NY Times article on WOW.

[Merusk]

Find it here.

First, the graph off to the side of the first page shows that EQ2 has sold fewer boxes than anything other than CoH.. so I find the 400-500k number in the article suspect.  Once again Station Pass lets SOE fudge the numbers. 400k people is a 200k-person-jump from even the unreliable numbers SirBruce uses on his last chart.

Now, the real reason for the post is there's 2 things I was interested in. The first is that Devs all seem to think WoW is a powerhouse and yet an anomaly at the same time.  I've seen this from a number of people who've been interviewed in the last year or espousing their opinions on the 'net.  It's like they're saying, "We can't face Blizzard's might.. but it's ok they're not really moving forward so we can ignore them when we develop our games."

Yeah, I completly agree that no game being developed has the numbers to match Blizz.  That's not what they should be trying, however.  They should pay special attention to the quote from the guy who runs Ascent.  He expresses exactly the lessons that EVERY SINGLE MMO DEVELOPER needs to learn from WOW.  If your game is an archaic maze of crap, then you're limiting your market.

  This, I fear, is being ignored because of the attitude developers are brining towards examining WoW.  Does anyone else get that same vibe?  I'd liken it to the ivory tower designers in Architecture vs Everyday Joe who designs and builds houses, but folks get stabby when I make those analogies.  The point is, though, you have to examine what people want and give it to them.  If you design to some 'ideal' that only exsists in your head, all you're going to get is crap like SWG. (And thus, my biggest criticism of Raph.)

The second is this quote:

In any case, as in years past, there are those who believe that paid online gaming is all a fad anyway.

"I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month," said Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Morgan, a securities firm. "World of Warcraft is such an exception. I frankly think it's the buzz factor, and eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers."

"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

It's like the man is living in a fantasy world of his own.  First, his assumption seems to be that only losers and failures play video games.  Yay common gamer stereotype #1. "Nobody plays games in the US, we're all winners, not like those Azn fucknuts! Shitcock!"  Then, in defiance of logic, to say that 4 million people worldwide won't pay.. maybe a million.  That's not only ignoring the numbers for ONE GAME, it's assuming that suddenly, across all games worldwide, huge numbers of people will quit.  Even before WOW if you totaled the people who are playing the games that spawned from UO to EQ2 they'd be over a million.   With insightful comments like this, I can't say that's a securities firm I'd want handling my money.

Edit: Damnit I had anomaly spelled right the first time, but it looked wrong. Thanks for immortalizing that, Murgos. :P

[Murgos]

Now, the real reason for the post is there's 2 things I was interested in. The first is that Devs all seem to think WoW is a powerhouse and yet an anamolie at the same time.

If it is not an anomolous result then the developers of the other games must be incompetent.  Guess what all the other games devs are going say about WoW's results?

I had this discussion with Mr. Crick in a way on the other site.  I came down on the most devs are incompetent side (I don't mean at an individual level, I'm talking about incompetent at the overall design & direction level, not individuals) Crick tried to argue that WoW is unique but he couldn't actually come up with a reasonable parameter that they were unique in.

I'm actually leaning to the idea that a large number of people had seen or knew of people who had played MMOG's and were curious to try the experience.  WoW was the game at the right time with easily accessible graphics and gameplay (vs EQ2 which was released at the same time with steep system requirements and far more emphasis on more complicated group play, at least at launch) and they got the benifit of the doubt being relatively unknown in the MMOG market.  Initial reports from beta were "The game doesn't suck" and they built positive word of mouth and so the borderline curious were swayed to give it a try.

In short I think it (WoW's success) was largely a matter of right time, right place, right product more than any sort of magical X factor the WoW devs stumbled across.

[HaemishM]

Goddamn, I love how the SOE/WB guy blames the lackluster to absolute shitty sub numbers for Matrix and EQ2 on WoW's big numbers, instead of on those two products' innate shittiness. Must be nice to have an excuse to pin your game design's failings on other than your own fuckupery. Twat.

