Well.............................is blatantly obvious the reason why all new MMOs are failing.
You didn't have to write all that wall of text to explain the concept.
Plainly simple, the reason is the lack of diversity.
95% of developers creates WoW clones ignoring the other MMO market
Everyone is making Apple pies, problem is that the best Apple pie is still made by Blizzard.
The solution would be to make Orange Pies, Blackcurrant Pies, but also Muffins, Doughnouts and Fritters.
When developers finally understand this simple concept, we will all begin getting excited for the MMO genre.................and they will start making money.
For some reason this thread is making me hungry.
The following statement is false The previous statement is true
the bottom line and really the only main reasons these MMO's are failing is this...
they're being rushed out unfinished, lacking features and most of these new MMO's coming out do not even feel like onlines worlds, and they have terrible endgame content, no one gives shit about grinding gear anymore for the only endgame! Blizz has done beat this horse to death...
the next MMO needs to be a real online world that players can do stuff in beside fighting/running dungeons the new MMO needs to have many social elements, be a card game or diplomacy, with deep indepth crafting and player housing
and things people can do together, like jousting, archery contest and horse racing even.... hell anything works! just make something beside running the same dungeons over and over for gear, crafted gear should matter
you know people dont' want these online game/themepark worlds and this is why they failing
the next MMO that captures that online world feel with just the right themepark elements and sandbox gameplay will rule them all
really is sad to see Starwars:ToR turning out to be a online themepark... massive and on rails
Played: MCO - EQ/EQ2 - WoW - VG - WAR - AoC - LoTRO - DDO - GW/GW2 - Eve - Rift - FE - TSW - TSO - WS - ESO - AA - BD Playing: Sims 3 & 4, Diablo3 and PoE Waiting on: Lost Ark Who's going to make a Cyberpunk MMO?
the bottom line and really the only main reasons these MMO's are failing is this...
they're being rushed out unfinished, lacking features
I disagree completely.
Rift had the perfect release, yet it will end up like WAR and AoC.
No originality, no soul, no charm, no reason why people shouldstay subscribed after the first month
The MMO industry need to diversify their offer. People are bored with WoW and its clones.
You can see in all MMO forums, the first complaint a player mention against every new MMO is that "It's another WoW clone"
That should tell something to all developers out there, problem is that they have their heads so up their own arses that they are not able to listen to anything.
I'm confused OP, I went to the Apple store and they kept telling me that they don't sell iFritters, let alone a chocolate colored one. I really want a Chocolate Apple iFritter, please halp!
the bottom line and really the only main reasons these MMO's are failing is this...
they're being rushed out unfinished, lacking features and most of these new MMO's coming out do not even feel like onlines worlds, and they have terrible endgame content, no one gives shit about grinding gear anymore for the only endgame! Blizz has done beat this horse to death...
the next MMO needs to be a real online world that players can do stuff in beside fighting/running dungeons the new MMO needs to have many social elements, be a card game or diplomacy, with deep indepth crafting and player housing
and things people can do together, like jousting, archery contest and horse racing even.... hell anything works! just make something beside running the same dungeons over and over for gear, crafted gear should matter
you know people dont' want these online game/themepark worlds and this is why they failing
the next MMO that captures that online world feel with just the right themepark elements and sandbox gameplay will rule them all
really is sad to see Starwars:ToR turning out to be a online themepark... massive and on rails
Despite the massive 'desire' you see on this forums about 'worlds and not themeparks', the market has been consistant over the last 7 years that 'WoW is king'.
An MMO game takes years to make so all these games that are coming out has been designed/made from 3-4 years ago when WoW was just destorying everything in the market.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Warcraft3 and WoW played pretty much the same. One from RTS view, also controlling a few more characters and unit production, and the other one person.
If you want to see the real inspiration and first relisations of WoW play the Rexar campaign in WC3 Frozen Throne. It is literly the first incarnation of WoW before WoW. For Blizzard there we little to convert. Hell in Wrath the main DK spells come from the DK in WC3 in fact now that I think of it, it can be said for all classes.
So the fact WoW transfered well from Warcraft to WoW is that there was little to 'convert' and change rofl it basically just need to be expanded here and there.
Jeff Strain says it best. eerily true, especially the failure of WoW clones and SW/ST/LOTR being far from the level of success they were expected to have.
Well.............................is blatantly obvious the reason why all new MMOs are failing.
You didn't have to write all that wall of text to explain the concept.
Plainly simple, the reason is the lack of diversity.
95% of developers creates WoW clones ignoring the other MMO market
Everyone is making Apple pies, problem is that the best Apple pie is still made by Blizzard.
The solution would be to make Orange Pies, Blackcurrant Pies, but also Muffins, Doughnouts and Fritters.
When developers finally understand this simple concept, we will all begin getting excited for the MMO genre.................and they will start making money.
But the thing is, what do people actually want? I'm not sure the average gamer who's sick of Themepark MMO's really knows.
Innovation is great, but it's also expensive. Small companies may have great ideas, but can't really carry them to fruition because of limited funds. Companies with a bikg budget are nervous about true innovation, and I can hardly blame them.
