WoW Reaches 10...

[Venkman]

I think Microsoft doesn't do an MMO because there's less money in it for them than what they're doing right now (playing exclusive platform aggregator). They certainly could afford to try, but their constant missteps seem due to not having the attention span for one big huge mega game that isn't called "Halo".

At the same time, a Halo MMO would be interesting. No idea if it'd be good, but it'd at least need to be MMOFPS, and we could stand for more development down that path (so we can get more sci-fi games).

Polished yes.  Bug-free?  Almost... but not quite.

Think in the context of the genre at the time

[Nebu]

Think in the context of the genre at the time

Relativism?  I don't think that's what the MMOG industry needs.  WoW was a fabulously polished game at release, but it wasn't without its issues.  I think maintaining a focus on those issues is a good thing from a consumer standpoint.

[Surlyboi]

Surly, WoW is not a turd. You just don't like it. There's a big difference.

Name one thing about WoW that wasn't done somewhere else other than the much vaunted polish and I'll concede. Short of that, my point still stands.

[tazelbain]

Games Workshop has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. WAR has that going for it, if they can lure table top players into the MMO.

And the turnout for WAR Events has been massive.
WAR will sell a ton of boxes, but so did SWG.

People are making excuses if they think Blizzard is still relying on their pre-WOW fan base for subs this far out.

[Kirth]

People are making excuses if they think Blizzard is still relying on their pre-WOW fan base for subs this far out.

I agree, WoW has there mac-esque ads with "celebrates" shilling for them, its really become the McDonalds of MMO's. Anyone with an internet connection and a computer made in the last 5 years can check out this 'WoW thing', this low entry barrier and fun initial gameplay is what I'd say is driving sub number now. I also would'nt be surprised if it hits 12mil after Wrath of the Lich King launchs.

[Archimedian]

Games Workshop has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. WAR has that going for it, if they can lure table top players into the MMO.

And the turnout for WAR Events has been massive.
WAR will sell a ton of boxes, but so did SWG.

People are making excuses if they think Blizzard is still relying on their pre-WOW fan base for subs this far out.

Not sure quoting you is appropriate, but what ever I felt like quoting.

I think any one thinking that WAR will put a dent in WoWs numbers is dilusional.  Beyond WARs niche and the MMOhardcore who knows about it?  Seriously I'm sure you know some people who know jack about MMOs want to bet they've heard of WoW?  Want to bet they have no idea what WAR is and aren't even curious?

Blizzard "canabalized" it's fan base into playing WoW, it took them a very long time to create the brand and while some people might think it's a fluke, I think it was just execution.  Granted market forces helped (ie no competition).  Even trying to steal anything resembling a statistical significant amount of the WoW virgin fans would be a miracle, the second the combat is "different" they wont like it.  If the UI isn't WoW like and WoW customizable, they wont like it.

To have a smash success (and this is all my opinion) you need to canabalize your own established fan base.  Sure there is some cross over but you hope not because when average joe is faced with shelling out $15 a month for diku1 versus diku2, they will choose the lowest barrier of entry/ greatest return on their entertainment dollar and go with that game.

The bug-free formula only gets you that your box sales might estimate your monthly subs, that's about it.  I mean who would market a game on the basis of "hey our servers our stable and our bugs are almost non existant!".  Who cares?  You published a standard product for the masses.  Your fans are going to viral market for you if that's the case, you just need a large base for that to be even close to effective.

So yep, to be a WoW killer you have to be WoW and as I stated that has absolutely little to do with the game you come out with but awhole lot with what you have done prior.  Also this imaginary WoW killer, will have very little impact on WoW, that is as long as it's not Starcraft.  Blizzard might screw them selves on that one.

[Mrbloodworth]

[Numtini]

I think the difference with WOW on the bug free thing is (at least at my level of casual play) I've not come across "the bugs that everyone knows about and have been there since launch that there is no expectation will ever be fixed." The servers at launch were a disaster, but they got fixed. There have been this or that bug, but they get fixed. It's really as much an attitude as it is an actual level of being bug free at any particular point in time.