Those numbers in the graph you talked about don't include all retailers, so aren't anywhere close to accurate. Also, 400-500k subscribers to EQ2? I'll believe it when I see SOE actually release a firm number, that specifies the amount of people playing games on the All-Access Pass, with a breakdown of the numbers of each game played. I.e. if someone is an All-Access Pass subscriber, I want to see that he played only SWG and EQ1, where he could be counted as a subscriber for both, and not be counted as a subscriber for EQ2.

EDIT:

In short I think it (WoW's success) was largely a matter of right time, right place, right product more than any sort of magical X factor the WoW devs stumbled across

Just like EQ1. I'd rather be lucky than good. In WoW's case, they were lucky AND good, or at least decent enough to not suck as much nut as the other releases of the time. The NY Times article actually mentioned the casual player emphasis and the lack of an arcane interface, which is about 300 times more relevant than the things I've seen devs mention about it.

[Sky]

Maybe if SOE didn't self-limit EQ2 by being hostile to solo players, they wouldn't be dealing with a minimal fraction of what WoW is enjoying. If I had to spend another minute in the motherfucking commonlands killing generic orcs, I'd sepukku. That game actually had some minor potential to be a good EQ...and they completely fucked it. Group^^x2 up your ass, mofos. Up your ass.

Indeed, I had no intention of playing WoW, and I tried EQ2 first. The direct result of EQ2's design was my 6 months enjoying the hell out of WoW.

Anomaly. Heh. Maybe less theorizing about fun and wearing money hats while rollergirl flashes her tits and more making fun games.

[shiznitz]

MMOG developers look like fools after WoW. There was this insular little world in which devs bounced from shop to shop trying to tweak their last idea instaed of trying something new. Then along come Blizzard with no MMOG experience and just blows these career MMOG developers out of the fucking water. Any commentary from the "old school" about how WoW is a one time thing is just ass covering.

Imagine you have been doing the same job at your company for 5 years and everyone views you as the expert. Then a new guy get hired out of college and demonstrates that everything you have been doing can be done in half the time and at half the cost. No matter what Blizzard spent on WoW, the rturn on investment is probablt two orders of magnitude greater than any other MMOG to date. The MMOG devs we all know and love now look like the academics that business people love to laugh about. Brad McQuaid/Raph/Ubiq are all like the professor that failed the founder of FedEx because his thesis laying out why charging a premium for overnight delivery would never work.

As far as the sales chart, EQ2 looks just horrific. CoH came out 6 months before EQ2 and is still competing on box sales? Whoa.

[tazelbain]

MMOG developers look like fools after WoW. There was this insular little world in which devs bounced from shop to shop trying to tweak their last idea instead of trying something new. Then along come Blizzard with no MMOG experience and just blows these career MMOG developers out of the fucking water. Any commentary from the "old school" about how WoW is a one time thing is just ass covering.

That would make sense if we were talking about an innovative game.  Its clear the blizzard devs did listen to the insular devs and made another duki clone.   Blizzard's genius was not from a game design stand-point but from marketing stand-point.  Before WoW, I didn't think there was that many untap MMOG players.  But clearly Blizzard did.  They went straight for new/causual people and struck the motherload.  I don't think that's repeatable, but I am probably wrong.  Who knows, maybe there are rich veins of other types of players. 

[Mesozoic]

MMOG developers look like fools after WoW.

That would make sense if we were talking about an innovative game.

No, it still makes sense.  Earlier devs were trying to make assloads of cash.  They did well.  Then Bliz came and made 20 assloads of cash.  Innovation, artistry, game v world - thats a rant site thing, but only becomes a developer concern to the extent that it might translate to money.

The lesson here is this:  we thought that new games needed innovative elements to break 1 million.  Blizz taught us that a good license and high-quality execution was all that was needed.  That kinda pisses us off because we like to talk about new mechanics, cool ideas, daring plans, etc.  WoW has none of that, and yet we have to talk about it because there it sits, with 4 million subscribers.