You've got themepark, and sandbox. What kind of true innovation could you put in those so that a themepark could truly dethrone WoW?
I can think of a few things, but some of them don't work well in an MMO and are far better suited, and feasible, in a single-player game.
I want a multi faction game where we have seperate zones that we pvp in, and meaningful objectives there.
I want player crafted gear that is the best in the game. Let epic mobs drop jewelry.
Gods and heroes is a really cool game, only problem is the devs have WoWitus too, and they are very busy skinning it up to be just like wow. Yep we are sick of WoW mechanics. There have been other very successful games that didnt employ the same mechanics.
Daoc was the most successful MMO ever before WoW came out, and most of the reasons the game has died out have nothing to do with gameplay, but more to do with things like Bots, and age, and lack of advertising.
Well.............................is blatantly obvious the reason why all new MMOs are failing.
You didn't have to write all that wall of text to explain the concept.
Plainly simple, the reason is the lack of diversity.
95% of developers creates WoW clones ignoring the other MMO market
Everyone is making Apple pies, problem is that the best Apple pie is still made by Blizzard.
The solution would be to make Orange Pies, Blackcurrant Pies, but also Muffins, Doughnouts and Fritters.
When developers finally understand this simple concept, we will all begin getting excited for the MMO genre.................and they will start making money.
But the thing is, what do people actually want? I'm not sure the average gamer who's sick of Themepark MMO's really knows.
Innovation is great, but it's also expensive.
I never talked about innovation.
I talked about diversification, very different things.
You don't have to look in the future to start thinking about filling the MMO market gaps.
4 examples
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those rappresent 4 very different niches (How big we don't know yet), that are currently left uncovered.
All those games are almost 10 years old, and no AAA developer ever attempted to copy any of those games.
The closest you can get is Sigil attempt to make a sequel of EQ with Vanguard, but the game released so broken and unfinished that it never recovered.
You don't need to innovate, just updating old concepts will do, in my opinion.
Except he managed to find a formula thats vague enough that you may apply it to any MMO in existence, and then only check if it applies to MMOs that failed. Resulting in a vague "MMO fail if they fail" or "Unless you are WoW, you fail" nonsense.
MMOs fail because they suck.
And why WoW was such a huge financial success, thats a combination of advertising, low hardware requirements, being a success in asia, and winning the run for the "my friends play it too" MMO.
Originally posted by dbstylin34
i could have almost bet someone would mention illuminati, lucky i didnt put money on it.
And sad it is, too. Illuminati would have made more sense than this ... whatever it is.
Originally posted by grunt187
For me its a little EQ2 and mix some Warhammer with a dash of WoW and ya get Rift. and not so fail imho. but to each his own.
I only hear bad things about RIFT.
Originally posted by yewsef
MMORPGs come loaded with game mechanics and game features. There are too many decisions and game approach to make that if not done precisely well you're going to end up with a mutation.
The problem is with compromises, you cannot compromise an MMORPG. If you are to cater for more than one audience you end up losing them all. If you want to make a steak, make a steak. You can't just add ketchup instead of peppersauce for instance just because the majority of people like ketchup. You've ruined your steak this way.
MMORPG is a combonation of game design decisions if one is compromise you end up with a different experience. You need a bold and courageous lead designer to stick to their vision and never compromise just to please investors.
I think the top 5 problems with current MMORPG design is these:
1. Hand Holding, Quest Driven, Pre-Degined, Scripted Events..etc <-- all are in the same category.. a.k.a No Freedom.
2. Itemization <-- predictible, mathematical, boring, you can see the pattern from mile away, it got too old.
3. Economy, Auction Houses, Crafting <-- Not all monsters should drop coin, let people communicate more when trading (scratch this Auction House crap)..etc
4. Difficulty, Sense of Danger, Death Penalty, More Team Work <-- Now everything is too easy, Forced Soloing, Just boring riskless grind.
5. Immersion <-- Remove GPS map, make night darker, stop using neon-colors every where for player convenience, stop making everything convenient to the player, freedom of exploration, reward exploring, community skills..etc
1. So WoW is a failure.
2. So WoW is a failure.
3. So WoW is a failure.
4. So WoW is a failure.
5. Yuck. The i-word. Yuck. Yuck. Yuck !!!
Originally posted by Tardcore
Brand recognition. Most people aren't going to use Bing when they already have Google. However many people might flock to Skype if all they had before was text messenging. So far none of the recent MMO companies have made that kind of evolutionary leap. Just supplied us with variences on the same theme. It reminds me of 1960s American televison where every other show was a western.
Whow. That would have been pure hell to me. I absolutely hate Western.
Anyway you're making crazy much more sense than the OP.
Google won btw because it loads fast and was the best search engine.
Originally posted by Hyperbeam
A lot of it is to do with how investors minds work as well.
Having come from a background in selling, 'creative', products sometimes the only way to get something of the ground is to directly compare your project to something else that was succesful in the genre. Basically these people are accountants and they like steady, reliable profit sources that come backed up with data. If you as a MMO developer market yourselves to them as being similar there more likely to be interested then if you try something completely different that might fail.