I remember, just as an example, in EQ the boats were always broken. And the solution wasn't to fix them, it was to have a GM put in a teleport gnome if someone reported they were down. That kind of tolerance for "broken" is just not anything I've ever seen in WOW.

[Dtrain]

I think Microsoft could do a MMORPG done right with a 6 year plan.  They have the finances, and are willing to take huge losses upfront to get it done (see the XBox).  They would screw it up by doing things like making it an Xbox exclusive and Vista only.

If they could just keep the executive hands off, then it could happen.  Of course, that's like saying "if only the politicians could just work with the other party."

That's a good theory, but history will prove you wrong. Microsoft bankrolled most of the development of Vanguard. As an observer, I'd say that puts them well outside the "make a good MMO" window. And I'm pretty sure they're not in a hurry to finance another MMO after that boondoggle.

It's still possible, especially given that one of the driving factors towards financing Vanguard was to have an xbox MMO, but they've been trying for that since True Fantasy Live Online on the original Xbox. If it hasn't happened by now, you have to start thinking there is a reason.

[Tarami]

I agree, WoW has there mac-esque ads with "celebrates" shilling for them, its really become the McDonalds of MMO's.

That would be of -computer games-, even. A major reason WoW made it in spite of being an MMO was because it wasn't promoted as an MMO but an online game, any game. "Played Hearts over MSN? This is as easy, but more fun." The marketing revolved around "if you're going to play a game, you might aswell play ours because we are -the- game", which works better and better with every new subscriber. It's the same marketing as McDonald's uses - it's not for those of taste X or preference Y, it's for -everyone-.

WoW is for the whole family, not just the members of the household who like a good game. As one of many, I fell for it, despite never having considered an MMO previous to WoW.

[Kageru]

I think Microsoft could do a MMORPG done right with a 6 year plan.  They have the finances, and are willing to take huge losses upfront to get it done (see the XBox).  They would screw it up by doing things like making it an Xbox exclusive and Vista only.

If they could just keep the executive hands off, then it could happen.  Of course, that's like saying "if only the politicians could just work with the other party."

The tried that, it's called Vanguard.

The true secret of WoW is that behind it all there's one or more developers who are able to look at what works, both in their own game and others, and evolve towards something that makes a fun game. This is then backed up with reasonable coding, a well known IP and a good layer of polish, but the reason it works is because much of the design makes sense. The way they've avoided adding an AA system and gone the other way towards agressively obsoleting old content, adding things like rest XP and dailies to balance up progression, alternate paths of progression, crafts that are actually enjoyable is really impressive. Quest based progression after EQ's "sit on a zoneline and kill mobs till ding"? yes please. Even their decision to rein in the graphics so that adding new content is cheaper and it doesn't take an uber PC to run it was a good choice.

I remember reading Enoyls posts during open beta and just nodding in agreement. I still think they got a fair bit wrong, their LFG system was inane and their 24 hour day / night cycle was a terrible idea, but most of the core mechanics make sense.

Meanwhile Vanguard, EQ2, Tabula Rasa and a host of others are much worse games than they should be for the amount of money that was spent. In all of those cases years of development effort was wasted in implementing "novel" ideas that weren't actually fun or workable.  There's just a lack of cohesion (and fun) in the design. Are we going to see the same in War or AoC? I'm betting we will.

I'll actually be re-subbing to WoW soon. Building a new computer for my fiance and I can't think of a better game to introduce her to MMORPG's with.

[Ratman_tf]

People are making excuses if they think Blizzard is still relying on their pre-WOW fan base for subs this far out.

No, but without it, there wouldn't be enough word-of-mouth watercooler chat to get them this far.

The Blizzfan base was integral to WoW's success.