[Hoax]

It also shows just how much MMO subscriber numbers will snowball.  The fact is the more you can get on the initial draw the larger the numbers of "untapped" gamers there are out there.  Everyone has a laptop/pc now, and if 33% of their social circle suddenly drops off the map, blaiming some computer game that is "just so fucking cool man" of course they are going to try it.

Add to that the fact that gaming suddenly became a hell of a lot less geek recently and you've got a recipie for picking up a fuckton of subscribers.  I pitty the fool that has a bad launch now, by that I mean EQ1, AC2 and AO bad of course.  All the ex-WoW addicts will not be willing to except something that people like us bitched about but generally paid for anyways.

[Yegolev]

So there are four million people who aren't tired of DIKU play.  This is fine because they will be driving the genre when they get tired of WoW.  I and others posting here don't fit in with this particular demographic due to our MOG experience and debateably our game savvy.  I started getting tired of DIKU in 1993, so I have a head start on these people.

[Strazos]

I didn't think WoW's launch was all that great either; crashes and queues and retail box shortages, oh my.

CoH and GW practically had perfect launches.

[Jain Zar]

WoW is pretty much the Diku perfected.  They ripped off almost everyone, but did it from the perspective of someone who wanted to see that style of game done right without the McQuaid "vision" interfering in it.

They also made a game that looks cool, runs fast on a lot of systems, and plays nicely for Mac and Linux nutcases too.  Who don't have much available to play anyhow.

Just having a hot lisence only does so much.  Otherwise SWG would have been the breakout hit.  It wasn't.  It also wasn't Star Wars, but that's another rant.  Then again, UO wasn't Ultima either.  (Which means someone needs to keep Raph away from beloved liscenses I think.)  Matrix Online wouldn't have bombed.  FF11 would have more players than it does. 

WoW went mass market, which in the case of MMORPGs didn't fuck over the hardcore.  Its what most of the hardcore actually wanted, outside of going away from the Diku style.

Sure Blizzard ripped everyone else off.  But they did it SMARTLY.

And other developers would do well to heed the lessons learned.  WoW is for the masses.  The masses beat a couple no lifers with 500 dollar videocards and the desire to kill the same mob 1000 or more times.

[Nebu]

Imagine you have been doing the same job at your company for 5 years and everyone views you as the expert. Then a new guy get hired out of college and demonstrates that everything you have been doing can be done in half the time and at half the cost. No matter what Blizzard spent on WoW, the rturn on investment is probablt two orders of magnitude greater than any other MMOG to date. The MMOG devs we all know and love now look like the academics that business people love to laugh about. Brad McQuaid/Raph/Ubiq are all like the professor that failed the founder of FedEx because his thesis laying out why charging a premium for overnight delivery would never work.

The financial success of WoW means that we're destined to see the market littered with more WoW clones for years to come.  If you like WoW, that's great for you.  That's pretty much what you'll be seeing for the next 5-10 years. 

Can you see how this may turn off people that didn't like WoW much?

I'm more apt to play a game that isn't like the things that came before it.  That gives me a deeper appreciation for the McQuaid/Raph/Ubiq types.  They'll be trying to expand gaming fronteirs while their competitors are still trying to build a better EQ/WoW clone.  Sure, they'll fuck things up on occasion.  I'd rather people continue to take risks rather than play it safe.  Mistakes breed progress.

[AcidCat]

I started getting tired of DIKU in 1993, so I have a head start on these people.

Exactly. This is new to so many gamers - and not even necessarily brand new, I know plenty of WoW players that started MMORPGs with games like FFXI or DAOC - not a virgin to the genre but new enough so that the basic gameplay mechanics still work for them. And honestly I think the basic mechanics of what a MMORPG is have a lot of life left. It's still a highly workable and for many, still enjoyable framework to build a game around. Just like FPS games continue to be popular with just variations on aiming a gun at someone and shooting, I think the basic way MMORPGs work is going to be similar on a bare-bones level for many years to come. Wether or not this is good or bad is just an academic question of opinion, games will continue to be made this way as long as there is a market for them, and if nothing else WoW proves there is definitely a market for this kind of gameplay. Fun is more important than innovation to your average gamer, and I can't say I disagree.