The last, 'gold rush' in MMO's was with WAR and AOC, who tried different elements but were long term unsuccesful commercially. If you look at it that way you can see why something like Rift gets greenlighted, especially in this economy.
This tends to happen when, 'entertainment' compaines are run by accountants. It's why we have endless sequels to films that were, 'successful', yearly 'new editions' of games and DLC, all reliable sources of income, in their minds.
Essentially there's nothing wrong with this, compaines need to be profitable, people need to be working and consumers need to be entertained. However at some point it does become a question of value and more importantly innovation, (and having the courage to follow through on new ideas), becomes quite stfiled in this enviroment.
Again a posting that makes much more sense than the OP.
Games fail because they are made by businessmen who avoid risk taking, instead of by artists who want to make a great game.
Originally posted by Malickie
Or like today where every primetime show is a new and "improved" crime drama. What you said though doesn't only apply to MMO's this is what every genre has done over the years. One might say it's the norm in video game development all over.
Not really, theres plenty of fantasy and science fiction around.
I know because I cant stand crime shows either.
Even good ones like The Shield or Dexter just cant keep my attention.
Originally posted by Fargol
But the thing is, what do people actually want? [...]
A new MMO that is built around factions and PvP where the role of the dedicated player can positively impact others around him and negatively impact the enemy players lol.. A ton of unique gear and a very usefull craft system also..
Amagine a new MMO with Skyrims graphics, excellent PvP like daoc, with vast lands and excellent crafting and exploring.
*Corsair Obsidian Series 650D *i5-2500K OC'd ~ 4.5 *Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 mother board * Radeon HD 7970 *8GB (4GBx2) 1600MHz Kingston HyperX *240GB Corsair Force GT Series SATA-III SSD
Well.............................is blatantly obvious the reason why all new MMOs are failing.
You didn't have to write all that wall of text to explain the concept.
Plainly simple, the reason is the lack of diversity.
95% of developers creates WoW clones ignoring the other MMO market
Everyone is making Apple pies, problem is that the best Apple pie is still made by Blizzard.
The solution would be to make Orange Pies, Blackcurrant Pies, but also Muffins, Doughnouts and Fritters.
When developers finally understand this simple concept, we will all begin getting excited for the MMO genre.................and they will start making money.
But the thing is, what do people actually want? I'm not sure the average gamer who's sick of Themepark MMO's really knows.
Innovation is great, but it's also expensive.
I never talked about innovation.
I talked about diversification, very different things.
You don't have to look in the future to start thinking about filling the MMO market gaps.
4 examples
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those rappresent 4 very different niches (How big we don't know yet), that are currently left uncovered.
All those games are almost 10 years old, and no AAA developer ever attempted to copy any of those games.
The closest you can get is Sigil attempt to make a sequel of EQ with Vanguard, but the game released so broken and unfinished that it never recovered.
You don't need to innovate, just updating old concepts will do, in my opinion.
The issue with the above is the commercial aspect.
Design decisions can't be made in a vacuum and you have to think how the mechanics all tie in together. e.g A Full-Loot PVP makes little sense being in a PVE Sandbox game.
So what you end up with is a lot of the big companies playing safe and going with design/mechanics that are popular. One set of design like 'no pvp full loot' quickly follows another like 'no perma death' or 'no severe death penalty'
After a series of 'connect the dots' you are left with a set of design choices that are safe and popular with little wiggle room to move.
To differentiate you have to do something else like 'placed in a well-known IP (LOTRO, WAR, SWTOR)' or F2P/B2P (GW), awesome graphics (AOC) etc etc.
Lastly, those games are still around which hinders futher investments from big companies. 'If DOAC 3 faction RVR is so good, why are the sub numbers so low?' is a question that'll be asked. If you are the game designer, what's your answer?
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Well.............................is blatantly obvious the reason why all new MMOs are failing.
You didn't have to write all that wall of text to explain the concept.
Plainly simple, the reason is the lack of diversity.
95% of developers creates WoW clones ignoring the other MMO market
Everyone is making Apple pies, problem is that the best Apple pie is still made by Blizzard.
The solution would be to make Orange Pies, Blackcurrant Pies, but also Muffins, Doughnouts and Fritters.
When developers finally understand this simple concept, we will all begin getting excited for the MMO genre.................and they will start making money.
But the thing is, what do people actually want? I'm not sure the average gamer who's sick of Themepark MMO's really knows.
Innovation is great, but it's also expensive.
I never talked about innovation.
I talked about diversification, very different things.
You don't have to look in the future to start thinking about filling the MMO market gaps.
4 examples
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those rappresent 4 very different niches (How big we don't know yet), that are currently left uncovered.
All those games are almost 10 years old, and no AAA developer ever attempted to copy any of those games.
The closest you can get is Sigil attempt to make a sequel of EQ with Vanguard, but the game released so broken and unfinished that it never recovered.
You don't need to innovate, just updating old concepts will do, in my opinion.