[Archimedian]

I think Microsoft could do a MMORPG done right with a 6 year plan.  They have the finances, and are willing to take huge losses upfront to get it done (see the XBox).  They would screw it up by doing things like making it an Xbox exclusive and Vista only.

If they could just keep the executive hands off, then it could happen.  Of course, that's like saying "if only the politicians could just work with the other party."

MS Games, which I think their MMO division has been defunct for ages now, bank rolled Asheron's Call (we'll call this a success), Asheron's Call 2 (we'll call this complete and uter failure), Mythica (shit canned and they decided to get out of the MMO business completely at this point) and Vanguard which was more of a VC venture then a colaborative work since they had at that point bailed on the concept (we'll call this a failure).

I think MS games to stick with 360 development (who'd blame them) and their previous track record shows that they have no inhouse expertise (beyond money and maybe testing facilities, AC2 had the best windowed mode ever for the time) to market or publish MMOs.  I think the canning of Mythica showed that this was not a pond they wanted to play in ever, I'm sure the $30 mill to Vanguard has reinforced this attitude.  Then again I don't work for MS, no longer know any one at MSGames so I could be wrong.

[Simond]

Star Wars has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. SWG has that going for it, if they can lure fanbois into the MMO.

 

WAR has one major potential problem (monthly fee probably more than $15/m i.e. more than WoW), and a number of possible pitfalls (will reskinned-DAoC PvP be any more popular this time around? Will people accept such limited instancing for PvE? What's the realistic minimum system requirements? How long will it be before EA eventually wade in with their size 13s and screw it all up?)

[WindupAtheist]

Dungeons & Dragons has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. D&DO has that going for it, if they can lure table top players into the MMO.

 

This is too easy.

[Kirth]

Except established fan bases prolly don't like swallowing shit, as you two previous examples show. Here I'll give a counter example:

Warcraft has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. WoW has that going for it, if they can lure RTS players into the MMO.

Note Diablo and Action-roleplaying will also be acceptable.

[Draegan]

Darniaq, Pokemon is the only existing license that can rival WoW.

For a keg and 3 pizzas. And a Wii MMO, they can rival WoW.

Game. Set. Match.

Even I'd play the shit out of it.

And it would have the only good PVP in the entire genre.

How can you seriously say you'd play Pokemon?  Let alone on a Wii?  Thinking this is like catching your parents having sex.  It makes you cringe and scars you for life.

[Xanthippe]

Games Workshop has a pretty large, and I think under-estimated fan base. WAR has that going for it, if they can lure table top players into the MMO.

And the turnout for WAR Events has been massive.
WAR will sell a ton of boxes, but so did SWG.

People are making excuses if they think Blizzard is still relying on their pre-WOW fan base for subs this far out.

Agreed. 

Also, WAR will likely sell a ton of boxes but will not retain players unless the game is as polished as WoW, with the dev team having a similar attitude as Blizzard's.

My standards to play are a lot higher now than they were when I played DAOC, and that's due to WoW.  I think I'm not alone on this.

[Venkman]

WAR by itself as a game for that IP probably couldn't dent WoW, no. WAR with a huge marketing budget both before and after launch though...

Surly, WoW is not a turd. You just don't like it. There's a big difference.

Name one thing about WoW that wasn't done somewhere else other than the much vaunted polish and I'll concede. Short of that, my point still stands.

I'm responding to you saying WoW was a turd, implying that it was imperically turdy. It's the very essence of not being one, due specifically to that polish. It did nothing else except launch a mostly content complete experience that was playable on day one by a large number of people who'd never considered the genre before, or left because of the grind2crap nonsense of everything that preceded it. The whole genre was niche. WoW singlehandedly made it not.

Bugs galore. I was on the Pacific/Mountain system that had all those problems in early year 1. I played with friends who were on Eastern/Central after the P/M stuff was solved. I tried to play a Troll and a Tauren and found neither as content complete as NEs and Humans. I was a Mage throughout, a veritable rollercoaster of uber to why-log-in to uber to wtf?

