| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Garrett
Joined: 13 Jul 2001
Posts: 74
Location: Munich, Germany |
| Ekim's Gamer View: MMORPG Blues |
|
The latest editorial by Ekim is called <a href="http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=526">MMORPG Blues</a> and is about MMORPGs and the turn they need to take to attract new players:<blockquote><em>What does this all tell us? Is it a sign that the genre is already sick? I think it's more a major sign that the genre needs to renew itself a little. Too many new games are just like the ones before them. When I reviewed AC2 I touched upon this. A good game, but not good enough to convince me to switch because I'm already doing all this somewhere else. Would I really switch only because of graphics or ease of use? No, the other game was hard to get into, but I've invested enough time in it so that now it comes easy to me. A new player might have something different to say, but are there enough new players to the genre willing to buy into AC2 or E&B or any other game right now? Apparently not. The genre needs new blood...</em></blockquote> |
Fri Feb 21, 2003 10:38 pm |
|
|
TheMadGamer
High Emperor
Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 487
Location: Southern California |
Many years ago I remember when Richard Garriot was commenting on his newly released Ultima VII and the question was something to the effect of what he felt made a CRPG interesting.
While I won't be able to quote him exactly, his answer was something to the effect that a CRPG is interesting to the point where the gameplay becomes repetitive... where you've experienced all the different things teh game engine can offer and after that point, it's just more of the same.
One of Richard's goals with the Ultimas (at least until Ultima  was to make the game engine so capabable that players would still be discovering new things up until the end of the game.
Now we have MMORPGs. Which by nature want to hold players attention for as long as possible... you can't bill a player who has cancelled their account. So unlike a single player CRPG, which might keep one's attention measured in terms of hours, MMORPGs have the daunting task of trying to keep people's interest in terms of months or even years... BUT... the gameplay becomes repetitive rather quickly in any of the current MMORPG offerings.
A player can discover everything the EQ game engine has to offer in just 1 month. After that, it's one's own vanity that pushes him forward, looking for that next dangling carrot to impress his online buddies with. But is it interesting? Well, MMORPGs include other real players which can keep things interesting. But from a gameplay point, it's pretty repetitive.
I'm not sure how I would detail a solution to this. But it certainly involves MMORPGs offering a greater purpose for a person to be involved with its world other than equipping your toon with nifty pieces of gear and gaining levels. There needs to be more compelling reasons to want to play. What those reasons are can be subjective. I think one way to tackle this problem is to look at successful single player CRPGs and see how elements that made them successful could be implemented in a MMORPG.
_________________
The Poster Previously Known As NeptiOfPovar |
|
Fri Feb 21, 2003 10:48 pm |
|
|
Moriendor
Black Ring Leader
Joined: 19 Jul 2001
Posts: 1306
Location: Germany |
I very much agree with Neptiofpovar. And I do have a possible solution  . Let's face it. It takes ages to code new content, to test it and to get it done for release.
Let's look at it this way... I've once been involved with track & field at high school. I was a runner. I competed in the 400 meters (1/4 mile) races. My coach (and my instinct) always told me to pretend that the race was over after 410 meters. It happened to me once (when my coach and my instincts failed me  ) that I was passed by a guy about 10 meters (30 ft.) before the finishing line.
Now.. where's the link to MMORPGs? Easy. I think that the live team of an MMORPG developer should have a detailed plan for additional content for months (!) ahead of the game's release. Let's take SWG as an example. Why did Sony/Lucas announce that a few features wouldn't make it into the initial release? Bad planning obviously. -- I strongly believe that the live team should have ready-for-release content for the 1st six months after the release of an MMORPG to be able to instantly satisfy gamers with new episodes/features etc. for the *entire* life time of the game! They should always be ahead by a large margin. -- MMORPGs are *not* done when they're done. They are done when you can ensure that your live team is going to keep gamers happy for a few months or even years...
<blockquote>Earth & Beyond has been struggling from day one. Although their game was initially practically flawless in the technical department, it was found to be lacking in many respects by lots of players. How else can you explain the free 1.2GB download for a "demo" and a week of free play time. Anarchy Online offered the same free "demo" through download, and as far as we can see the game's population hasn't increased dramatically. So this literally means that even if the publishers bend over backwards to actually offer their games free - that is completely free - for a few days, they are still not getting any bigger player-bases...</blockquote>
One more thing I don't understand. It should become a habit (not the exception) to publish demos of MMORPGs. Which serious gamer spends US$ 50,00 (or more) on a game w/o knowing what he gets? It's even worse than in the case of single player RPGs. There's absolutely nothing you can do with the game after you've decided to not subscribe. If you get lucky, you will only suffer from a minor loss as long as you manage to sell the game on eBay...