The issue with the above is the commercial aspect.
Design decisions can't be made in a vacuum and you have to think how the mechanics all tie in together. e.g A Full-Loot PVP makes little sense being in a PVE Sandbox game.
So what you end up with is a lot of the big companies playing safe and going with design/mechanics that are popular. One set of design like 'no pvp full loot' quickly follows another like 'no perma death' or 'no severe death penalty'
After a series of 'connect the dots' you are left with a set of design choices that are safe and popular with little wiggle room to move.
To differentiate you have to do something else like 'placed in a well-known IP (LOTRO, WAR, SWTOR)' or F2P/B2P (GW), awesome graphics (AOC) etc etc.
Lastly, those games are still around which hinders futher investments from big companies. 'If DOAC 3 faction RVR is so good, why are the sub numbers so low?' is a question that'll be asked. If you are the game designer, what's your answer?
And unfortunatly it seems that most of the people here and on other forums tired of the so called "themepark" method of game production can only answer that question with "Wow sucks, these ideas are better." Which frankly isn't going to convince any of these companies to risk millions.
Very excellent points JPNZ. It is all well and good to wish for pie in the sky when you aren't the person who has to figure out how pay for it, and then hope it doesn't all go tits up and you go broke. Creating video games of any type is a massive production, and MMOs even more so. And there are so many more facets that developers and their investors have to work out beyond just what kind fo features they should add.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
The issue with the above is the commercial aspect.
Design decisions can't be made in a vacuum and you have to think how the mechanics all tie in together. e.g A Full-Loot PVP makes little sense being in a PVE Sandbox game.
I never said to mix the genres, I am actually saying to keep them totally separated that's why I gave the following examples:
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those genres are completely different and cater to different players and should stay separated
So what you end up with is a lot of the big companies playing safe and going with design/mechanics that are popular. One set of design like 'no pvp full loot' quickly follows another like 'no perma death' or 'no severe death penalty'
After a series of 'connect the dots' you are left with a set of design choices that are safe and popular with little wiggle room to move.
To differentiate you have to do something else like 'placed in a well-known IP (LOTRO, WAR, SWTOR)' or F2P/B2P (GW), awesome graphics (AOC) etc etc.
No, you are totally out of depth.
What you are talking about is different themes/settings not different subgenres, preople wants different kind of MMOs not different settings.
Lastly, those games are still around which hinders futher investments from big companies. 'If DOAC 3 faction RVR is so good, why are the sub numbers so low?' is a question that'll be asked. If you are the game designer, what's your answer?
Are you kidding me?
Are you trying to say that a 10 y/o game could compete with a modern MMO on its design alone?
Those games have old mechanics, old interfaces and old graphics of course no one play them
Same reason why I do not play Baldurs Gate which is my favourite RPG, but to ancient to compete with its modern clones.
The issue with the above is the commercial aspect.
Design decisions can't be made in a vacuum and you have to think how the mechanics all tie in together. e.g A Full-Loot PVP makes little sense being in a PVE Sandbox game.
I never said to mix the genres, I am actually saying to keep them totally separated that's why I gave the following examples:
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those genres are completely different and cater to different players and should stay separated
So what you end up with is a lot of the big companies playing safe and going with design/mechanics that are popular. One set of design like 'no pvp full loot' quickly follows another like 'no perma death' or 'no severe death penalty'
After a series of 'connect the dots' you are left with a set of design choices that are safe and popular with little wiggle room to move.
To differentiate you have to do something else like 'placed in a well-known IP (LOTRO, WAR, SWTOR)' or F2P/B2P (GW), awesome graphics (AOC) etc etc.
No, you are totally out of depth.
What you are talking about is different themes/settings not different subgenres, preople wants different kind of MMOs not different settings.
Lastly, those games are still around which hinders futher investments from big companies. 'If DOAC 3 faction RVR is so good, why are the sub numbers so low?' is a question that'll be asked. If you are the game designer, what's your answer?
Are you kidding me?
Are you trying to say that a 10 y/o game could compete with a modern MMO on its design alone?
Those games have old mechanics, old interfaces and old graphics of course no one play them
Same reason why I do not play Baldurs Gate which is my favourite RPG, but to ancient to compete with its modern clones.
I will never claim what people want except to say a game sold well.
As long as the game design is solid and people enjoy it, it has a chance at success regardless of its graphics. Minecraft comes to mind.
Out of those that you listed, there are plenty of games that take it further with better graphics. Darkfall/EVE is PVP sandbox. WAR has RVR type battles.
Some game's execution was a bit bad (esp WAR) at the start but even now they don't have millions of subs.
Is it the design or is it the execution? Who knows?
But what everyone knows is that a 'WoW type' design on a good execution = millions of subs. Aion/Rift
Saying 'this game has bad graphics so it is not doing well so if we up the graphics it'll be fine!' won't fly with anyone.
In an ironic twist, those who just look at the graphics and play that game probably won't stick around for all that long.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Perhaps if someone would actually deliver something that we want, we'd quit our bitchin.
And American women are awesome, in fact I'm married to one.
