Who DOES Blizzard need to fear?

[Merusk]

Yeah it's not like anyone plays Starcraft, or Diablo anymore, the engines are so old and crappy.  Psh.. not like you can find boxes for those crappy-ass 8 & 6 year old games out there anywhere for them to play, even if they wanted to. 

Are you being sarcastic?

No.  Nobody my age who messes around on the internet is ever, ever sarcastic.  The internet is serious business. hahahahahahaha

[Margalis]

Personel is a huge issue for most companies.

Look at Bioware. They want to get into MMORPGs so they teamed up with some "proven" people. People who had proven they had no business making MMORPGs. Blizzard had no MMORPG experience to speak of.

Not only are companies now going to play it safe and copy an existing formula, they are also going to play it safe by hiring utter failures who will predictably fail in the exact same ways they already have before.

If I were looking to play it safe with personel I might hire some network programmers who had worked on other MMORPGs or someone else with some technical expertise. Guy like Vogel at SOE I would avoid like the plague.

We have a weird notion in our culture that people actually learn from their mistakes and that screwing up is better than doing things right the first time. Because the guy who screwed up knows not to make that mistake again. (In theory) The fact is that some people screw up a lot and some don't.

You could see that here in Boston during the Cardinal Law (Catholic Priest) scandal. His defense was basically:

"Sure, I made a lot of mistakes. I let a bunch of kids get molested. But that taught me a valuable lesson, and I'll never let kids get molested again! Now I know!!"

Blizzard understands how to *develop* games. Not even how to design them. How to develop them. How to iterate to improve the overall experience, what kind of product to ship out the door, and how to approch the entire dev cycle. I don't understand what Bioware is doing getting people who have shown beyond any doubt that they don't get that at all.

[Morat20]

Blizzard's biggest problem will be supplying enough Burning Crusade boxes.

I am sure about that.
I just think that 6 million people will burn out that Crusade pretty soon. 12 months, maybe 18. It will keep them busy for the whole 2007 and part of 2008.
Then what?
The carrot of another long delayed expansion? With a 4 - 6 year old graphical engine?
Fine. Then I'll be SO wrong.

The nice thing about WoW's graphics is that they won't get dated. WoW's not playing the 'hot-ass graphics' game all that hard, and it means they're more or less immune to people quitting because of 'outdated graphics'.

[jpark]

We have talked about this but not enough so I will give the brief rehash:

WoW graphical strategy is brilliant.  By basing their game on a cartoon - rather than polygon counts - they are effectively immune to have their graphics rendered obsolete for the foreseeable future.

I never look at Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck and say - those graphics are old.  I enjoy that stuff just as much today as I did back then.  On the other hand, games that attempt to be photorealistic - get dated quite quickly.

This is WoW's brilliance in my mind.  What is a competitor going to do here - present graphics that are more "realistic" than WOW's ?  That makes no sense - the graphics never were realistic.  They only thing they can do is offer a look that is more stylistic.  That's about Art, not graphics cards.

/fanboi off.

[Morat20]

We have talked about this but not enough so I will give the brief rehash:

WoW graphical strategy is brilliant.  By basing their game on a cartoon - rather than polygon counts - they are effectively immune to have their graphics rendered obsolete for the foreseeable future.

I never look at Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck and say - those graphics are old.  I enjoy that stuff just as much today as I did back then.  On the other hand, games that attempt to be photorealistic - get dated quite quickly.

This is WoW's brilliance in my mind.  What is a competitor going to do here - present graphics that are more "realistic" than WOW's ?  That makes no sense - the graphics never were realistic.  They only thing they can do is offer a look that is more stylistic.  That's about Art, not graphics cards.

/fanboi off.

It also has the lovely side-effect of running smoothly on lower-end machines. If you want a mass-market game, you can't launch requiring the current high-end game monster to run it.

Some people don't like WoW's art style -- but more people have a chance to look at it at launch than will have a chance to run Vanguard at launch.

[Trippy]

Blizzard has "some Asian company you've never heard of" to fear. That would be about it I think. Their largest market is Asia and I certainly have no clue about who's cooking up what in Korea or the PRC. That I think is the market where they could most easily be hurt in.