<blockquote>There is a place for competition in the MMORPG market, of course. There are enough willing players to have more than just one game on the map at any given time. Certainly there could be 4 or 5 big ones living alongside one another. But can there be more? Given the lack of success of some of the current crop of titles available, I don't see that there can be.</blockquote>
Hmm... I have to disagree with this one . I remember a source (don't remember which one but it was one that could be taken seriously) that was talking about 5 million potential online players by 2005. The year 2005 is *very* close in terms of development cycles. -- OK, the source was talking about "online players", not "MMORPG'ers' but 90%+ online games seem to be MMORPGs these days. There <i>is</i> a huge potential in this market and I believe that a much higher number of different online games (MMORPGs) could easily coexist. -- Let's do the math. If you'd only have five big MMORPGs with a limit of 3000 players per server and 10-15 different servers per game, you'd end up at a max. number of appx. 250.000 players in total. Obviously much too little according to the source's study.
Makes you wonder where MMORPG devs fail...(?) One reason might be the lack of a demo or trial. Another one may be the lack of available servers when the game is initially released. I'm personally looking forward to SWG but I still have a hard time believing that SOE is *not* going to offer European servers at the beginning (I'm German). The (probably) most anticipated MMORPG of all times (worldwide) is *not* scheduled for release in Europe yet? WTF?
I may be wrong about all of this stuff, of course. But the only MMORPG experience I got so far has occurred due to the fact that a free 1 month trial of DAoC was released on a major German gaming mag's cover CD last year... plus... I also tried the free downloadable 5-day Earth & Beyond demo. In both cases, I was tempted to join in the fun but figured that US$ 10+ a month were too much for someone with as little spare time for gaming as me... - However, people with plenty of time at their hands might think differently.
The MMORPG devs/publishers should also think differently. Give us demos/trials, give us servers that are (at least) located on the *continent* we live in and give us an outlook into the future of your game. Make sure that you've planned well ahead to keep us entertained. Remember: An MMORPG is not done when it's done... |
|
Sat Feb 22, 2003 1:04 am |
|
|
albatross
Head Merchant
Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 65
|
I, for one, am slowly but surely losing my interest in mmorpgs. I'v always felt that the first 20 lvls or equivalent of that were the most interesting,after that was just endless fighting,sitting,crafting,fighting,sitting,etc,.The glow wears off fast and another dungeon dosen't do it for me. I'v always been more of a loner when it comes to mmorpgs anyway so I won't miss them.I like new games,with new ideas and new things to do.My preference is single playing rpgs and a few are just around the corner. Thats where my gold is going too. |
|
Sat Feb 22, 2003 4:50 am |
|
|
TheMadGamer
High Emperor
Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 487
Location: Southern California |
| Participation dropping off |
|
I'm not sure why, but since the new year, participation on Ekim's topics have really dropped off.
I would hate to see this rpgdot feature go away because of some percieved idea that maybe people aren't interested.
But I think if you could somehow keep these editorials highlighted on the main page, more people would participate.
_________________
The Poster Previously Known As NeptiOfPovar |
|
Mon Feb 24, 2003 5:09 pm |
|
|
Ekim
Eagle's Shadow
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 2365
Location: Montreal, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Moriendor
Hmm... I have to disagree with this one . I remember a source (don't remember which one but it was one that could be taken seriously) that was talking about 5 million potential online players by 2005. The year 2005 is *very* close in terms of development cycles. -- OK, the source was talking about "online players", not "MMORPG'ers' but 90%+ online games seem to be MMORPGs these days.
Somehow I strongly doubt that the largest portion of this multiplayer games player pie belongs to MMORPG. They probably call Multiplayer games any and all games that have multiplayer in them, which would include Counter Strike, Jedi Knight 2, Amercia's Army, and many other non-RPG games. Many! I would go so far as saying that the MORPG market probably represents only a fifth of this number.