Edit: Back to the OP. The analogy is a pretty good representation of how the modern MMO space has evolved.
I recall when DAOC decided it needed to be more raid centric and they brought out the TOA expansion which pretty much invalidated the core PVP of the game and sent a large portion of the player base fleeting. The went on later to add the New Frontiers (another unwanted change), Catacombs (instanced dungeons a la WOW), and a horde of other modern conveniences (ie. horses, which invalidated the roles of travel classes such as Minstrels) so that even if you wanted to play DAOC, you really can't, its just not what it was in its glory days.
Same issue plagued SWG and a host of newer MMO's, they all try to incorporate the "optimal" feature set that they believe will draw in the greatest amount of subs which if course makes sense financially even if it results in uninspiring MMO's.
Hey, people keep buying them, and few companies seem to go out of business so I guess they're makiing money on them, even if they aren't equal to Blizzard.
see you get whet you asked for. *Darkfall *Eve *Mortal Online They are sandbox MMORPG that have also tried new things like fps combat, and non humanoid characters. Why aren't you happy with that?
The OP has a point, but it should also be noted that a brand new IP created for the purpose of an MMO is a bad investment as well.
In 2010 the only games that broke the million selling mark were sequels. No one is interested in something completely new at full price, especially when you throw a subscription fee or dodgy item shop on top of it.
There is a way around both these problems, but I only see two companies (in the entire industry), taking the right approach with it. The rest seem to still have their heads in the sand.
I actually have to disagree with the OP here. Fritters and chocolate aside, I don't think mixing an IP with an MMO model has anything to do with whether the game would succeed or fail.
In support of his argument, the OP has listed several games that did this and showed they failed. For example:
Warhammer + WoW = WAR = Failure
Conan + WoW = AoC = Failure
This is all well and good, but I could do the same with successful games:
Ultima + MUD concepts = UO = Success
D&D + MUD concepts = Everquest = Success
EQ + Warcraft = WoW = Success
So I don't think that merely mixing two concepts predicates a game to be a failure. I think you could argue that nearly any game is a mix of a few concepts, that's just how development works. That said, I DO think blatantly copying one game and just laying an IP on top of it WITHOUT any innovation/changes, is a recipe for failure. So if this is what you were actually arguing, I agree.
With that said, all of the games we commonly list as failures DID innovate some things. For example, WAR had public quests, AoC had a combo-based combat system. But these games still failed. I could get into why I think they failed, but my point is that I think the reasons for their failure are more complex than a simple "rule of thumb" can explain.
The long awaited answer to a long perplexing question....
Why are 4th gen to modern MMO's failing?
I KNOW ZE ANSWER.
Lets put it like this.
You are a chef, you make amazing APPLE FRITTERS! Everyone from ALL over the world travel to eat your yummy apple fritters, you have a monoply in the area as far as bakeries go, noone can compete with you... right? Untill a new upstart (for instructional purpose lets call this upstart "World of Bakerycraft") moves into your neighborhood, this new bakery specializes in chocolate flavored cakes, best in the world, now people are traveling to your city not just for your apple fritters but for these internationally acclaimed chocolate cakes.
Upset, jealous, and envious of the new bakeries you decide you are gonna make a small change to your apple fritters...
I mean, people love your fritters, and people love these chocolate cake.. so they will go APE sh!t for CHOCOLATE APPLE FRITTERS -- right? RIGHT!? WRRRONGGGG
I mean the notion sounds appeal, people get hyped due to the marketing of this interesting mix, however once they taste a marriage of component not intended to be fused.. it's all over.. you can't go back.. Fritters won't be the same.. chocolate won't be same..you sir.. just ruin the bakery busniess for everyone.
Long anogly short, everyone is blaming Blizzard for ruining the MMORPG industry, when i think it's these retarded companies that are not just creating WoW clones (And they ARE!) but these moronic companies they have had histroically successful IPs that are converting their tradiontal games over to MMO format.
Example Grand Thef auto online? APB was a disaster, analze what you will about it, the disaster can only be accredited to one fact, GTA had a successful recipe, why tamped with it?
I'm seeing more and more established game IPs port to MMO, and i think to myself these fools are asking for disaster.
Look Blizzard got away with taking Warcraft porting to MMO for a few fairly unique reason (Under-marketed young genre was the main one that doesn't exist anymore), the more these companies push their loved titles into waters they don't belong the more money they will bleed out.
Leave apple fritters be applie fritters, let the chocolate cake be just that, stop trying to rewrite the binary superstructure of the universe!
Interesting analogy, but I'm not sure I agree with you on why Blizzard (the chocolate cake factory) was successful in the MMO space.
If your interested on this topic, I suggest you take a look at the Blue Oceans / Red Seas Theory.
One of the most popular examples of using this theory was Cirque du Solie. They mixed the best (and cheapest) parts of Circus performance with Opera and created a whole new product and expanded out in a market space that hasn't been fully exploited....giving them first to market advantage and the ability to stand up barriers to entry for all other businesses looking to compete in that space.
