Star Trek Online: Here We Go Again!

[Lantyssa]

Not really if you consider the hundreds of thousands like myself who have Cryptic accounts from their betas but didn't buy either game.

[Venkman]

Given their gleeful reporting and retraction, I'm curious where they get their 300k accounts for WAR and AoC too.

[UnSub]

Given their gleeful reporting and retraction, I'm curious where they get their 300k accounts for WAR and AoC too.

Lazy reporting - it's been a while since WAR has been linked to 300k active accounts.

[Kageh]

I really wonder how box sales have been going, I miss the usual euphoric reporting of billions of boxes having been moved to retailers. The game isn't even in the top 10 weekly steam sales, although it still seems to be best-selling with d2d (probably just meaning d2d is reporting over a longer period).

Considering the lack of high-end content and the generic nature of much of the low-/mid-level content, the churn is probably going to hit hard after the free month.

[Riggswolfe]

I really wonder how box sales have been going, I miss the usual euphoric reporting of billions of boxes having been moved to retailers. The game isn't even in the top 10 weekly steam sales, although it still seems to be best-selling with d2d (probably just meaning d2d is reporting over a longer period).

Considering the lack of high-end content and the generic nature of much of the low-/mid-level content, the churn is probably going to hit hard after the free month.

You're probably right. Cryptic really screwed themselves with that. I'll play for free and maybe one more month and then I'll be bored and go back to LOTRO probably. One thing though, assuming the game doesn't shut down, this is one of the few MMOs were I don't much care if people leave. It's not like the content really depends on other players. At all. In fact, with their scaling scheme, groups can sometimes make content harder.

[Signe]

That wasn't a review.  It doesn't look as if the author even got out of character creation, or more likely, he read somewhere that the character creator was good.     Hopefully, the person who wrote it doesn't actually get paid for writing.  That would be a travesty.

[Khaldun]

Which I think further fits the proposition that Cryptic's business model is now:

1. Go for intellectual properties/genres that have built-in audiences which aren't that well-served by WoW & direct WoW clones (e.g., not sword-and-sorcer fantasy).
2. Standard Cryptic engine provides shiny graphics and fun combat model, + very nice character customization. Seems like a good time!
3. No content depth, but it takes a while for people to notice that.

=

Into Profit Off of Box Sales

--------

Minimize further investment in live management and further development. Settle for retaining people who are either so so so so into that genre or so unjudgemental that they'll continue to subscribe even when the lack of depth and weak incentives to group activity become visible. Run on bare bones so that whatever retention you get is still profit.

By not having a strongly group-driven content model, you don't run into the acute problems that AoC and WAR did as populations plummeted, where you can't actually play through the content because you don't have groups capable of doing so. By not having separate named shards, you don't have to deal with the embarassment and hassle of consolidation, either.

Expect the whole market to shift in this direction: we're going to see more glossy massively single-player subscription games where the subscription model is just intended to provide a revenue boost to a box-sale driven business model, an extra soak on players who are willing to pay it (rather like some quick DLC is intended to get the people who must have that content NOW to pay up for it). The only people who are going to mess around with a design that's intended to have a big subscriber base and a long life as a MMOG will be people with very deep pockets or a few weird houses like CCP that are determined to stick it out with a boutique design.

[Kageru]

It may be a very sensible model if you know you don't have the talent, time or budget to compete with Blizzard or the market leaders. It's almost like the "plan to fail" model of MMO development. Though identifying it as a single player game with an online component on the side is possibly kinder.

[Malakili]

I'm sort of torn on it.  On the one hand, its clearly smarter than putting all your eggs in one basket such that it MUST be a hit or you are screwed.  On the other hand, its likely to produce a bunch of sub par games.  Now, if they make 4-5 MMOs, each of which isn't that great, but gives a smallish community just what they are looking for, I can't complain too much, especially since I often find myself saying things like "smaller MMO projects are definitely the way to go."  I guess the problem is that when I say things like that I imagine smaller passion driven projects and not a relatively big developer like cryptic cynically exploiting the model for profits.

[Surlyboi]

And sadly, I'm stil having fun. But I am starting to notice a bit of a grind and some broken missions that make me stabby.

[Lantyssa]

In a week...

[Ghambit]

So we're at the point now in MMO-dev that webgames are the new boutique model?
Seriously, it's kinda sad that there are many pbbg with better retention and margins than most big-block MMOs.

So yah, it's starting to seem like standard 3d MMOs are throwing in the towel and relegating themselves to box sales and 3-month subs.  Christ even SWOR is going kinda "small."  At this point we've got what?  "Heroes of Talara" as the last remaining "big" MMO in dev.?

[Soln]

Turbine with DDO and LotRO are definitely on the solo-is-best path.  It caters to a lot of new MMO entrants, it satisfies the casuals (whatever experience) AND it's ultimately lower cost for the provider (less raid content, less drama).  A lot of remaining group content is on rails, which Blizz pioneered.