[Nebu]

Fun is more important than innovation to your average gamer, and I can't say I disagree.

You make an excellent point.  I think that the been_there_done_that syndrome is what makes most of us harsh critics. I'm guessing that my strongly negative view of WoW is tied to the fact that even though they streamlined many aspect of mmog play, there wasn't really anything there that I hadn't already seen/done.  I still have hope that someone will continue to find innovation while keeping the fun.  Maybe I just want too much.

   

[Fabricated]

All I'd like to say is that everyone I know plays WoW. People I make small talk with waiting in line anywhere play WoW. At least one family member of most of the people I work with at the courthouse play WoW, and we're talking 40-50 year-old women. I had a conversation about warrior equipment with 2 of my classmates and my 40-something business teacher the other day.

I've never seen anything like this, ever. Every retarded frat boy at the huge university in my town knows about Halo, but everyone knows about WoW.

[Rasix]

WoW is pretty much the Diku perfected.  They ripped off almost everyone, but did it from the perspective of someone who wanted to see that style of game done right without the McQuaid "vision" interfering in it.

They also made a game that looks cool, runs fast on a lot of systems, and plays nicely for Mac and Linux nutcases too.  Who don't have much available to play anyhow.

Yah, some of us really like DIKU.  After I quit EQ for the first time (yay EBAY!), I started getting heavy into playing DIKU muds.  I think at one point I was outcatassing what I had done in EQ in a text based format.  It's an enjoyable combat system for some of us.  You just need variety to keep it interesting, which EQ somewhat failed on.  A warrior having only kick and taunt, makes for some boring melee combat.

One really interesting thing as when my PC kicked the bucket, only one MMORPG would run on my laptop (that I was tempted to try). WoW runs flawlessly on a Thinkpad with a 32meg graphics card and still looks great.

And other developers would do well to heed the lessons learned.  WoW is for the masses.  The masses beat a couple no lifers with 500 dollar videocards and the desire to kill the same mob 1000 or more times.

I won't be playing the new stuff unless it really gets some learns some lessons from WoW's success.  Probably the main thing for me is a non-grenade-in-the-ass death system.  I'm done with EXP debt, de-leveling, long corpse runs and the possibility of full equipment loss.  Devs that try to pull that shit now have about the same chance of getting my credit card information as a Nigerian email scam.

Mistakes breed progress.

And in this genre, progress is going to be slow I think.  Plus, you've got your setbacks and instances where it seems like nothing was learned (HI SWG, HOW'S IT GOING?).   I think we'll play a great and truly innovative game in this area sometime around the time I have grandchildren.

[Hoax]

Ray of hope says:

I disagree, you look at the rts and fps genre's (I know MMO's are a medium the point stands damn it) and you do not see 25 CStrike clones or 25 Warcraft clones.  I mean do they even make C&C games anymore?

RTS seems to be branching out, and I really dont feel like that took too long post StarCraft to happen.

I seriously haven't heard of any new fps titles meaning jack shit since T:V, the new Quake will be a hit because its fucking Quake the gameplay doesn't matter this is the new shiney to those gamers.  Besides as the mod'ing communities get more and more advanced and the engines get better and better there really isn't a fucking need to release a ton of clones because whatever half baked idea they are using to make the game different will already exist in a mod/tc.

I think we true believers of non shitty games can take heart in the current state of the fps/rts genre, and say if you were to throw WoW levels of funding at them you couldn't get HL/CS/Quake/UT only faster and more shiney and requiring LESS aiming for you casual folks out there.  You would end up with something cool that involved hella crazy interesting new types of combat.  Like WWIIonline but with less suck and more cool.  Or BG2 without the bugs and with even more command options and more persistence.

[Trippy]

I don't think that's repeatable, but I am probably wrong.  Who knows, maybe there are rich veins of other types of players. 

The first company to do an online version of "The Sims" correctly (which TSO clearly didn't do) is going to be laughing all the way to the bank.