One could say that Blizzard did the same thing with World of Warcraft. Blizzard recognized the MASSIVE revenue potential in the MMORPG priceing model (Box Sale + Reoccuring Monthly Fee).....IF only they could market this very niche gaming genere to a wider audience to maximize revenue & expand the market in the MMORPG playerbase.
So, recognizing that traditional MMORPGs turned off the largest subset of the gamer population (Casual Gamers), Blizzard acitvely looked to stream line traditionaly complex game mechanics, remove much of the risk involved in playing MMORPGs, and lower the other barriers to entry that has kept casual gamers out of the genere.
In doing this, they are the first MASSIVLY successful casual MMORPG. They enjoy all the benifits of being first to market in this new Casual MMO space, and have done such a good job on their product that its created barriers to entry for all others trying to immitate Blizzards success.....as evidenced by all the major flops of similar casual themepark MMORPGs.
The reason we have seen little innovation (or change of direction from the linear themepark model) is 2 fold.
1) Blizzard holds the lion share of MMORPG Market Share (approx 60%) . Other AAA publishers feel that if they are going to be able to be successful in this Casual MMO space (and potentially eclipse Blizzard's market share), they will have to go after the same crowd that Blizzard reaches with World of Warcraft....Casual Gamers.
So in that, the AAA publishers will not adopt anything too radical from the tried and true WOW model. They will try to indifferienate themselves by giving more customization, more options....but will not stray too far away from the linear themepark gold standard.
2) The AAA publishers also believe that the only way to compete with WOW is to match their production quality. This involves hiring the best & brightest developers for game development, the renown composers & orchestra for the soundtrack, the best & brightest artists & animators, state of the art software & hardware technology, etc.
All of these things will ultimately cost 100s of millions of dollars. You cannot get a favorable return on investment for this product if it is only appealing to a niche market (IE, the old sandbox crowd, or anyone else wanting something different than the linear model). The only way to recoup that investment is to appeal to a larger section of the MMO crowd.......yes, the Casual Gamer. As such, you won't see any mechanics in these games that will stray too far from the model that casual gamers love the most.
Comments
For some reason this thread is making me hungry.
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
the bottom line and really the only main reasons these MMO's are failing is this...
they're being rushed out unfinished, lacking features and most of these new MMO's coming out do not even feel like onlines worlds, and they have terrible endgame content, no one gives shit about grinding gear anymore for the only endgame! Blizz has done beat this horse to death...
the next MMO needs to be a real online world that players can do stuff in beside fighting/running dungeons the new MMO needs to have many social elements, be a card game or diplomacy, with deep indepth crafting and player housing
and things people can do together, like jousting, archery contest and horse racing even.... hell anything works! just make something beside running the same dungeons over and over for gear, crafted gear should matter
you know people dont' want these online game/themepark worlds and this is why they failing
the next MMO that captures that online world feel with just the right themepark elements and sandbox gameplay will rule them all
really is sad to see Starwars:ToR turning out to be a online themepark... massive and on rails
Played: MCO - EQ/EQ2 - WoW - VG - WAR - AoC - LoTRO - DDO - GW/GW2 - Eve - Rift - FE - TSW - TSO - WS - ESO - AA - BD
Playing: Sims 3 & 4, Diablo3 and PoE
Waiting on: Lost Ark
Who's going to make a Cyberpunk MMO?
I disagree completely.
Rift had the perfect release, yet it will end up like WAR and AoC.
No originality, no soul, no charm, no reason why people shouldstay subscribed after the first month
The MMO industry need to diversify their offer. People are bored with WoW and its clones.
You can see in all MMO forums, the first complaint a player mention against every new MMO is that "It's another WoW clone"
That should tell something to all developers out there, problem is that they have their heads so up their own arses that they are not able to listen to anything.
I'm confused OP, I went to the Apple store and they kept telling me that they don't sell iFritters, let alone a chocolate colored one. I really want a Chocolate Apple iFritter, please halp!
Despite the massive 'desire' you see on this forums about 'worlds and not themeparks', the market has been consistant over the last 7 years that 'WoW is king'.
An MMO game takes years to make so all these games that are coming out has been designed/made from 3-4 years ago when WoW was just destorying everything in the market.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
There is one thing wrong with your post.
Warcraft3 and WoW played pretty much the same. One from RTS view, also controlling a few more characters and unit production, and the other one person.
If you want to see the real inspiration and first relisations of WoW play the Rexar campaign in WC3 Frozen Throne. It is literly the first incarnation of WoW before WoW. For Blizzard there we little to convert. Hell in Wrath the main DK spells come from the DK in WC3 in fact now that I think of it, it can be said for all classes.
So the fact WoW transfered well from Warcraft to WoW is that there was little to 'convert' and change rofl it basically just need to be expanded here and there.
Jeff Strain says it best. eerily true, especially the failure of WoW clones and SW/ST/LOTR being far from the level of success they were expected to have.
http://www.guildwars.com/events/tradeshows/gc2007/gcspeech.php
But the thing is, what do people actually want? I'm not sure the average gamer who's sick of Themepark MMO's really knows.
