit of genius, isn't it? It gives you longevity, and people who feel really dedicated to a product tend to promote that product to anyone they meet who might be interested.
EQ has also gotten to be a lot more newbie friendly. I remember the bad old days when you started with nothing and newbie mobs dropped bits that sold for mere copper pieces. Nowadays, most newbie zones have drops worth at least some gold, if not platinum, there are newbie armor quests for stat armor, there's no corpse retrieval til level 10 and no experience loss until level 11... The game itself is far more newbie friendly than it once was. And maybe that's another thing that keeps it open to new people. Have other games changed with the times to make starting late less of a burden?
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
These are some very astute observations. Maybe you should get that consultant job, Glove!
I have said in previous posts that I think the appeal of these games is twofold. People play to enhance their character through leveling or crafting (achievement) and they play to foster and promote relationships with other player (social). No doubt there are other aspects of MMOGs which appeal to players, but these are the top two in my opinion.
Of these two, I think the bigger draw and the one with more longevity is the social side. In the beginning it's all about leveling and getting items, but once friends are made and relationships established, the social aspect of the game becomes the real enticement. I know people who have given up accounts containing high-level characters with lots of wealth and possessions because all their in-game friends went to a new game. To them, it was more important to play a newbie character in a new, unfamiliar game with friends than to play their uber character in a familiar game where they knew no one.
I would argue that the majority of new players to older games like UO and AC are recruited by current players who want their friends and family in the game with them. This is where these games should focus, IMO, to maintain their subscribers. Refreshing content is absolutely essential, but when a MMOG reaches 5 years, it only takes a bit of new content on a regular basis to keep the old players happy. More attention should be payed to quickly assimilating those new players into the existing social structure, as that is likely what brought them to join an older game.
Maybe new players could be allowed to start their first character at an advanced level so that they could be closer to the level of those with whom they are wanting to group. For example, EQ could allow a new player to start his first character at level 25 so he could more get to the planes more quickly and join his buddies who finally convinced him to join. DAoC currently allows something like this, but it is only available to existing players who have reached level 50.
I think games like UO and AC and EQ will continue for years, as long as there is a player base willing to keep paying a monthly fee. Regardless, as a game ages, people will eventually leave for whatever reason. Consequently, the game will become a liability and have to be closed, which is never pretty. (People are STILL griping about AOL killing the original Neverwinter Nights eight years ago). The best way to stretch it out is to keep the content fresh and make the game amenable to new players. When new players stop coming, I don't care how solid the player base is, it is surely the beginning of the end.
-----
Old timer.
-=-=-=-=-
Chess the orginal hardcore PvP game!
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
Yee: Ach: 85% GRE: 65% AFF: 15% Imm 15% Test Click here to learn about it.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
04.01.31
AC and AC2 CDs can be purchased here for $ 5 to 7. Or here. AC1 is a very simplistic game for rpgers that prefer to solo instead of the EQ forced grouping style. Though one should also get the 1st expansion Dark Majesty and the soon to be released 2nd expansion. The bigest problems in AC are the excessive lag, the macro and CoC cheaters that the devs refuse to punish.
Since Turbine has bought back the rights from MS, they have announced their plans to increase the subscription from $10 to 13/mo.
You can try AC2 for 15 days free through the 900MB download.
details
EQ which is probabaly the most popular pay to play mmorpg of all time in the west had used a good formulae.
Now the other 2 oldies UO(1997) and AC(1999) probabaly apply to this formulae more or less to a smaller degree.
EQ looked deep into the words MMOPRG.
First it made it such that you had to group and guild up.Now this might seems fustrating to some but is essential for gaining long standing customers.You have to group means you have to interact means you make new online friends means you don't want to lose them even when the game becomes a bore.
It made the end content very hard to get to and char advancement endless meaning the goal is never achieved.
Now mistake many of the new games have made is to listen to those with loads of hours on their hands with zero patience to advance a character(not saying this are all 12 year olds but mainly are).
So they made character advancement fast to achieve and everyone can solo perfectly in the end people maxed out their character in 1 month and did not interact with anyone and have the impression they been on a barren world and leave.
Sadly I agree new players will only get fustrated in such games like EQ because ppl have 5 years of play on them and have advanced very far.
I know people that started playing in 2001 and can not get to see the highest end stuff yet in EQ!!!
This is probably why SoE is going ahead with EQ2 .A fresh start for most people with a fresh look to match.While I think some stuff like death penalty should be reduced in EQ2 I think the old formulae of grouping should stay.IE poor soloer should be very good in groups/raids.Good soloer bad in groups/raids.
Also dependace on other classes for a successful raid is sometime they should keep.No warrior to tank then no raid,no cleric then no raid,no monk to pull no raid,no enchanter then no raid and so on.
I think most new games have made it such that the world is totally boring now.You want to hunt in SWG?just recruit does not matter who.Chances are they are all commandos or whatever the flavour of the month is.
I personally am tired of easy mmorpgs that seems no better then a offline game.Yes I have little time on my hands and probabaly in EQ2(if its like EQ) will be one of those running in junk armor for a long time but as long as I know my character is always there for me to advance,see new place(or look forward to them ) and there are loads of people to interact I will be happy.
Actually this was Mythic's really unsuccessful way to balance out realm population imbalances and also served as a reward for players who had maxed their main. Basically the theory was everyone could get a /20 character if they had a 50 already, but if they started the alt on a certain realm which was severly unpopulated, they could start at /30 instead. Basically it did VERY little if anything to balance out the realm populations. As evidenced by the fact that on NO server can you create a /30 Alb character.
Richard J. Cox
"There were much of the beautiful, much of the wanton, much of the bizarre, something of the terrible, and not a little of that which might have excited disgust."
Interesting that it's still available, especially given that Microsoft doesn't even list the original AC on their website and Dark Majesty is listed without a purchase option. Also, I noticed one of the above websites listed the software as "used". I can't imagine they're actually selling pre-owned copies of AC as they would be useless without an unused key.
The price increase on the original AC begs the question, is Turbine trying to "kill off" AC? I have no idea, but it seems to me that they have not made the efforts that others have to keep their product on the shelves.
For example, Mythic offered the Shrouded Isles expansion as a pure add-on, then a few months later bundled the original game and SI into the Gold package so that new players wouldn't have to search high and low for the original software (which was required to play SI).
SOE released the original EQ and all the expansions through Planes of Power under the EverQuest: Evolution name, so that new players could buy the game and be up to date on all the expansions.
When the UO Age of Shadows expansion was released, no other code was necessary, i.e. one did not have to go find the original game. Also, an "invite a buddy" program was put into place which gave those who recruited a new player one free month of game time and an in-game rare.
Granted, AC is in a slightly different situation. None of the above has a follow-on game currently released while Turbine is supporting both AC and AC2. The subscription rate for AC has remained the same since 1999 (tip o' the hat for that). Also, Turbine has just bought the rights to the game from Microsoft, so maybe some of the reason for the lack of availability is sourced in Redmond.
I did see where Turbine is opening a new AC server - news which was lukewarmly received on the forums. The biggest complaint on the threads I read was that there is no way to buy keys online and the software is hard to find. So, again, it comes back to the question of Turbine's plan for AC.
Maybe the question is fodder for a new thread, but with AC aging and AC2's population problems, I have to wonder what Turbine's plans are to shore up its player community. I think it would be logical to assume they would want to focus on a single game (which, of course, would be AC2), but I may be way off.
-----
Old timer.
planetside isnt very friendly to new players nobody on there wants to team up with a low br
i tryed the 7 day free thing this weekend never did get in a squad