[Riggswolfe]

Turbine with DDO and LotRO are definitely on the solo-is-best path.  It caters to a lot of new MMO entrants, it satisfies the casuals (whatever experience) AND it's ultimately lower cost for the provider (less raid content, less drama).  A lot of remaining group content is on rails, which Blizz pioneered.

I really wish more MMOs would cater to solo and dual type of content. Frankly as I age I don't have the patience anymore for guild drama and a 7 hour day of raiding. I just want to log in with my wife and have fun in our own little corner of the "world". I also have noticed a trend among most of my friends who play MMOs to do the same thing. For us as a group is pretty much two couples joining up together for fun, usually for overland hunting or something.

[Lum]

I'm actually sending a first look/review as my next column to MMORPG.com today  

(I'm level 16 so I think I'm at least moderately qualified.)

[Gutboy Barrelhouse]

Thats 16 more levels than the last review had.

[Riggswolfe]

I'm actually sending a first look/review as my next column to MMORPG.com today  

(I'm level 16 so I think I'm at least moderately qualified.)

So, can you give us a paraphrase or is that against the rules? I'm kind of curious what your view is since you have a wee bit of a background in this industry. (wee obviously an understatement.)

[Lum]

It has some interesting gameplay, not sure how much of an MMO it is.

[Ghambit]

It has some interesting gameplay, not sure how much of an MMO it is.

It's not.  It's a linked 50-person (20 really) multiplayer game.  (a sharded version of Joint Operations is actually more MMO than this is)
The only thing MMO is the chat server and crafting system, which can be done "easily" with any game of any type.

Matter of fact, if you want to have a fleet meeting somewhere or organize fleet actions... good luck with that.  You just cant.

disclaimer:  feel free to use the above comments in your industry-insider review

[Tannhauser]

And sadly, I'm stil having fun. But I am starting to notice a bit of a grind and some broken missions that make me stabby.

WTF is wrong with you.

[palmer_eldritch]

It has some interesting gameplay, not sure how much of an MMO it is.

It's not.  It's a linked 50-person (20 really) multiplayer game.  (a sharded version of Joint Operations is actually more MMO than this is)
The only thing MMO is the chat server, which can be done easily with any game of any type.

Matter of fact, if you want to have a fleet meeting somewhere or organize fleet actions... good luck with that.  You just cant.

disclaimer:  feel free to use the above comments in your industry-insider review

It seems to be possible to invite other people onto the bridge of your ship, not that I've tried it.

However, I don't see how fleets will last (fleets are guilds, for anyone who doesn't know) as it literally makes no difference whether you actually know anyone else on the server or not. It seems like it would work well for very casual players but it also highlights to me how some of the things many of us dislike about MMOs, such as needing a cleric for groups, do help to build a community because they force you to connect in some way with other players.

[Count Nerfedalot]

It may be a very sensible model if you know you don't have the talent, time or budget to compete with Blizzard or the market leaders. It's almost like the "plan to fail" model of MMO development. Though identifying it as a single player game with an online component on the side is possibly kinder.

Kinder but less accurate, at least as far as the phrase "with an online component" implies the rest of the game can be played offline. 

[UnSub]

It has some interesting gameplay, not sure how much of an MMO it is.

If Bloodworth is going to argue that Global Agenda is a MMO, then STO certainly is.

[Malakili]

It may be a very sensible model if you know you don't have the talent, time or budget to compete with Blizzard or the market leaders. It's almost like the "plan to fail" model of MMO development. Though identifying it as a single player game with an online component on the side is possibly kinder.

Kinder but less accurate, at least as far as the phrase "with an online component" implies the rest of the game can be played offline. 

Single player online game with a multiplayer online component?

[Kageru]

I guess having it on-line also allows them to avoid comparison with the experience single player games can provide. Just as STO can't really compete with a top class MMO the game experience doesn't look as intense or exciting as the better single player games. I mean if they tried to sell the same degree of repetitive content without being a MMO they'd get hammered.

[Surlyboi]

In a week...

I'm actually ok with that though. It's not like I'm playing just that or that my it's eating up my life. I stop playing for a while and the stabbiness goes away. Or I run a mission like the one to find out what blew up Hobus and I'm back in it again.

[01101010]

I guess having it on-line also allows them to avoid comparison with the experience single player games can provide. Just as STO can't really compete with a top class MMO the game experience doesn't look as intense or exciting as the better single player games. I mean if they tried to sell the same degree of repetitive content without being a MMO they'd get hammered.

Game Experience May Change During Online Play = MMO, now?   

[Shatter]

MMORPG is too broad a category nowadays, there needs to be sub categories.  STO would fit into the laughably multiplayer category :P

[Venkman]

Nowadays?! That's been the case since we were arguing how to compare the success of Lineage and EQ1. So far nothing big has fit into any clean categories. There's MMOFPS|RTS|RPG, but it's only *RPG that's been the big talking point. We need at least LoTRO-equivalent successes in *FPS and *RTS for those to roll off the lips. And FPS is already there if only to be used in the early hype days of upcoming shooters like MAG, Huxley and Global Agenda until they eventually devolve into non-massive shooters with public space commerce or something.

