Thumb Wars: Ep 37: Ninten-Dont’s?: Of LPs & Twitter
Top 5 Rail Shooters
Sage Reviews – Metro: Last Light
Lotus Prince Let’s Play – Amnesia: The Dark Descent (Parts 4-6)
Lego City Undercover is AWESOME! – Episode 4
Posted By Shaun K. about 9 months ago
Thumb Wars: Episode 5: The Changing of the MMO,
Episode 5: The Changing of the MMO
Welcome back to the show where we introduce the debate and you continue it. This week’s topic: Shaun & Jon “ChaosD1″ Burkhardt discuss the changing nature of the MMO and what the future may hold for the popular sub-genre.
Thumb Wars is a weekly show hosted/produced by Shaun Kronenfeld dedicated to starting and encouraging dialogue and debate on a wide variety of topics within the video game industry. Look for a new Thumbs Wars every Sunday. Comments, opinions, and thoughts are not only welcome, they are the entire point. Feel free to follow Shaun on Twitter @bigred_13 if you feel so inclined.
This will be tl;dr
There is a phrase you repeat over and over again in the podcast that really irritates me, “sub-genre”. You using that term is a bit of insult and illustrates what I think is wrong with BT’s coverage of MMOs. That phrase implies, “Yes, there is this thing called MMOs but it’s not really a big or important thing.” That’s the feeling that I get when I go looking for MMO articles on BT. Aside from your guest who I deeply respect for his work, I don’t see BT really taking giving the MMO genre the respect it deserves. The average you can expect is maybe once a week for a genre that is growing, and as you put it, “can be anything.” I say this in knowing you are one of the few writers willing to at least spend some of your time on MMO stories. You even say in the podcast “An MMO can be anything” and they are. There are MMORPGs but there are MMORTS, MMOFPS, MMOTPS, MMO Platformers, MMO strategy games, MMO hybrid games, MMO Action games, MMO Tactical fighter and starship games, MMO sports games, Martial Arts MMOs, and the list goes on. Not only that, this genre is only a part of the venue of online gaming, which includes MOBAs, social gaming, exclusive online titles that are not on consoles. So seeing you call it a “sub-genre” over and over is not just demeaning for the genre but shows that BT’s regard for MMOs is disrespectful to online gamers.
Moving off of my griping and onto debating actual points you made in the video, you make the point that the subscription MMO is on its way out and Free-to-play is here to stay… This is a point that I don’t agree with entirely. While you do mention playing some MMOs, your perspective is what I consider an outsider to the genre. Take for example when you spoke of BioWare and Star Wars saying “if they couldn’t do, no one can”. That is looking at it from the outside and not recognizing BioWare isn’t an experienced MMO developer. BioWare is a legendary studio making several award winning RPGs. Yet, that doesn’t mean they can make an MMORPG. It means that given a set of parameters, they know how to make a compelling story and use game elements to give the story plenty of fun while playing the game, keeping them interested, and have some replay value. These things are carried over into SWTOR, but many things are left out that an MMORPG needs. There is a reason the MMO comes first in the abbreviation. The first thing you need to consider is the massively multi-player part, this often means creating expansive worlds where players have many, many tasks they can complete together. BioWare’s emphasis on the individual story, while refreshing and made the leveling up experience extremely enjoyable, left the other essential parts of an MMO to be desired. When it came to tools for grouping, PvP, operations, the ultimately reasons to keep playing the game; it fell flat in most of those categories. This is why the game, while reported as the fastest growing MMO ever, failed to keep subscribers. In other words, people were more than willing to pay for the game, but were not willing to “keep” paying for the game. The draws of high end operations, loot, and PvP were too easy, too quick to get, and broken respectively.
That is the problem when it comes to subscription model games. It’s not that subscriptions are bad. I’ve never had an issues with paying $15 or less if I like a game and it gives me continued reason to keep paying. It’s addressing the two things that you have to have with subscription games at launches. You’ve got to not only provide content for many different players, PvE content, casual content, PvP content, story, and so much more right at the beginning; but also provide content that will keep players playing the game, long-term content and goals whether it’s a several month high-end raid dungeon, competitive PvP, or just a really cool piece of gear that takes a long time to earn money for because it is really rare. This is why launches are so difficult for MMOs and why established MMOs that know the formula like WoW can continue to keep going. So what do many MMOs do when they can’t compete, go free-to-play. It’s not because they are necessarily bad games but because the barrier to entry in the genre is ridiculously high and free-to-play is a great way to lower that barrier.
