Another One Bites the Dust: SWG Edition!

[HaemishM]

Yes, but that's the danger of any event-scripting based game. And the same could be said about instance/zone-based MMOG's, which is where the phrase "TRAIN TO ZONE!" came from. It was simply people trying to rush to another area to escape destruction.

[Teleku]

Let's not be too nostalgic about it.  The first play through of Half Life 1 was undoubtedly an amazing experience in part because of one's own expectations about how AI worked at the time.  That being said, after you played the game a lot you could actually just flat out skip a lot of enemies.  While they were busy flanking and hiding behind cover, a lot of the time you could just sprint through to the next area. 

Who the hell plays through a video game more than once?   

Seriously, I never do.

Loved half life.  It deserves its rep as one of the greatest games ever created.  It absolutly revolutionized FPS's, and I'm not sure I've ever played a game that blew me away as much as half life did at the time (I'm also getting old and jaded though).

[Gimfain]

I do read a lot of praise and criticism in raph's blog, and I have seen it in the comments of the game as well. I only mention it because it makes a good comparison with swtor.

The praise for the game is that it gave a different experience from the heavy combat online games and found an audience that doesn't get satisfied by the typical online gaming experience, and no games that does such a thing could truly be viewed a failure. On the other hand, after launch the focus wasn't on the players they had, instead they were busy trying to satisfy people that wasn't into the SWG experience. By doing this they lost far more players than it had, and that's why the game eventually ended up failing.

Swtor started out as being wow with lightsabers and while they attracted a huge amount of players for being star wars, lots of people were turned off by the game being wow except worse. The only thing that was actually interesting about the game was the solo-story game and also some mildly enjoyable group-content, and that's what they have been focusing on with each expansion. There has never really been any huge changes for the game, but by working hard on their audience the game did eventually become a success.

The lesson is an obvious one, know your audience.

[Malakili]

Let's not be too nostalgic about it.  The first play through of Half Life 1 was undoubtedly an amazing experience in part because of one's own expectations about how AI worked at the time.  That being said, after you played the game a lot you could actually just flat out skip a lot of enemies.  While they were busy flanking and hiding behind cover, a lot of the time you could just sprint through to the next area. 

Who the hell plays through a video game more than once?   

Seriously, I never do.

Loved half life.  It deserves its rep as one of the greatest games ever created.  It absolutly revolutionized FPS's, and I'm not sure I've ever played a game that blew me away as much as half life did at the time (I'm also getting old and jaded though).

Well, I was young and didn't have a lot of money and so I played what I had a lot of times to get the most I could out of it.

But that aside, I agree.  Half Life is probably my favorite game of all time and arguably the best game ever made.

[Lantyssa]

Have there been any games since that had a complicated faction system?  WoW's had some, but it mostly felt like grinding to get some item.

I could be friends with the Witches of Dathomir, Corsec, and a hundred others and they'd help out if something attacked me within their sight.  But they almost always had a counter faction or two so you always had an enemy, too.

[sam, an eggplant]

You could change factions in the Matrix Online (anyone else remember that piece of godawful dogshit?) and EQ2. But I don't remember any with more complex factions like EQ1.

[Viin]

I think I played Matrix Online for two days before I uninstalled it.

[HaemishM]

On the other hand, after launch the focus wasn't on the players they had, instead they were busy trying to satisfy people that wasn't into the SWG experience. By doing this they lost far more players than it had, and that's why the game eventually ended up failing.

Well, the game probably had to be considered a failure from the get-go, IMO - because it never EVER attracted the numbers that would make the game profitable in light of the licensing fees that were required. So it HAD to continually keep trying to satisfy people who weren't into the SWG experience because there weren't enough who WERE satisfied with the SWG experience to pay for the maintenance and licensing and still make a comfortable profit. So from a business stance, it was a failure.

Creatively, it sounds like it was about half-in-half. Raph, I appreciate you taking the time to write these port-mortem answers on the blog. I hope one day you'll design an MMOG I actually play at release instead of criticize from the sidelines. 

[Draegan]

Hey Raph can I get you on my podcast? I love player behavior in game environment discussions and your blog posts are excellent reads.

[Hutch]

On the other hand, after launch the focus wasn't on the players they had, instead they were busy trying to satisfy people that wasn't into the SWG experience. By doing this they lost far more players than it had, and that's why the game eventually ended up failing.

Well, the game probably had to be considered a failure from the get-go, IMO - because it never EVER attracted the numbers that would make the game profitable in light of the licensing fees that were required. So it HAD to continually keep trying to satisfy people who weren't into the SWG experience because there weren't enough who WERE satisfied with the SWG experience to pay for the maintenance and licensing and still make a comfortable profit. So from a business stance, it was a failure.

Creatively, it sounds like it was about half-in-half. Raph, I appreciate you taking the time to write these port-mortem answers on the blog. I hope one day you'll design an MMOG I actually play at release instead of criticize from the sidelines. 

Criticism from the sidelines is the bedrock upon which our community is founded 

[UnSub]

The true tragedy was how SWG's failure to execute was taken as an object lesson by the industry.