China is certainly able to generate some eye-popping subscriber/account numbers but the economics over there are quite a bit different than in NA and Europe and none of the really popular MMORPG titles over there are popular over here except for, of course, WoW. If WoW suddenly got kicked out of the China for some reason there would still be 3 million+ people coughing up ~US$15 a month in Korea, NA, and Europe. Somebody would have to get to at least 1 million paying subscribers for NA and Europe combined before Vivendi would start to get worried, I would imagine.

[WindupAtheist]

Predicting that the makers of the mildly successful Dark Age of Camelot are about to hit the ball out of the park and score an order of magnitude more subscribers with their second game, while at the same time the biggest success story in the history of the genre suffers an unprecedented collapse?   Yeah, that's stupid.

[Endie]

Blizzard is Rome at it's height.  It rules the world.  No one can compete with it, everyone is it's bitch.  No crazy market paradigm shift or clever competitor will ever defeat it.  No ultra-quality persistent FPS with RMT is going to come along like a Great White Hope to unseat the reigning Diku.  Anyone with enough money to make that game is going to be too risk-averse to actually do so, and will instead make a pale but safe WoW wannabe game.

The only way it can ever fall is if it gets content, fat, and decadent.  And while that's bound to happen eventually, it's not likely to take place for a very long time.  Like I said, kneel before Zod.

I don't know if you care, since this is tangential at best.  I'm not being pedantic or picky here, but if you're interested, then this view of the fall of the (western) Roman Empire has been losing ground for a while.  Peter Heather's "The Fall of the Roman Empire" is one example of the view that Rmoe was pretty much at its height, strength-wise when it fell, and actually getting stronger.

The Rome analogy is still informative for the MMO sphere, though: Heather says that the Romans were defeated because their dominance gave a strong example to their neighbours; that technology and techniques leaked and made their competitors (the Germanic tribes) stronger; and that they were defeated less by their major competitor (to the east) than by a large number of smaller, regional players, some of whom had been faster to adopt new technologies and techniques.

[Margalis]

The problem is companies will learn the wrong things.

Here is the average takeaway for most companies:

Spend more.
Because you are spending more, you better play it safe and copy WOW.
Because you are spending more, you better play it safe and hire former SOE guys to make your WOW copy.
Because you are trying to beat WOW, you better launch in the 3-month window you've convinced yourself is crucial to success, preferably well-timed between WOW expansions.


Here are the actual lessons people *should* be learning:

Your game should be fun early.
Make the fun parts more fun.
Remove the parts that aren't fun.
Keep doing this, over and over.
Ship when it is really fun.

This is highly justifiable from an economic perspective:

Iterating over gameplay changes is relatively cheap and does not require much staff, especially early in the process but even late as gameplay changes don't require a lot of totally new systems or content additions.
Launch word-of-mouth is probably the #1 factor in determing the success of a game. Launch timing pales in comparison.

[Ironwood]

In the long term, arrogance and a dilution of talent. The talent loss has actually been going on for a while now. WC3 was worse than Starcraft for example, because they added D&D-style crap like hunting MOBs to what was supposed to be a skill-based competitive game.

In Your Opinion.

Heroes were an interesting evolution in RTS design. Creeping, however, is stupid beyond belief.

And that's your opinion heard also.  I'm still disagreeing.  Warcraft 3 was Miiiiiiiles better than Starcraft (In My Opinion).  The Creep hunting aspect appears in other RTS games, the difference being that it usually only adds extra liberated units to your side.

Not that these opinions matter any.

[Daeven]

And that's your opinion heard also.  I'm still disagreeing.  Warcraft 3 was Miiiiiiiles better than Starcraft (In My Opinion).  The Creep hunting aspect appears in other RTS games, the difference being that it usually only adds extra liberated units to your side.

Not that these opinions matter any.

And now I'll commit heresy:

Both Starcraft and Warcraft were crap. RTS is crap. Stupid, crappy, clickfesty, resource harvesting, tactically stupid, crap.

On Warhammer: Let me know when I can roll up a Scar-Veteran, stomp around on a Carnosaur and rip the still beating heart out of some stupid Skaven / Human / Elfin interloper.

[Yegolev]

I don't know about you all, but I'm waiting for this.

I would totally play that.  I am a sucker for collect-em-all games.

[Jayce]

And that's your opinion heard also.  I'm still disagreeing.  Warcraft 3 was Miiiiiiiles better than Starcraft (In My Opinion).  The Creep hunting aspect appears in other RTS games, the difference being that it usually only adds extra liberated units to your side.