And I'd been through every game that preceded it. This was the best launch of a full game to that point. Since then we've seen GW and LoTRO launch very well (they had their own problems), other games wtfbombwreck, and still others get pushed out to not follow that path. None of them are perfect. None of them are SB relevant-PvP with Eve socioeconomics, ATiTD crafting, and Freespace 2 flight mechanics in space with chocolate and kisses. But I've long since stopped wishing for that in this genre. We just got past the point where launching was good enough. Now polish is part of the business of driving success. The next step is actual, like innovation and stuff.

[sinij]

What is A LOT more interesting is that WoW player base seem to mature and demand more quality game and less grind. *A LOT* of things that were 'given' at release, like horrible grinds or raid or gtfo, are being toned down due overwhelming played base demand. Also another note of interest - given choice between raiding and PvP for equal rewards most people pick up PvP route.

[Ratman_tf]

What is A LOT more interesting is that WoW player base seem to mature and demand more quality game and less grind. *A LOT* of things that were 'given' at release, like horrible grinds or raid or gtfo, are being toned down due overwhelming played base demand. Also another note of interest - given choice between raiding and PvP for equal rewards most people pick up PvP route.

PvP means you don't have to be dependant on Leroy Jenkins for your purpz. You get a bad Battleground, and it's over and you move on. You get stuck in a shitty raid guild, and they might be the only guild who've got Illidan (or whoever the fuck you kids are farming lately) on farm status.

It's another expression of "forced grouping sucks ass".

Not that PvP can't be fun, but most everyone in the /bg channel is doing it for the lewtz.

[LK]

I'd rather do an activity where I only have myself to blame if something goes wrong (PvE, non-Raid) as opposed to one relying on teammates who are either retarded, high, drunk, or terrible players (PvP).  Part of the reason I don't play Call of Duty anymore (and I want to, everyday.  I think about it every god damn day) is because my friends aren't on and the PUGs I join are bottom-dwelling scum-sucking algae eaters.  I'll top the charts and they'll be right there at the bottom all content with their 2 kills 14 deaths.

Battlegrounds are mostly similar.  It's either Organized or it's "Why am I even fucking playing?"

[Kirth]

What is A LOT more interesting is that WoW player base seem to mature and demand more quality game and less grind. *A LOT* of things that were 'given' at release, like horrible grinds or raid or gtfo, are being toned down due overwhelming played base demand. Also another note of interest - given choice between raiding and PvP for equal rewards most people pick up PvP route.

PvP means you don't have to be dependant on Leroy Jenkins for your purpz. You get a bad Battleground, and it's over and you move on. You get stuck in a shitty raid guild, and they might be the only guild who've got Illidan (or whoever the fuck you kids are farming lately) on farm status.

It's another expression of "forced grouping sucks ass".

Not that PvP can't be fun, but most everyone in the /bg channel is doing it for the lewtz.

Its also a far far less time investment for a guaranteed reward, you can put a hour a night in and get epic item x after a time period relevant to your participation and to some degree skill (In Arenas). PVE raiding is a totally different affair where 3-4 hours a night is considered the minimum, the item you seek may not even drop and then dependent on what ever loot distribution system your guild uses you may not even have a chance at it. Tokens were a partial fix but even those are hit and miss with what classes need what tokens.

[LK]

I think Badges of Justice were the further fix to that.  At least having them drop in the 10 mans.

[Venkman]

Agreed. And also agree that WoW has itself gone through a number of changes, evolving as a game as the demands of neophyte MMOers have similarly evolved. Which itself is also indicative of how much the genre has changed.

[Slyfeind]

Name one thing about WoW that wasn't done somewhere else other than the much vaunted polish and I'll concede. Short of that, my point still stands.

By that metric, all but one or two of Shakespeare's plays were turds.

The marketing revolved around "if you're going to play a game, you might aswell play ours because we are -the- game", which works better and better with every new subscriber. It's the same marketing as McDonald's uses - it's not for those of taste X or preference Y, it's for -everyone-.