Now, yes this number will grow, but I was talking in present terms, relative to this year only. As of this moment I don't think more than 5 BIG MMORPGs could survive along side one another. By "BIG" I mean high profile, highly successful games like AC2, DAoC, EQ, or the upcoming SWG. More than 5 and one of them would struggle. Heck, there aren't even 5 high profile MMORPGs on the market right now and most are already struggling! Now add the upcoming ones to the mix and it makes for a very unpredictable drink 
quote:
Originally posted by Moriendor
Makes you wonder where MMORPG devs fail...(?) One reason might be the lack of a demo or trial. Another one may be the lack of available servers when the game is initially released.
Upon launch AC2 had... I think around 10 servers. The highest population I ever saw on any one server by the time I stoped playing was 1000. All others, and I mean ALL of them were far below 500 %90 of the time. So, the problem, I think, is that some developers see bigger than their stomachs sometimes. There should have been half the number of servers at launch. But now they're stuck! They can't possibly remove servers because the people who have made it their home will complain. It's always easier to expand than to cut down.
quote:
Originally posted by Moriendor
Let's do the math. If you'd only have five big MMORPGs with a limit of 3000 players per server and 10-15 different servers per game, you'd end up at a max. number of appx. 250.000 players in total. Obviously much too little according to the source's study.
What if the game offers as much room as you say but is never capped for lack of interested players? What if there is no demand for any more than those 250,000 players? And, even more obvious, what stops a developer/publisher from adding servers if the demand does grow? This argument does not stick at all. There is no limit to the number of players that can play their favorite game. It would be best though for a developer to start small, with 5 to 10 servers so as not to spread the population too thin, and then build up from that as demand grows.
Downloadable "demos" of MMORPG might be an answer, but the problem still remains: most games in the genre are like the ones before them... The genre needs new blood for it to expand now. I think this year we'll be seeing the player-base bottlneck expand because of games like SWG, but only because of the name and myth the title carries, not because of what the game offers. Those players for whom SWG will be the first MMORPG will be very disapointed if they ever decide to try something out. They'll go back to SWG because everyone else does the same in different settings. So when this player becomes fed up with SWG, what will he play next?
_________________
=Proud Father of a new gamer GIRL!=
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Worshiper of the Written Word= |
|
Mon Feb 24, 2003 7:06 pm |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
Ekim, a few weeks ago I´ve read a post by a developer. He said what will happen is <i>clustering of MMORPGs</i>. Two publishers form a coalition and try to make their existing products more attractive by giving you two for one.
The combined player base remains constant (people can only play one game at the same time), so there are only slightly increased overall costs, but the doubled content and the freedom to play another game for free will drastically improve the price/performance ratio.
_________________
Webmaster GothicDot |
|
Mon Feb 24, 2003 9:37 pm |
|
|
TheMadGamer
High Emperor
Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 487
Location: Southern California |
quote:
Originally posted by Gorath
Ekim, a few weeks ago I´ve read a post by a developer. He said what will happen is <i>clustering of MMORPGs</i>. Two publishers form a coalition and try to make their existing products more attractive by giving you two for one.
I'm not so sure that will work. Much like I've learned that supersizing my Big Mac meal is a good deal in terms of dollars and cents, it's really more food than I can eat.
MMORPGs are very time consuming. I can't say that I would really go for say a combo UO and AC deal because as I've already learned, both MMORPGs require lots of time, and given the amount of play time of the average gamer, you'd already know you wouldn't really be able to take full advantage of the deal because of your own personal time constraints.
_________________
The Poster Previously Known As NeptiOfPovar |
|
Mon Feb 24, 2003 10:54 pm |
|
|
Ekim
Eagle's Shadow
Joined: 27 May 2002
Posts: 2365
Location: Montreal, Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Gorath
Ekim, a few weeks ago I´ve read a post by a developer. He said what will happen is <i>clustering of MMORPGs</i>. Two publishers form a coalition and try to make their existing products more attractive by giving you two for one.
The combined player base remains constant (people can only play one game at the same time), so there are only slightly increased overall costs, but the doubled content and the freedom to play another game for free will drastically improve the price/performance ratio.
Combining two MMORPGs together is a nice idea actually, and might even catch on. But isn't it more like a "band-aid" kind of solution? It doesn't really fix anything, does it? That kind of solution might help smaller MMORPGs struggling for a player base, or those who can't afford to pay for big marketting campaigns to make their game known by attaching their name to another and combining resources. But long-term this is not a solution at all. The games need to renew themselves, there needs to be changes in the genre. Not only to attract new players, but to keep those that are already playing right now!
_________________
=Proud Father of a new gamer GIRL!=
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Worshiper of the Written Word= |
|
Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:04 am |
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:25 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