[Margalis]

I don't think it is fair to compare WoW to games made by guys like McQuaid and Raph. It's pretty clear that for both Raph and Quaid, the vision takes precedence over the end-result. Both of those guys, in their own way, are creating an experiment first and a mass-market game second.

I would argue that SWG was not designed to be a big mass-market hit. That wasn't the mindset. Same with whatever Quaid is working on now. Hell, they come right out and say it.

EQ2 is a bit harder to understand, because that did seem like an attempt at a mass-market hit.

WoW was designed to be fun and accessible for a large portion of the population. Not all games have that goal in mind. In fact, many of the best games DON'T have that in mind. (And many of the worst games do)

EQ2 ends up looking very bad of course, because it was an established brand and certainly an attempt to create a mass-market game. They just screwed up quite badly. IMO EQ2 is the only game directly comparable to WoW.

[shiznitz]

EQ2 was clearly meant to get EQ customers, both past and present. That was the limit of their thinking. The problem is what Haemish(?) always says: MMOG sequels are stupid.

[Venkman]

Maybe if SOE didn't self-limit EQ2 by being hostile to solo players, they wouldn't be dealing with a minimal fraction of what WoW is enjoying

EQ2 tried to target traditionalists with a game that required FPS-gamer upgrade-now-or-die bleeding edge gamers with a game play that didn't really hit the mark. By all accounts it still doesn't. EQ2 could have enjoyed the slow-growth success of EQlive if not for the explosive me-too compelling WoW launch/media-coverage, so there I agree that WoW impacts EQ2's potential. But that potential wouldn't have been much anyway because the core game didn't broaden the appeal of the genre to players not already here.

WoW wins because Blizzard tossed the rules so many discussed as "required". It's not a coincidence, nor an accident, they did this with Diablo and Warcraft RTS either. They are the quintessential opportunists, with the cash and reach of Vivendi to help.

Screw required. People who want to make games only for players already here need to accept their limited reach. WoW proved, unequivocally, that there were a huge number of players sitting on the edge of the genre waiting for an excuse to play it.

Purists don't consider WoW a "true" MMORPG. Can't argue there really. The only thing massive about the game is the Auction House and the increased probability of meeting somebody new. But then, it does require we ask just how much "massive" lots of people truly want.

4mil worldwide doesn't impress me. The whole cafe/Baang arena of gaming makes accurate metrics too tough for relevance. What impresses me is the 1mil U.S., and the peak concurrencies, and the fact all this happen in nine months. That shows the potential for the genre. I don't think WoW is as large a game can get, and think it's rather interesting an "analyst" can so obviously ignore the big ass spike in total subscribers that is WoW versus the incremental growth the genre had for the prior six to seven years.

Incidentally, this whole thread could have been about SWG, the first real attempt at a license in an MMO. The only problem was the rather specialized appeal of UO contradicting the broad one of the license.

[tazelbain]

*sigh* The future of MMOG is fucked.

[Merusk]

EQ I'll agree wasn't designed for mass-market. It was a surprise to everyone it got the numbers it did.  However, I think you're wrong that SOE wasn't aiming for 400k+ with SWG.  Raph may not have, but I don't expect the suits or Smed expected anything less than 2-300k+.  I KNOW you're wrong with McQuaid's current project, as he's said himself he expects 400k.  If you accept that WOW is the anomaly that those working in the field keep trying to pawn it off as, then 400k would be the MMO Mass-market number, yes?

Also, if anyone's activly designing their game to be a niche, small project approaching only WW2OL's number, I hope they're using their own money or explained that when they pitched the idea to whatever publisher took them on.  These games aren't cheap, and even the bombs have spent a pretty penny coming to market. This is also why I'm fairly certain Raph wasn't just experimenting and dicking around, that he was aiming for some big sub numbers.  It's one thing to spend your own dough or be given permission to do it by the likes of Garrott and quite another to do it with a publicly-traded corp.

 Games are business now, they're out to make money. WoW has shown the way to the bucks, if anyone cares to pull themselves out of their denial, professional jealousy and the rut of the industry in general and learn them rather than bury their head in the sand.  You can be innovative and still be fun.  You can experiment and still be accessible.  Nobody before now has tried because 'well, only geeks play games, and geeks love digging through that shit to find the gold nugget' has been the mindset for so long they're stuck in it.