Yeah...a friend of mine was looking for Pirates of the Burning Sea yesterday. I swear, one of the cashiers asked her, "Is that a World of Warcraft thing?" 

[tazelbain]

I remember, just as an example, in EQ the boats were always broken. And the solution wasn't to fix them, it was to have a GM put in a teleport gnome if someone reported they were down. That kind of tolerance for "broken" is just not anything I've ever seen in WOW.

Exactly, WoW Polish doesn't mean bug free.  
EQ's tolerance for broken is one example of unpolished. But also there's Vanguards adding major system a week before launch. There's SB with game crashing rendering the game moot. There is EvE and UO that drops noobs in the deep end and says "sink or swim bitch" while throwing pine cones at them. There is EQ2 which could hardly run on anybody's computer.  AC2 decided that all content was TBDL.

It's about that hour starts to moment the player decides to give your game a go. Can they run the game? Can they understand the game? Can they immediately find something fun to do? Can you get they excited about continuing the game? Are there frustrating aspects that encourage them to quit? Otherwise there no reason to talk about your game outside the gaming community.

More than the any other MMOG WoW was built as a piece entertain first. Creating a time waster, a grand social experiment, an peen measuring stick, or a simulation is not important unless it dovetails into entertainment.  If you aren't willing to do that, you aren't making a WoW competitor.
 

[sidereal]

identify your actual market, and hit them

That's what most developers do.


Oh, you mean 'satisfy them'.  Not 'bludgeon them until they cry'.

Yeah, then no.  Nobody does that.


On polish:  The sadfunniest thing I've read out of Conan is the head honcho's belief that a final 6 months of polish is what makes or breaks a game.  Polish starts on day 1. 

[Rondaror]

On polish:  The sadfunniest thing I've read out of Conan is the head honcho's belief that a final 6 months of polish is what makes or breaks a game.  Polish starts on day 1. 

Head honcho of AOC does look at it like a high-exec of a corporation: Direct competitors that are going to launch MMO's are WAR (delayed to Q2...at least) and WoTLK (expected Q3/Q4?). So the strategic managment decision is to launch it end of Q1, suck in the "waiting" subscribers, polish the game until the competitors show up....and this is why AoC is going the same road as Vanguard did, if the game launches unpolished.
I am still playing the turd, desperately looking for something new and every new MMO launched is a big pile of shit and every time because of these stupid, avoidable mistakes...errr...managment decisions....
It's not rocket-science that one secret of the success of WoW was the polish, the accessibility (easy-mode) and the comfort of a good UI.

[Mrbloodworth]

identify your actual market, and hit them

That's what most developers do.


Oh, you mean 'satisfy them'.  Not 'bludgeon them until they cry'.

Yeah, then no.  Nobody does that.


On polish:  The sadfunniest thing I've read out of Conan is the head honcho's belief that a final 6 months of polish is what makes or breaks a game.  Polish starts on day 1. 

Hes right. While trying to polish, or at least do things right does start on day one, the last 10% (out of 100% development time) is the key part.

[sidereal]

No.

The first 10% is the key part.  You cannot unfuck a bad architecture in the last 6 months.  Execs tend to believe you can, possibly because in other industries it is possible to buy your way out of a bad architecture.  In software this is not the case, and I've personally seen it fail every single time it has been attempted, in multiple disciplines.

One of the reasons I'm bullish on PotBS is -- gameplay issues aside -- I've followed Joe Ludwig's blog, and it's clear that from the outset they knew what they were doing technology-wise, and have the tools and expertise in place to fix it or change it.

[Mrbloodworth]

No.

The first 10% is the key part.  You cannot unfuck a bad architecture in the last 6 months.  Execs tend to believe you can, possibly because in other industries it is possible to buy your way out of a bad architecture.  In software this is not the case, and I've personally seen it fail every single time it has been attempted, in multiple disciplines.