Not that these opinions matter any.

And now I'll commit heresy:

Both Starcraft and Warcraft were crap. RTS is crap. Stupid, crappy, clickfesty, resource harvesting, tactically stupid, crap.

On Warhammer: Let me know when I can roll up a Scar-Veteran, stomp around on a Carnosaur and rip the still beating heart out of some stupid Skaven / Human / Elfin interloper.

It's not heresy, it's opinion.  You don't like RTS, I don't like FPS (any more).  Po-tay-toes, po-tah-toes and all that.   

Let's call the whole thing off.

[Yegolev]

Predicting that the makers of the mildly successful Dark Age of Camelot are about to hit the ball out of the park and score an order of magnitude more subscribers with their second game, while at the same time the biggest success story in the history of the genre suffers an unprecedented collapse?   Yeah, that's stupid.

Oooh, oooh, you forgot to mention the RvR version 3.  No firsthand knowledge, but the executive summary I gather is that they are redoing DAoC RvR with new races, plus removing some suck (PvE).  I predict DAoC RvR except this time you can crash into the homelands rather than just masturbate in the RvR regions.

I didn't mention PotBS earlier because their WoW is actually EVE.  The two things that I am aware they have on EVE is avatar combat and a nautical pirate theme (EVE having space pirates already).  Aside from having three years on PotBS, EVE will also be adding large amounts of content in Q406 and Q107, meaning multiple entire new game systems; more to do for more types of players.  Maybe PotBS will really take off, but I doubt they will do it by competing with EVE directly.

[Daeven]

It's not heresy, it's opinion.  You don't like RTS, I don't like FPS (any more).  Po-tay-toes, po-tah-toes and all that.   

Let's call the whole thing off.

Eleventy Quadrizillion Koreans think Starcraft is the Second Coming. I'll stick with Heresy. ;)

[WayAbvPar]

Both Starcraft and Warcraft were crap. RTS is crap. Stupid, crappy, clickfesty, resource harvesting, tactically stupid, crap.

Preach on, brotha!

[Soln]

unbelievable no one has said, but Spore. 

[Falconeer]

unbelievable no one has said, but Spore. 

I thought about it but I don't like the art direction so far, so I chose to forget it :)

[Venkman]

unbelievable no one has said, but Spore. 

EA.

I don't care who's actually building it, because they never do either.

[Falconeer]

EA.

I don't care who's actually building it, because they never do either.

So this is why you think Warhammer is doomed too? EA?

[WindupAtheist]

Because Mythic's previous game couldn't even keep ahead of billion year old UO in terms of subscriptions, this game looks like more of the very same, and Warhammer isn't THAT valuable of an IP.  Even the Warhammer fans I know of are annoyed that the game isn't based on 40k.

[Raph]

Massive virtual communities have always been the main goal of mmo's. Not online RPG's, and not even games necessarily. They're about the landscape, not the vehicles that drive on them.

Who gives a shit about virtual communities?  We're talking about Blizzard, and Blizzard makes games.  If Raph or whoever runs off to go make the next Myspace, he isn't cleverly plotting to outfox Blizzard by broadening his view.  He's fucking off to an area of development Blizzard doesn't give a shit about.  He's effectively admitting he's been run out of the MMOG genre.

EDIT:  And he probably wasn't pooh-poohing this whole "game" thing back in the early days of SWG development, when it was supposed to be the million-plus subscription game that would take the genre mainstream.

I wasn't? You weren't paying attention.

[Daeven]

and Warhammer isn't THAT valuable of an IP.  Even the Warhammer fans I know of are annoyed that the game isn't based on 40k.

America = 40k
Europe = Fantasy.

You're polling the wrong userbase.

[Falconeer]

and Warhammer isn't THAT valuable of an IP.  Even the Warhammer fans I know of are annoyed that the game isn't based on 40k.

America = 40k
Europe = Fantasy.

You're polling the wrong userbase.

Agreed. Local polls doesn't count no matter how large is your circle of friends, but I don't know personally a single human that prefers 40k over fantasy Warhammer. In fact, I don't know a single human that doesn't think 40k is a pile of crap.