This goes hand-in-hand with what Darniaq said about tossing the 'rules.'  There's a lot of success out there if you're able to do that.  Those who don't adapt will be the dinosaurs, and we'll all wonder why they went away while not really caring that much.

Now, switching to view from a gameplay standpoint, I'll say Rasix is also correct. There are some folks who simply enjoy DIKU mechanics, and have since '93 or even earlier. Shock and awe!  In fact I'd say the larger percentage of people enjoy DIKUs than don't, which is why you see so many more of them than MOOs, MUSHEs or MUCKs.   It's a simple system that's easy to have fun in, and easy to know what you need to do.  Oh no, there's that accessibility thing again.. games must be hard, and elitisim must rule the online world or else all this time we spend in front of the rectangular light-box pounding away on these keys means nothing! *gasp*

Here's the fact.. if you can't enjoy what a HUGE number of people think is a FUN game, then the problem is more likely you than it is the game.  Either you're really wanting to hate it, or it's just not something you'd enjoy regardless of whatever 'tweaks' were made.  I'm in that exact situation with Diablo and Diablo2.  I can't stand either game and think all there is to it is a long run around with little story and a lousy loot system.  Other people think it's the best damn thing since indoor plumbing and can't fathom my hatred for it while still enjoying DIKU clones.  C'est la vie.   Doesn't mean I think the world's going to pot, or that there shouldn't  be any more Diablo-eque games.. just that I should avoid them.

All I'd like to say is that everyone I know plays WoW. People I make small talk with waiting in line anywhere play WoW. At least one family member of most of the people I work with at the courthouse play WoW, and we're talking 40-50 year-old women. I had a conversation about warrior equipment with 2 of my classmates and my 40-something business teacher the other day.

I've never seen anything like this, ever. Every retarded frat boy at the huge university in my town knows about Halo, but everyone knows about WoW.

Yeah, I had a similarly odd conversation with someone at work because her two kids play and she was interested.  It's bizarre.

[Nija]

Games are business now, they're out to make money. WoW has shown the way to the bucks, if anyone cares to pull themselves out of their denial, professional jealousy and the rut of the industry in general and learn them rather than bury their head in the sand.  You can be innovative and still be fun.  You can experiment and still be accessible.  Nobody before now has tried because 'well, only geeks play games, and geeks love digging through that shit to find the gold nugget' has been the mindset for so long they're stuck in it.

That's the best part about WoW. They didn't show anyone how to make money, really. Everyone knows how to make money. You put out a polished, fun game that works. Nobody has done that yet, though, because nobody has HAD to. They could half ass because they could, and now they're pretty much busted for it.

It's like if a real network engineer showed up at my workplace tomorrow. I'd be fucked SWG style.

[HaemishM]

The financial success of WoW means that we're destined to see the market littered with more WoW clones for years to come.  If you like WoW, that's great for you.  That's pretty much what you'll be seeing for the next 5-10 years. 

Actually, I am beginning to think that may not be true. For the next two years (i.e. the current dev cycle of games that were started before WoW came out), we'll see some WoW-alikes. But I think investors and hopefully devs who aren't clueless chucklefucks, will see that taking the interesting bits of WoW, i.e. the gameplay improvements on the MMOG model, and a new setting will be gold.

Take the ideas that even mainstream press are talking about. A game that is casual enough, and newbie-friendly enough, and spin it into a new setting. I'm hoping WoW's dominance will convince people that maybe a sword-n-sorcery fantasy game isn't going to have a chance of competing, and we'll see other genres in the medium.

The bad part about WoW's success is that it will further skew the already skewed thinking that an MMOG can't be a success without 200k + subscriptions. That's a theory which COH has disproven month after month.

[Yegolev]

The first company to do an online version of "The Sims" correctly (which TSO clearly didn't do) is going to be laughing all the way to the bank.