Innovation is great, but it's also expensive. Small companies may have great ideas, but can't really carry them to fruition because of limited funds. Companies with a bikg budget are nervous about true innovation, and I can hardly blame them.
You've got themepark, and sandbox. What kind of true innovation could you put in those so that a themepark could truly dethrone WoW?
I can think of a few things, but some of them don't work well in an MMO and are far better suited, and feasible, in a single-player game.
I want something like Daoc, but new!
I want a multi faction game where we have seperate zones that we pvp in, and meaningful objectives there.
I want player crafted gear that is the best in the game. Let epic mobs drop jewelry.
Gods and heroes is a really cool game, only problem is the devs have WoWitus too, and they are very busy skinning it up to be just like wow. Yep we are sick of WoW mechanics. There have been other very successful games that didnt employ the same mechanics.
Daoc was the most successful MMO ever before WoW came out, and most of the reasons the game has died out have nothing to do with gameplay, but more to do with things like Bots, and age, and lack of advertising.
I never talked about innovation.
I talked about diversification, very different things.
You don't have to look in the future to start thinking about filling the MMO market gaps.
4 examples
UO = PvP sandbox
SWG pre-NGE = PvE sandbox
EQ = Full PvE MMO
DAOC = 3 factions RvR
Those rappresent 4 very different niches (How big we don't know yet), that are currently left uncovered.
All those games are almost 10 years old, and no AAA developer ever attempted to copy any of those games.
The closest you can get is Sigil attempt to make a sequel of EQ with Vanguard, but the game released so broken and unfinished that it never recovered.
You don't need to innovate, just updating old concepts will do, in my opinion.
I have no clue what the OP is even trying to say.
Except he managed to find a formula thats vague enough that you may apply it to any MMO in existence, and then only check if it applies to MMOs that failed. Resulting in a vague "MMO fail if they fail" or "Unless you are WoW, you fail" nonsense.
MMOs fail because they suck.
And why WoW was such a huge financial success, thats a combination of advertising, low hardware requirements, being a success in asia, and winning the run for the "my friends play it too" MMO.
And sad it is, too. Illuminati would have made more sense than this ... whatever it is.
I only hear bad things about RIFT.
1. So WoW is a failure.
2. So WoW is a failure.
3. So WoW is a failure.
4. So WoW is a failure.
5. Yuck. The i-word. Yuck. Yuck. Yuck !!!
Whow. That would have been pure hell to me. I absolutely hate Western.
Anyway you're making crazy much more sense than the OP.
Google won btw because it loads fast and was the best search engine.
Again a posting that makes much more sense than the OP.
Games fail because they are made by businessmen who avoid risk taking, instead of by artists who want to make a great game.
Not really, theres plenty of fantasy and science fiction around.
I know because I cant stand crime shows either.
Even good ones like The Shield or Dexter just cant keep my attention.
Games that are fun.
I agree 100%
A new MMO that is built around factions and PvP where the role of the dedicated player can positively impact others around him and negatively impact the enemy players lol.. A ton of unique gear and a very usefull craft system also..
Amagine a new MMO with Skyrims graphics, excellent PvP like daoc, with vast lands and excellent crafting and exploring.
*Corsair Obsidian Series 650D *i5-2500K OC'd ~ 4.5
*Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 mother board
* Radeon HD 7970
*8GB (4GBx2) 1600MHz Kingston HyperX
*240GB Corsair Force GT Series SATA-III SSD
I can has choc fritter?
The issue with the above is the commercial aspect.
Design decisions can't be made in a vacuum and you have to think how the mechanics all tie in together. e.g A Full-Loot PVP makes little sense being in a PVE Sandbox game.
So what you end up with is a lot of the big companies playing safe and going with design/mechanics that are popular. One set of design like 'no pvp full loot' quickly follows another like 'no perma death' or 'no severe death penalty'
After a series of 'connect the dots' you are left with a set of design choices that are safe and popular with little wiggle room to move.
To differentiate you have to do something else like 'placed in a well-known IP (LOTRO, WAR, SWTOR)' or F2P/B2P (GW), awesome graphics (AOC) etc etc.
Lastly, those games are still around which hinders futher investments from big companies. 'If DOAC 3 faction RVR is so good, why are the sub numbers so low?' is a question that'll be asked. If you are the game designer, what's your answer?
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
And unfortunatly it seems that most of the people here and on other forums tired of the so called "themepark" method of game production can only answer that question with "Wow sucks, these ideas are better." Which frankly isn't going to convince any of these companies to risk millions.
Very excellent points JPNZ. It is all well and good to wish for pie in the sky when you aren't the person who has to figure out how pay for it, and then hope it doesn't all go tits up and you go broke. Creating video games of any type is a massive production, and MMOs even more so. And there are so many more facets that developers and their investors have to work out beyond just what kind fo features they should add.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
I will never claim what people want except to say a game sold well.
As long as the game design is solid and people enjoy it, it has a chance at success regardless of its graphics. Minecraft comes to mind.