[HaemishM]

And that's your opinion heard also.  I'm still disagreeing.  Warcraft 3 was Miiiiiiiles better than Starcraft (In My Opinion).  The Creep hunting aspect appears in other RTS games, the difference being that it usually only adds extra liberated units to your side.

Not that these opinions matter any.

And now I'll commit heresy:

Both Starcraft and Warcraft were crap. RTS is crap. Stupid, crappy, clickfesty, resource harvesting, tactically stupid, crap.

HAH HAH, you are CORrect, Sir. Diablo was too. Warcraft was ok fun, but Command and Conquer was a better game.

People like to buy crap.

[WindupAtheist]

I wasn't? You weren't paying attention.

Then I stand corrected.  Though I can't help but notice that you (and some others, but you post here, so you) really picked up the volume on this sort of talk after Blizzard walked up and ate all your lunches.  Everyone was content to do the monthly-fee online RPG thing, until Bliz came along and did it on a scale that they knew they would never, ever, ever be able to compete with.  Now suddenly Cokemusic or virtual horsies or what the hell ever, those are the future.  Okay.

[HaemishM]

Now suddenly Cokemusic or virtual horsies or what the hell ever, those are the future.  Okay.

Those are the future of the MMOG MEDIUM. The MMORPG GENRE, a subset of the MMOG MEDIUM, will not be about what those are about. There is more money, more products and more diversity in the medium than in the genre, and no one can have a stranglehold on the medium.

[DataGod]

Yes and there are people far more experianced than you and I wanting to "tap that medium" as it were...

http://www.valleywag.com/tech/myspace/myspace-the-business-of-spam-20-exhaustive-edition-199924.php

Tom is apparently a figure-bobble-head, as if people really believed otherwise....

[WindupAtheist]

The future of massively multiplayer online gaming lies in big-budget subscription-based games.  Those eleventy million people playing Bejeweled for free are never going to pay cash money to a bunch of ragged MMORPG development refugees just because they slapped a chat box and a virtual dollhouse onto the game.  Those eleventy million people are more likely to go back to playing Windows Solitaire while chatting on AIM first.

I'm sure those Myspace guys have huge moneyhats, but Myspace isn't gaming.

[tazelbain]

IRC isn't gaming either but something like plays a huge part current MMOG.

[SnakeCharmer]

The future of massively multiplayer online gaming lies in big-budget subscription-based games.  Those eleventy million people playing Bejeweled for free are never going to pay cash money to a bunch of ragged MMORPG development refugees just because they slapped a chat box and a virtual dollhouse onto the game.  Those eleventy million people are more likely to go back to playing Windows Solitaire while chatting on AIM first.

I'm sure those Myspace guys have huge moneyhats, but Myspace isn't gaming.

But. But. It works in Asiaaaa!!!! And cel phone games!!! They all work in Asia!!!! We should be looking to Asiaaaa for inspiration!!!

I've heard/read a less sarcastic version of that so many times...And if Asia is where dev houses are looking for inspiration for the American market, God help us all.

[Margalis]

SC was obviously better than WC3 in the eyes of consumers. In addition it was better in the eyes of serious RTS players.

The main group of folks that like WC3 over SC are people who are not serious RTS players who liked the D&D aspects of it. I can see that, and I can see why some people liked that better. But overall SC was more popular AND more liked by genre experts.

[Chenghiz]

Warcraft 3 is much more extensible, though. Not many people play vanilla War3, but a lot of people play the various mods like DotA.

[Nija]

TA Spring is the best RTS that you can play these days.

[Raph]

I wasn't? You weren't paying attention.

Then I stand corrected.  Though I can't help but notice that you (and some others, but you post here, so you) really picked up the volume on this sort of talk after Blizzard walked up and ate all your lunches.  Everyone was content to do the monthly-fee online RPG thing, until Bliz came along and did it on a scale that they knew they would never, ever, ever be able to compete with.  Now suddenly Cokemusic or virtual horsies or what the hell ever, those are the future.  Okay.

There's no doubt that I picked up the volume; However, I REALLY picked it up after I left SOE, not when WoW came along.

When I was first made CCO of SOE, one of the first emails I wrote was one that said "Someone is going to make an uberDiku spending more than anyone imagined, with top notch story and art and experience design taken from their expertise in other arenas, and eat everyone's lunch. We should be looking for alternate markets altogether."