The right lesson would be "don't release until it's ready". Simple to say, harder to do. But the lesson they took to heart was "focus on combat at the exclusion of all else".

But MMOs are never completely ready, just in failure states that may or may not be working as intended. 

As for 'was SWG a failure?', it absolutely was against developer expectations. It also wasn't what a lot of people wanted out of a Star Wars game (see: Raph's post on the conumdrum of playable Jedi).

In many ways the best thing that happened to SWG's legacy was the NGE, which killed the original game and made it into something of a legend.  Having such a dramatic change to the game helps deflect criticism of the original systems that didn't do enough to keep players to keep SOE happy.

If SWG has been a title without the Star Wars IP it would have been more able to succeed on its own terms.

[Morat20]

Leaving WoW aside, what was the average number of subs on a triple A MMORPG before WoW? After WoW? Now?

Compared to everything BUT WoW, how did SWG do?

[Lantyssa]

Quite well in the grand scheme of things.  It was a failure of expectations.

[IainC]

Leaving WoW aside, what was the average number of subs on a triple A MMORPG before WoW? After WoW? Now?

Compared to everything BUT WoW, how did SWG do?

The NGE was announced in mid 2005 and obviously would have been greenlit and planned long before that. I think that looking back from our current perspective, we can see that WoW was unique and broke the curve on subscriber numbers; but from the perspective of a product owner in 2005, this wasn't so obvious. Many people believed back then that WoW was opening up whole new swathes of players to the MMO experience and that these would eventually churn through and migrate to other games. Given that, it doesn't seem quite so ludicrous to try and build a product to capture some of that 11m subscriber runoff. Mythic thought so, Funcom thought so, Bioware thought so. In that light SOE's decision to double down and rewrite the game for a post-WoW audience doesn't seem so insane (the implementation is, of course, a different matter entirely).

The fact that they were all wrong and that WoW is pretty much the only MMO in history to go for more than 4 years without being put into maintenance mode is obvious now, but if I could go ten years into the future before making any business decisions, I'd be doing a lot better myself.

[Merusk]

Wow DID bring new players to the market and they HAVE migrated to other games. Just mention WoW in any other MMO and you'll find a bunch of former players. The aggregate total of those is probably greater than the difference between WoW's peak numbers and now. They just happened to be looking for different things when they migrated and didn't all jump to "the next big thing" as had happened previously.

[Lantyssa]

WoW was doing well, but it had just launched.  And the people playing it weren't going to be jumping ship that easily.

Greed drove the direction, not sound business decisions.  Yes, it's easier to see in hindsight, but even back then it was possible to predict it would end poorly.

[IainC]

Wow DID bring new players to the market and they HAVE migrated to other games. Just mention WoW in any other MMO and you'll find a bunch of former players. The aggregate total of those is probably greater than the difference between WoW's peak numbers and now. They just happened to be looking for different things when they migrated and didn't all jump to "the next big thing" as had happened previously.

I don't entirely agree. Sure there are ex-WoW players in other MMOs but not to the same extent that might have been expected. The players you are referring to would likely have been MMO players anyway who played WoW because it was an MMO rather than previosuly uninterested players brought to the MMO experience by WoW. At its peak WoW had 11m active subscribers, I'd estimate based on that number and my experience with operating MMOs that the historical total of WoW accounts is in the region of 100m. Not all of those will count of course, some will be trials that never converted to paid accounts, some will be multi-accounts owned by the same player and so forth but if we assume that of that 100m, 30m are unique and formerly active players, then there's still a huge discrepancy between churned WoW players and the state of the modern not-WoW MMO market.

[Ironwood]

What we really need here is a vole-fucker with a chart.

[Raph]

The NGE was announced in mid 2005 and obviously would have been greenlit and planned long before that.

Try "on the order of a few weeks." Seriously. NGE was a huge rush job, start to end.

[Raph]

I just posted "DiD SWG fail?" Which answers some of the things above, btw (though I just caught up on this thread now).

SWG was the second largest MMO after EQ, for a little while, I think.

I discuss WoW's impact on SWG in the post.

[Paelos]

The NGE was announced in mid 2005 and obviously would have been greenlit and planned long before that.

Try "on the order of a few weeks." Seriously. NGE was a huge rush job, start to end.

Not at all shocking. 

[Gimfain]

I just posted "DiD SWG fail?" Which answers some of the things above, btw (though I just caught up on this thread now).

SWG was the second largest MMO after EQ, for a little while, I think.

I discuss WoW's impact on SWG in the post.

After reading your latest piece I find myself questioning parts of the gaming industry, do game developers and publishers have realistic expectations about their products. For all its flaws, it still had good retention and it still sold well, yet those numbers weren't enough. We need a jedi to boost christmas sales, we need to be like wow to boost sales, we need to recreate the combat experience, and we have to put it out quickly before we can fix all the issues, we can fix all those things later.

I can understand that sometimes you have to apply quick fixes but if you do a huge overhaul its essential that you get it right the first time.

[HaemishM]

do game developers and publishers have realistic expectations about their products.

No. Not at all, as a matter of fact.