Out of those that you listed, there are plenty of games that take it further with better graphics. Darkfall/EVE is PVP sandbox. WAR has RVR type battles.
Some game's execution was a bit bad (esp WAR) at the start but even now they don't have millions of subs.
Is it the design or is it the execution? Who knows?
But what everyone knows is that a 'WoW type' design on a good execution = millions of subs. Aion/Rift
Saying 'this game has bad graphics so it is not doing well so if we up the graphics it'll be fine!' won't fly with anyone.
In an ironic twist, those who just look at the graphics and play that game probably won't stick around for all that long.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
see you get whet you asked for. *Darkfall *Eve *Mortal Online They are sandbox MMORPG that have also tried new things like fps combat, and non humanoid characters. Why aren't you happy with that?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Yep. When is someone going to do a good RvR game again?
Yep. When is someone going to do a good RvR game again?
don't you get that with eve?Philosophy of MMO Game Design
The OP has a point, but it should also be noted that a brand new IP created for the purpose of an MMO is a bad investment as well.
In 2010 the only games that broke the million selling mark were sequels. No one is interested in something completely new at full price, especially when you throw a subscription fee or dodgy item shop on top of it.
There is a way around both these problems, but I only see two companies (in the entire industry), taking the right approach with it. The rest seem to still have their heads in the sand.
Don't like fritters tbh. Chocolate coated apples however....
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Ok, this thread made me really really hungry.
Browser RPG | www.titansoftime.com
I actually have to disagree with the OP here. Fritters and chocolate aside, I don't think mixing an IP with an MMO model has anything to do with whether the game would succeed or fail.
In support of his argument, the OP has listed several games that did this and showed they failed. For example:
Warhammer + WoW = WAR = Failure
Conan + WoW = AoC = Failure
This is all well and good, but I could do the same with successful games:
Ultima + MUD concepts = UO = Success
D&D + MUD concepts = Everquest = Success
EQ + Warcraft = WoW = Success
So I don't think that merely mixing two concepts predicates a game to be a failure. I think you could argue that nearly any game is a mix of a few concepts, that's just how development works. That said, I DO think blatantly copying one game and just laying an IP on top of it WITHOUT any innovation/changes, is a recipe for failure. So if this is what you were actually arguing, I agree.
With that said, all of the games we commonly list as failures DID innovate some things. For example, WAR had public quests, AoC had a combo-based combat system. But these games still failed. I could get into why I think they failed, but my point is that I think the reasons for their failure are more complex than a simple "rule of thumb" can explain.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Interesting analogy, but I'm not sure I agree with you on why Blizzard (the chocolate cake factory) was successful in the MMO space.
If your interested on this topic, I suggest you take a look at the Blue Oceans / Red Seas Theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean_Strategy
One of the most popular examples of using this theory was Cirque du Solie. They mixed the best (and cheapest) parts of Circus performance with Opera and created a whole new product and expanded out in a market space that hasn't been fully exploited....giving them first to market advantage and the ability to stand up barriers to entry for all other businesses looking to compete in that space.
One could say that Blizzard did the same thing with World of Warcraft. Blizzard recognized the MASSIVE revenue potential in the MMORPG priceing model (Box Sale + Reoccuring Monthly Fee).....IF only they could market this very niche gaming genere to a wider audience to maximize revenue & expand the market in the MMORPG playerbase.
So, recognizing that traditional MMORPGs turned off the largest subset of the gamer population (Casual Gamers), Blizzard acitvely looked to stream line traditionaly complex game mechanics, remove much of the risk involved in playing MMORPGs, and lower the other barriers to entry that has kept casual gamers out of the genere.
In doing this, they are the first MASSIVLY successful casual MMORPG. They enjoy all the benifits of being first to market in this new Casual MMO space, and have done such a good job on their product that its created barriers to entry for all others trying to immitate Blizzards success.....as evidenced by all the major flops of similar casual themepark MMORPGs.
The reason we have seen little innovation (or change of direction from the linear themepark model) is 2 fold.
1) Blizzard holds the lion share of MMORPG Market Share (approx 60%) . Other AAA publishers feel that if they are going to be able to be successful in this Casual MMO space (and potentially eclipse Blizzard's market share), they will have to go after the same crowd that Blizzard reaches with World of Warcraft....Casual Gamers.
So in that, the AAA publishers will not adopt anything too radical from the tried and true WOW model. They will try to indifferienate themselves by giving more customization, more options....but will not stray too far away from the linear themepark gold standard.
2) The AAA publishers also believe that the only way to compete with WOW is to match their production quality. This involves hiring the best & brightest developers for game development, the renown composers & orchestra for the soundtrack, the best & brightest artists & animators, state of the art software & hardware technology, etc.
All of these things will ultimately cost 100s of millions of dollars. You cannot get a favorable return on investment for this product if it is only appealing to a niche market (IE, the old sandbox crowd, or anyone else wanting something different than the linear model). The only way to recoup that investment is to appeal to a larger section of the MMO crowd.......yes, the Casual Gamer. As such, you won't see any mechanics in these games that will stray too far from the model that casual gamers love the most.