So yah, it's starting to seem like standard 3d MMOs are throwing in the towel and relegating themselves to box sales and 3-month subs.  Christ even SWOR is going kinda "small."  At this point we've got what?  "Heroes of Talara" as the last remaining "big" MMO in dev.?

Two parts here:

It's inevitable. Very few have budget a Blizzard can command, and nobody wants to risk it. It's also sensible. Only the players demand that the next big thing be a Huge Home Run. Base hits can be successful too, if you guessed right on your budget vs revenue.

SWOR will be the next big MMO for sheer size of the game and the probable amount of marketing behind it. And I still feel it's the swan song for this model. It's obvious companies can make enough money on smaller titles to keep themselves employed. They may not have 2,500 GMs and 120 developers. But they don't need that many either when their game only cost $8-15mm to make. You can make three different titles for nominally different audiences (based on IPs) at the price of one big bet so few are confident in making.

SOE has been right about this for some time in my opinion. They just need a better catalog.

[Modern Angel]

SOE has been right about this for some time in my opinion. They just need a better catalog.

This is absolutely correct. Even the big budget flops can be completely self-sufficient with small numbers of subs; hell, even old shit like UO and AO are pure profit. You don't NEED a 30mil budget. Christ, for all the complaining about STO or other games that just don't "feel" like MMOs the only way anyone is going to see anything new is with smaller, less ambitious titles made by competent studios.

[HaemishM]

MMORPG is too broad a category nowadays, there needs to be sub categories.  STO would fit into the laughably multiplayer category :P

That's because MMOG is not a GENRE, it's a MEDIUM with distinct genres that vary based on content, size of community, style of game, etc.

Battlefield 2 is a MMOG as much as Global Agenda. The old term MMORPG which denotes a very specific subscriber-based service like Everquest is no longer broad enough to encapsulate the variety in the MMOG Medium.

[Ghambit]

When I was speaking of "big" I was referring mostly to shear gamespace size and depth of function, not necessarily amount of budget.  Today's MMOs are just small (and sometimes STILL have stupid-big budgets).  Rife with lazy-design social aspects such as twitter sharing, small shards,  too much art, RMT costuming, etc.  instead of just designing a large, open, virtual world.  Everything is all go'ram Facebook now.

It's a noted fact right now that things are slipping into a bad place (and yah, Western MMOs are becoming more Korean).  Going backwards so to speak, in many ways.  I'm not saying it's all bad, but instead of using "small-design" as a tool to make a good game better, they're just using small-design as a total replacement and washing their hands... chunking out assembly-line garbage instead of hand-crafting something notable.  There are studios and people with money who are fighting this slippage into mediocrity, but they're losing badly.

This all plays into this glut of sadness that pervades everything these days.  Everything is robotic and stale.  

Now, there is this "counter-culture" of eggheads and Edge-types who are trying desperately to bring "craft" back to the Western World (game design included), but it's just not happening fast enough and most of those guys <insert redname here> are evaporating.  People dont have easy/cheap access to the tools or training to compete with larger/lazier institutions.  And those same institutions are the only ones with access to the best IPs and best tools.

We're seeing babysteps right now with guys like Epic "unlocking" the UDK or Multiverse getting James Cameron on-board, making their stuff open access and developing "Remix."  (Remix btw can take a movie and traslate it back into digital medium for easy modeling, this is how all those Avatar games were chunked out so quickly).  But it's still not quite there yet.

Anyways, to me that's how quality will return to the medium... through small studios putting high-quality pressure on the big boyz.
Fuck Facebook, I want a WORLD.  <----see??    WOOOORRRLLLLDD

[HaemishM]

You are in the minority. Get used to it.

[Jayce]

Wow is this thread derailed, but I like it. I think we're out of useful STO topics.

It seems like things are crystallizing into three main ways to be successful in the MEDIUM (thanks Haemish):

1 - STO type games; plan-to-fail; make your money back quickly and then shut down at some definite point in the future. AoC, WAR, Aion (?) are in this bucket. One or more of these may fall under #2 (time will tell)
2 - start small, stay profitable, serve a niche and steadily improve: cf Eve-Online, LotRO
3 - big-budget, big idea, long-term; WoW is the only successful recent example of this now. UO and EQ got a free pass for being first movers, but no one else will.  AC and DAoC got a free pass also, but it was already wearing out by then.

I think it also bears pointing out that like most overnight successes, Blizzard took 10 or more years to position themselves for success with WoW, both in terms of IP and in gathering a team that knows wtf and establishing a base of technology to build from without breaking the bank by starting from scratch.

The above is only really persistent worlds. There is a whole other sub-medium of less-persistent worlds: GW and Planetside come to mind.

[HaemishM]

DAoC should be listed under #2.