[tazelbain]

I don't think their exceptions are unrealistic. When your venture is more risky than investing in the stock market you should looking for better returns than the stock market.

[Torinak]

I don't think their exceptions are unrealistic. When your venture is more risky than investing in the stock market you should looking for better returns than the stock market.

I think many really understand the potential rewards, but not the risks. Sure, you could end up with a home run that yields double or triple digit percentage ROI, but you will probably end up strongly negative. Of course, the pitches omit that latter part, bury it in a footnote in 3-point font, or deny that it could ever happen even though there are dozens or hundreds of other examples that are relevant to whatever they're doing.

[Triforcer]

Wonderful series of posts, Raph.  Please find the time to helm one more AAA MMO in between consulting gigs.  There has to be at least one Harry Potter, etc. exec who is a huge fan and will hand you 150 mil, no questions asked!

[5150]

The NGE was announced in mid 2005 and obviously would have been greenlit and planned long before that.

Try "on the order of a few weeks." Seriously. NGE was a huge rush job, start to end.

Leading to the question "How does Smed still have a job"

[Paelos]

Good intentions made me chuckle, because that's like boilerplate excuse for how badly something gets fucked up.

I mean you're owning some of it Raph, but it doesn't really excuse the mistakes that people should have known by the time this thing existed. From a simply running a business perspective.

[sam, an eggplant]

Leading to the question "How does Smed still have a job"

In the beginning, SOE obviously did extraordinarily well with Everquest1. They were the king from 1999 until WoW released in 2004. The decade from 2004 to 2014 was a string of MMO mediocrity. Everquest 2, SWG obviously, that Matrix Online stinker, and Vanguard. Very recently, DCUO and Planetside2 have been doing quite well on consoles, which is why they were acquired.

Question is why he held on from 2004-2014. My assumption is that SOE actually made money during that time and he was political and played ball with the corporate parents.

That said, now that SOE was acquired, I would be very surprised if Smed doesn't resign one year and one day post-acquisition.

[Malakili]

H1Z1 has also consistently been on the top sellers list on Steam.

[Riggswolfe]

Reading those blogs has certainly been interesting. Taken together they're a great post-mortem on the game and give a window into several key decisions that were made (or not made) that definitely impacted the game both prior to release and once it went live. It would be interesting to see an alternate universe where the game had another year or two of development time, better server hardware, and someone to advocate for the players since in my opinion the wrong choice was made a few too many times to choose lore over player happiness/expectations.

[5150]

and someone to advocate for the players since in my opinion the wrong choice was made a few too many times to choose lore over player happiness/expectations.

Theres a balance here since SWG showed me that what the players ask for may actually be the wrong thing to give them.

The example that sticks in my head was shuttle times between planets and cities. I did a lot of business (both buying and selling) waiting for the next shuttle due to the large crowd that had gathered. Once the shuttle times were cut (to 30sec IIRC) due to player requests/demands those social situations that created so many opportunitues vanished.

[Paelos]

Theres a balance here since SWG showed me that what the players ask for may actually be the wrong thing to give them.

The example that sticks in my head was shuttle times between planets and cities. I did a lot of business (both buying and selling) waiting for the next shuttle due to the large crowd that had gathered. Once the shuttle times were cut (to 30sec IIRC) due to player requests/demands those social situations that created so many opportunitues vanished.

That's dangerous thinking though. There are a few things that players will ask for in a QOL sense that are game-breaking in other ways. The best WoW example is flying. Which is why I understand why Blizzard is fighting it now, but the genie is out of the bottle. You can't take it back once you give it out without massive backlash.

The other dangerous part of that is developers deciding that what players want is wrong over the wrong issues.

[Malakili]

It depends.  A lot of time the most frustrating games are the ones I end up playing the longest.  In a huff I might ask for things that genuinely would make it less frustrating, but there are also things attached to that frustration that make it worth playing in the first place. I also might genuinely have a nicer time playing the game with those changes, but it might also mean I get bored of the game and quit much sooner.  I'm not sure which constitutes a better "game" - one that I feel ONLY positively about but get bored of and quit after a month, or one that really makes me feel compelled to play month after month for a long time.  Obviously it does not always boil down to that dichotomy, but if I had to choose one, I do not know which I would choose.

[Raph]

Devs decide what players get all the time anyway. There is no universally well recived patch. In theory, the devs have a god's eye view on what is actually going on. In practice, as my articles mentioned, that eye can be blind. Keep in mind, SWG's metrics system was actually one of the FIRST MMO metrics systems like that at all! It was a simpler time. :l

On the other hand, the player's eye is ALWAYS blind. They never have a distant view of the whole, ever. Even the most jaundiced, impartial critic, someone who maybe gets all the big issues right, simply doesn't have a way to know what's affecting the situation, the *why* things are the way they are. More typically, they're simply focused on their own personal QOL without caring how it affects any other's QOL.

All in all, you should USUALLY be less worried about whether the devs will make a correct choice over the players' wishes; and be MORE worried about whether they have good motives in general. I don't know of anything at all that has ever been done by any MMO management that came anywhere near the general skeeviness and callous disregard of players that was prevalent in Facebook game development.