One of the reasons I'm bullish on PotBS is -- gameplay issues aside -- I've followed Joe Ludwig's blog, and it's clear that from the outset they knew what they were doing technology-wise, and have the tools and expertise in place to fix it or change it.

No one was talking about architecture (including the developer your talking about, im sure)... The term "Polish" is applied to the game level (IE: Game features, mechanics, and potentially art assets ETC...)part of the application not the core architecture.

[Nebu]

I'd be happy if development houses would focus on one simple detail: Is their game fun? 

So simple, yet so few manage to capture the essence.   WoW is, at its core, a fun game.  It's possibly the first MMO to be fun first.  I'd say that is the fundamental reason for its success above all others.  It's not flashy.  It's not revolutionary.  It's just fun. 

Stop worrying about detailed mechanics, spreadsheet development schemes, ultra-rare loot tables.  Just make the game something to look forward to.  Noone needs a second job. 

<yes, I realize this has been beaten to death>

[Mrbloodworth]

I'd be happy if development houses would focus on one simple detail: Is their game fun? 

So simple, yet so few manage to capture the essence.   WoW is, at its core, a fun game.  It's possibly the first MMO to be fun first.  I'd say that is the fundamental reason for its success above all others.  It's not flashy.  It's not revolutionary.  It's just fun. 

Stop worrying about detailed mechanics, spreadsheet development schemes, ultra-rare loot tables.  Just make the game something to look forward to.  Noone needs a second job. 

<yes, I realize this has been beaten to death>

By the time you get to polish, the game should already be fun, thats what all those ugly, dirty and quick iterations were for. 

[Archimedian]

No.

The first 10% is the key part.  You cannot unfuck a bad architecture in the last 6 months.  Execs tend to believe you can, possibly because in other industries it is possible to buy your way out of a bad architecture.  In software this is not the case, and I've personally seen it fail every single time it has been attempted, in multiple disciplines.

One of the reasons I'm bullish on PotBS is -- gameplay issues aside -- I've followed Joe Ludwig's blog, and it's clear that from the outset they knew what they were doing technology-wise, and have the tools and expertise in place to fix it or change it.

No one was talking about architecture (including the developer your talking about, im sure)... The term "Polish" is applied to the game level (IE: Game features, mechanics, and potentially art assets ETC...)part of the application not the core architecture.

Actually you are talking about polish in the sense of architecture, most people couldn't care less about it though, except when it's done badly.  ZOMG my server crashes every 2 minutes, ZOMG the login lags, My ping is over 9000!  You know the kind of things that will drive your standard consumer right out the door to look for a product where they can actually play and be entertained and not worry about why cluster X keeps crashing.  They don't care the reason for why it crashes or doesn't work correctly, they will assume you did your do diligence, designed it to handle bandwidth and expect it to work.  If it doesn't they will eventually take their money else where.  The silent majority that will never post or even surf forums.

Once you actually have all your tech so that you don't have to deal with basically tech-nerd issues people will then want good FPS (i mean as a standard product delivery), no memory leaks and that it can run on their 386 with math co-processor! (I exegerate but that it runs on the min specs and it runs well), and from there they'll care what your game looks like, and sounds and once they've gotten past the point of this is not a turd (assuming who ever satisfied these little pre-reqs) the part which you consider "polish" is that the game is logical the minigames (combat, crafting, looting, what ever) are well designed, are not boring.  The final part in which you will retain (up to this point they just want to play your game, here they'll actually pay to play it) these customers, they will expect you have entertaining content.  What ever that means, for some it means go kill that rat 10k times to see numbers go up, others will want the rats to get bigger and nastier.  

All those little things, some subtle, some invisible really need to be thought about, designed, implemented and tested day 1.  You can parse out the definitions that server architecture is not polish, but that's from a technical standpoint the reality is most people will lump a laggy server (due to what ever bad design you can name) similar to having bad poly counts on your NPCs which drop FPS.