If I may be so bold, the big fuckup of TSO was adding a grind.  The executive committees spent a long time misunderstanding how (and which) people were enjoying their game, and undoubtely (and unsurprisingly) using EQ as an example.  My wife, for example, plays architect in The Sims 2, and you can bet your ass she doesn't start off with fucking Bob Newbie, working his sorry ass through dozens of jobs until he can afford a fancy mansion.  She uses the money cheat, as does everyone else, because it's more fun to dress up your fantasy couple and hit the clubs than work all day and come home to a shit-box house.  The Sims Online should have had no advancement system at all.  The "PvP" of TSO would then be of the type you see at parties and clubs where people outdress each other.

[Righ]

I've never subscribed to the view (first championed here by Schild) that WoW's success will prevent further innovation in the MMOG genre. When there are obvious areas for improvement in a product that has strong market following, people will invest talent in making those improvements. When something comes along that addresses many of the perceived flaws, it makes the temptation to invest talent in improvements of the old model less attractive. The success of WoW will have the opposite effect to the predicted death knell of MMOG innovation foretold by our local chicken littles. It will more likely cause companies to abandon Diku type projects and assign their creative talent to different products.

[Margalis]

When something comes along that addresses many of the perceived flaws, it makes the temptation to invest talent in improvements of the old model less attractive. The success of WoW will have the opposite effect to the predicted death knell of MMOG innovation foretold by our local chicken littles. It will more likely cause companies to abandon Diku type projects and assign their creative talent to different products.

That's what happened with Starcraft. Before SC there was a whole mess of RTS games that were all pretty similar.

I think it's very hard to say because MMORPG dev cycles are so long. Any MMORPG that comes out in the the next year or two isn't going to take much away from WoW either way.

[Nebu]

Actually, I am beginning to think that may not be true. For the next two years (i.e. the current dev cycle of games that were started before WoW came out), we'll see some WoW-alikes. But I think investors and hopefully devs who aren't clueless chucklefucks, will see that taking the interesting bits of WoW, i.e. the gameplay improvements on the MMOG model, and a new setting will be gold.

Take the ideas that even mainstream press are talking about. A game that is casual enough, and newbie-friendly enough, and spin it into a new setting. I'm hoping WoW's dominance will convince people that maybe a sword-n-sorcery fantasy game isn't going to have a chance of competing, and we'll see other genres in the medium.

I really hope that you're right about this.  Sadly, my pessimism drives me the other way.  It took this long for someone to make a polished version of a 3D Diku Mud.  I'm afraid to see how long it will take until they make another leap forward with MMOG's.  The one thing that your statement has in its favor is that Blizzard has demonstrated that an MMOG can make some serious bank.  There should be enough people out there willing to chase some of that cash stream to encourage further innovation.

I'm hoping that I'm wrong on the 5-10 year estimate. I'm just afraid to expect too much.   

[Yegolev]

It took this long for someone to make a polished version of a 3D Diku Mud.  I'm afraid to see how long it will take until they make another leap forward with MMOG's.  The one thing that your statement has in its favor is that Blizzard has demonstrated that an MMOG can make some serious bank.  There should be enough people out there willing to chase some of that cash stream to encourage further innovation.

My hopefullness in the MOG space stems from the idea that these WoW subscribers will help lay a foundation for MOG infrastructure, possibly luring companies to come up with working licensable software and datacenter space as a business model.  Commoditizing the infrastructure will help smaller and more innovative companies get a foothold.  I am basing this on the fact that I personally have three domain names attached to 250GB of storage with Apache/PHP... something nonthinkable to me even ten years ago.  They supply Apache, I supply HTML/PHP.

[HaemishM]

I really hope that you're right about this.  Sadly, my pessimism drives me the other way.  It took this long for someone to make a polished version of a 3D Diku Mud.  I'm afraid to see how long it will take until they make another leap forward with MMOG's. 

Hey, I didn't say they'd be fun, necessarily, just that they will happen. I mean, Horizons tried to polish the Diku formula and innovate as well, and where did that get us?

Yeah, a sign outside the newbie town with a arrow that said "Monsters."