The REAL Problem Nobody is Talking About: Service Cancellation

Beatnik59

Originally posted by jimdandy26

Originally posted by Beatnik59

Originally posted by jimdandy26

I heartily disagree. There is a rather large gap between putting forth illusion as you put it and not reminding players at every turn. You are describing it much more malicously than it really is. Buying another form of currency for example is not there for obsufcation purposes (though it may provide that as a benefit) but to get around laws that force refunds. Its simple protection for them. You know up front that you are buying a digital good. You are paying for entertainment, just like with every other media service. You are left with the ideas, friendships, and memories of that experience, again, just like every other media service. Waxing lyrically about it will not change it.

I'm not sure exactly what there is to disagree with, except that--perhaps--I'm bringing up issues that make people around here uncomfortable.

Neither you, nor I, dispute the basics: that people spend time and money in online games, online games get taken away from the player for any reason the publisher sees fit, leaving people with nothing to show for it.

Now I guess if you want to "wax lyrically" about it you can say that people have the memories of all the great things they paid for, but are now gone.  But that's rather weak, isn't it?  It's saying that a person shouldn't care if their car disappears, because they'll always have the good memories of the car.  But the person who has good memories of the car doesn't want the memories.  He wants the car.  The memories of the car are no substitute for the car.

Of course, this digital stuff isn't like a car, but this digital stuff isn't like a resturant (the example brought up before) either.  Like you said, we buy "digital goods," but what does this mean?  The best real-world correlation I have found is that a digital good is like a casino token: something that works within the casino, but has no use outside of it.  Buy it and use it fast, though, because once the owner blows the casino up, those who buy casino tokens are SOL.

If it's entertainment we buy, what kind of entertainment is it?  Well, you can rent a 90 minute feature on Netflix.  You know it's 90 minutes, you know when it'll be over, and if you want to watch it again, you can watch it again.  But a digital "thing?"  It might be available for two decades or two months, whenever the service provider wants to yank the service away.

Again, probably the closest analogy is the casino: you take your chances.  Just like in the casino, and like you implied with the virtual currency, the house protects itself.  It'll always win, but the user?  "Let the buyer beware." 

Now there was a post on this thread, a few pages ago, which asked if this is a worthwhile hobby, compared to...say...horseback riding or model trains.  And probably the best I can say is that it has a recreational value the same as, or slightly better than, a trip to the casino.  It's immersive.  It works on your senses powerfully.  But it is also a place where you can get into deep trouble if you go in there with low impulse control, without fully realizing what it is.

Because--perhaps sooner than you think--"all those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."  Just like in Vegas, you buy the illusions, but you end up with nothing.  Given the similarity between Vegas and online gaming, is it any wonder why Zynga is wanting to branch out into online gambling?  MMORPGs are pretty much there.

I disagree because you have grown attached to digital products that you should not have grown attached to. Much like the lonely boy who grows attached to a stripper. Your subscription only ever buys you access to the server, and any additional money payed is increase your enjoyment there-in, and only have the value that you yourself deem them to have. That is the entire reason why those are optional. You cannot compare them with things like cars because beside the fact its physical ownership versus renting, cars provide far more than just entertainment.

So you don't disagree with my posts.  Frankly, I'm trying to figure out exactly what I say that you don't say, besides the accusation that I've "grown attached to digital products," which is itself really rich.  (How can one accuse someone of growing attached to something when the person he accuses keeps reiterating how pointless it is to grow attached to the something?)

Except, perhaps, that I am right...and it bothers you for some reason.  Do you have a stake in this business, by chance?

Four0Six

Originally posted by Beatnik59

That's what we have now, Eyelolled.

But here's the thing that's really confusing.  If these games are, as you said, "not a commodity," how is it that the industry has been, for the better part of a decade, "commoditizing" them in the form of offering items for sale and services?

They do it because they wish to create the illusion that the player has a sense of ownership of something.  But this sense of ownership is, in the end, highly dependent on the perception that the game will last.  As soon as the "magic circle" is broken, that the things people pay money for will disappear, people don't throw money into the thing as readily.  A $5.00 jacket for your characters looks like a good deal if you have it forever.  It looks like a really dumb thing to do if you only "own" it for two months on a lame duck service.

I don't think these games are marketed as "entertainment," or places you visit, like Disneyland.  They aren't developed to slam them in one night like a prostitute.  They are marketed as things you live with, like a steady girlfriend or a wife.  They are places you can live.  And the reason I say this is because they encourage behaviors that only make sense if players are confident they'll have access to the game in perpetuity.

These games offer choices in how a person should spend his or her time.  There are activities, like building and decorating a guild headquarters, that require the individual to forego content.  These activities take a considerable amount of time and expertise.  But you only take the time to learn these things and do these things on the presumption that you'll have the time to do all the other content.  And you could extend this to many activities, like receiving a matching set of some loot, or helping guild mates.  You only do these things under the presumption that the game will last a long time.  You don't do these activities if it all goes away in a few months.

Now the reason why I say the longevity issue is a problem is that it is starting to affect how players are looking at these games.  For example, I know of a lot of people who are rather skeptical about Wildstar right now because of what NCSoft did with City of Heroes.  And I can't say I blame them.  Why throw good money and good time into something that might go *poof* for reasons not under your control?

That's a big problem.  It's one thing if players are avoiding your game because they are afraid they'll like it too little.  It's another thing if players are avoiding your game because they are afraid they'll like it too much, and it'll be taken away. 

 

 Not me, no skeptics here. Why be skeptical? No reason, since I wont play another NC game again.

WereLlama

I think the idea that a game will only be perpetually hosted if it is 'successful' will speed up the tipping point  of failure.

Which, to me, means players will be super sensitive to all news and follow the flock out (and quit) if the game has the following two characteristics:

1. Is so big that it is expensive to maintain.

2. Bad reviews

If both are true, people will soon quit immediately and not invest, and maybe not invest at all unless proven otherwise.

This leads me to a possible future where almost all MMOs start tiny (low cost to maintain) and slowly grow their playerbase, like EVE / Tibia did.

-Blitz