As for your comments regarding, “Why not go free-to-play?” It’s not a matter of fact that free-to-play is better. Here’s a matter of fact. When comparing all the free-to-play and subscription game revenues (you can check NewZoo for this), the two models are almost neck-and-neck. Usually free-to-play games edge out subscription titles by a few points, like 53%-47%, in most markets. Still, the money is still nearly the same. Then, think about how many games are subscription, and how many games are free-to-play. There are so many more free-to-play games out there than there are subscription titles. So if you look in perspective, on average, a subscription game is more profitable. That’s why many companies want to start with subscription games. DCUO for example had the layout of being a free-to-play game in terms of its content delivery but was subscription based despite Jon Smedley and SOE becoming Free-to-play zealots. So why did DCUO release as a subscription game? To make initial cash, and have the option to reinvigorate the game with a free-to-play launch. The Secret World is a different story. It’s a niche title. That term is used not because of selling you a mystery supernatural MMO but because this title will scare away typical MMO gamers. The mission system isn’t simple go and kill 5 boars but has stealth missions, investigation missions, research missions require browsing the internet to solve and I know players will get frustrated and say “Game sucks” because it’s not easy and leave. So what Funcom was probably thinking is, “We created a great product that is gonna scare away a lot of typical players. We need to recoup that loss somehow.” So that’s why I think The Secret World is subscription.
Thus, when you are saying free-to-play is so superior. It’s not necessarily true. Every game that goes free-to-play loves to tote their numbers after launch, up 1000% in users and so on. But rarely do they say if the games profits do turn around. LOTRO did do this and that has largely been cited as proof that all games should go free-to-play. They tripled revenues. Yet in a recent story out of GCD Online Europe, developers were also saying to expect a 70% user drop off. Free-to-pay has many of the same issues as subscription games. It’s just by lowering that barrier of entry do you increase the number of potential people willing to buy your game. Yet, a lot of people are still not going to give you money. You have to hope that people, dedicated players along with new ones, are willing to pay money for your content.
On the free-to-play flood note, I would not worry about the market being flooded by crappy free-to-play games because:
1. That’s already happened and it has not been apocalypse but a burgeoning of the genre, offering some of the same old stuff but some games with new twists and innovative new games
2. Along with the flood of smaller titles comes more AAA titles from smaller MMO and online studios trying to break-in: Age of Wulin, Otherlands, Games of Thrones (Yes there is an MMO game for it coming), MechWarrior Online, RaiderZ, Neverwinter, and more.
And finally, your remarks on WoW being out for years and years as the reason why players are leaving. That’s once again outsider looking in perspective. Or rather, I like to make the analogy that console gamer are online gamers are like movie-goers and TV watchers. There are many parallels there between the two. My point is though, a movie-goer sees a movie, likes it, but then goes look for the next big thing. A TV Watcher, who likes a particular TV Show, will follow it for years as long as it is good and keeps their interest. That’s what an MMO player is like. What we’re seeing with WoW is not people getting tired of it because its old (Doctor Who is plenty old, as is Star Trek, SNL, Price is Right, Oprah, and so on). It’s more along the lines of the game is as ChaosD1 says, stagnating. They like their current design philosophies and as long as they are top-dog, they will not change a damn thing. At the same time, partially because of free-to-play longevity and the times moving forward, more games are coming out, quality games. These games are doing more, experimenting more, and are willing to be more receptive to players than WoW. That’s why I think the game is tanking. As long as they are on top, they will act like the big dog and continue what they have been doing.
That’s it.
I’m not too much of an MMO player, primarily because Calbeck is EXACTLY right to say it feels like a “theme park.” I play LOTRO on occasion, but if I play it for too long I burn myself out. Consequently I play enough to warrent occasional TP, but definitely not enough for any sort of a subscription.
I suspect that once the Freemium MMO becomes the norm, things will change. Getting purchases from players will depend on holding long-term interest and providing long-term content, and when you adopt F2P you get plenty of players to peddle to a particular flavor community. RP communities in particular are looking to benefit, particularly if the developer makes a conscious effort to make the gameplay complement the RPing aspect, and makes it easy to develop and get into character.
But again, it boils down to the gameplay and relative monotony. MMO’s need to do something other than questing and crafting. Something which focuses on developing player networks, fosters a particular kind of community, and provides a break from ordinary gameplay. I don’t know what’s missing, but when somebody figures it out the MMO genre will suddenly click and become one of the more potent forces in gaming. And will remain that way for a long time.
I think what a lot of people are looking for is an MMO where they have a unique and enjoyable experience they can tell (read: brag about) to friends.
Current MMOs have a largely “theme-park” atmosphere, though, wherein everyone and their mother’s uncle experiences the same exact content over time. You purchase your membership, you ride the rides, you have your fun, maybe you go back over the same rides for a while, and then inevitably you get bored — unless more rides are provided.
The solution, however, is not merely introducing a random element. There has to be a narrative of SOME kind, because pure random dice-throwing gets boring too, rendering everything down to “yeah, you just got lucky”. Guided design remains a requirement, which would seem to reintroduce the “theme park” problem.
No… I think the key is introducing games that provide an epic scope, the ability for the player to affect outcomes that aren’t set in stone, and flexibility. And that’s not just making every quest into a pick-a-path adventure, either.
I, of course, have my own ideas. I’d rather not talk just yet about one specific design i have in mind. But how about, say…the American Civil War?
What would happen if you used topo maps from the era, not to merely re-create battlefields, but to allow on-the-fly engagements between opposing elements? A rolling, non-stop wargame moving in real-time speeds, with players occupying roles in their armies’ chain-of-command.
There’d be many design hurdles to overcome, but with such a freeform environment, a player’s accomplishments would be undoubtedly their own.
Who figured out how to steal a march on an enemy regiment? You did. Whose cavalry broke through skirmishers to savage a crucial supply train? Yours. When the line wavered and threatened to break, who ran to the front and shouted the encouragements that made it hold? You.
Not in some pre-rendered cutscene or faceless ratings chart full of numbers, but there in the chatrooms with the rest of the community, each with their own unique, shared, and actually-important-to-the-game tales to tell.
I see WoW as having only another 2-3 years left because well it’s just getting old. The way I see it is MMO’s are like, say, a car. You can put in new spark plugs, touch up the paint job, maybe add some fuzzy dice but in the end its just not gonna do the job. Games have come a long way since WoW first came out both technically and gameplay wise. My bet is that once whatever new MMO Blizzard has in the works comes out that they will drop WoW to F2P status as players mass migrate to the big new thing.
While I could see theoretically WoW as THE dominating force in the MMO sub-genre coming to an end at some point in the course of the next few years, I do not think the actual game itself will be going anywhere. Keep in mind older ames like Everquest and Ultima Online are both still around in some form or another and neither were ever nearly as popular as WoW.
At 9 million+ subscribers at the moment, WoW could drop as far as ten percent of its present user base and still feature far more players than any number of current MMOs. Honestly I would not be surprised to find WoW still around and being actively played even ten years from now.
And I would not be so sure that Blizzard will be able to repeat the level of success they achieved WoW with another MMO. For one thing, there were any number of factors that contributed to WOW becoming what it is today and many of these are simply no longer present or meaningful; as you said, it is a different industry these days;.
I also wonder about expectation. I mean can you imagine the level of hype that would surround a successor, direct or otherwise, to WoW? Blizzard could make the most innovative and fresh MMO ever and still not be able to satisfy potential unreasonable expectations. And honestly, no offense to Blizzard fans, they have always been far better at perfecting established formulas (in both a gameplay and storytelling sense) than actual outright innovation or originality. Personally I think the end of WoW’s run at the top of the MMO heap comes will also mark the same for Blizzard. We will see I suppose.
I agree that the b2p model (as I’ve heard the GW2 model referred to) is better all around. I’d like to see TSW go this route, even though I’ve already paid for a month. I really like how LOTRO does it, minus the lock boxes and keys. The biggest problem I with that game is that they keep releasing new expansions when I hardly made it out of the level 20 areas in 1 year. That’s probably due to my own altist and the stop-and-go nature of my gaming thanks to work and other hobbies.
Keep up the good work to both of you! You’ve given me yet another show on MMO’s and gaming to listen to.
free to play might not the death of a game but it is the death of that games community when tons of people rush in with dirty boots that don’t really care about the game, grab whatever “fun” they are looking for and leave.
That are at least my feelings about the whole P2P going F2P topic
As a long-time City of Heroes player, I completely agree. 90% of the players are hanging around in low-level areas, with the rest doing high-level farms, meaning new players come in and grind their way to endgame and have no idea how the game works.
Actually, this is why the GW2 model makes sense to me, since it prevents people coming in for a quick thrill. The price tag also keeps out the ‘annoying troll preteen’ crowd, as well as gold-sellers.
Why are some words and sentences re-dubbed?
I had some microphone and computer problems and as a result a few bits here and there did not record right. I know its sounds a little awkward at places but I did not want to scrap the whole episode over it. I am taking steps to fix the problem going forward (including purchasing a new and better microphone) so hopefully it should not happen again. Thanks for understanding.