Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The state of MMOs 2014 - "A buffet for the masses".

245

Comments

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    I think that a lot of the problem is that it seems like every single AAA MMO (and plenty B MMOs as well) today seems to target the same audience: the ones that only want something easy and simple, preferably a gear focused Pve fantasy MMO.

    But that is just some of the MMOers out there, even if it is the largest group (which it might or might not be) they are all only competing for the exact same crowd. That makes all games very similar and players that actually learn to play well can't pick up something harder, just like players that tires of the same thing can't find much different.

    the genre needs at least to niche itself out somewhat so we get harder and easier games as well as both linear and less linear games. There are plenty of people that can't find a MMO to stick to because there is nothing aimed at their type of players.

    Trying to make a game really fun for all types of players is either impossible or at least close to impossible.

  • AIMonsterAIMonster Member UncommonPosts: 2,059

    I know I'm going a little offtopic here, but:

    Why are some of you hating on indie games so much?  You can have your next triple A game like Call of Duty, and I'll continue enjoying games like Journey, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Transistor, Recettear, Amensia, Fez, LIMBO, World of Goo, Hotline Miami, etc.  As far as advertising and budget goes, when you are paying less than 10 developers to work on a game as opposed to 400+ you typically see in a modern triple A game, then you don't need to sell as many copies of a game so an advertising budget does not become as important.

    I'm willing to bet that the average developer who worked on a game like Bastion made more per year than the average developer who worked on any of the huge triple A titles which is a better measurement of success than sheer number of copies sold.

    There is no need to hate on indie titles.  Sure, there is a lot more crap out there (debatable though, as there is plenty of triple A shovelware too) than triple A titles, but that doesn't mean you don't get a few - well more than a few - gems every once in a while.  I play a lot of both triple A and indie titles, and one of my most anticipated titles this year is No Man's Sky which is an indie game as well as looking forward to a few others like Rime, Shiness, Chasm, and a few others.

  • kaiser3282kaiser3282 Member UncommonPosts: 2,759
    Originally posted by 0effort
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    a few things on this matter.

    1. Gaming is an art form. Measuring the quality of Art by dollars sold is when not even factoring in the affects of advertising is...well...terrible.

    2. Appealing to the masses is an element of the past. Its no longer a requirement to be successful. Now, good developers quit their jobs at the big firms and end up making MORE money as an indie then they would working for a AAA. This was not realistically as possible before digital distrubution became so wide spread. So now we are entering a phase where its easier for a small group of developers to focus on a small group of gamers and still make great money.

    3. If you measure quality of game by the amount of things you can do (which in general is what I do) then indies come out on top by a long shot.

     

    Anything good needs cash or some type of a strong long run investment . Some happened to be exceptions aka Minecraft and they made it through word of mouth. That does not mean Minecraft is the greatest sandbox construction game but Minecraft like World of Warcraft in that time filled a massive void. And as long as there is this massive void, there will be millions of players playing both of them.

    In every crisis or stale period, there are opportunities that whoever is the fastest and the smarter hits gold. If we had Star Citizen the same time with EVE Online, EVE would be nothing than a major niche game. Some MMOrpgs are good at doing that - filling up a hole through a period of crisis or stale in the market. When things get better players will move on. 

    Option is always good but when within any genre the minority dominates that is unhealthy. It is unhealthy because as soon as one MMOrpg fulfills the gap, the rest will get wiped, studios will close down, jobs will be lost and so on and so forth. And there are two huge gaps - making a complete MMOrpg in general and making great MMOrpg according to the theme. If right now someone released the closest thing to a Skyrim multiplayer, ESO Online would go bankrupt.

    Look at ArcheAge. Is it a successful game so far? It is but it will never be a true sandbox game and it will never have millions of subscribers because it never had that intention, not by the developers, but by the other parties (publisher(s), higher ups, ect). Companies right now will not allow for complete MMOs to appear because there is no need to because there is not a good competitive market and there are way too many gaps. Most MMOs are being made out of "opportunitism" - to take advantage -  of a thirst of a niche MMO group. The hardcore Lineage-esque crowd will support ArcheAge until there is a better game than that.

    That is the exact problem of this F2P culture - that as long as it exist, as long as there is no competition you will get unfinished products that cater to the "niche" and will do major updates every 3-5 years (i.e graphics update) because there is no need, no stress to improve when the market has not set a high bar. When the bar is low or average, the situation will not change unless someone steps up his game. That is why you will have ESO Online and SWOTOR being profitable as hell for many, and many years unless things progress.

    It is just a bubble waiting to be burst.

     

     

    The part in red is what i find the most amusing considering most F2P games in the past few years have actually done at least as good of a job, if not better, of pushing out updates such as new areas / content, new classes, new features, etc than nearly every P2P MMO.

    The trend has become put out a hyped up P2P game, rake in the box sales and first few months of subs, then leave the game on life support with a skeleton crew who can barely even manage to implement bug fixes and sure as hell isnt going to actually add new content.

    Just look at WAR. Big hype, big companies, lots of sales. 1 major content update (Land of the Dead) in its 1st year, then nothing (in fact they even removed content as well as cancelled content that was supposed to have been added in) for several years before shutting down. They never even managed to fix a ton of bugs that existed since launch.

    Then you have both games that were built as F2P from scratch, or that have made the P2P > F2P conversion, who are putting out content updates every few months. PoE updating every few months, DDO (even after all these years)updating regularly, Rift with several minor updates as well as  full on expansion like updates. Those are just a few.

    Of course there are a few exceptions, like FFXIV:ARR which has actually been doing well with releasing new content on a regular basis so far. But more and more games have been going the route of WAR. Hype up sales, promise future content to keep people subbed for a few extra months, then when players get sick of waiting for the content that never comes start laying off staff and put it on life support.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by AIMonster

    I know I'm going a little offtopic here, but:

    Why are some of you hating on indie games so much?  You can have your next triple A game like Call of Duty, and I'll continue enjoying games like Journey, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Transistor, Recettear, Amensia, Fez, LIMBO, World of Goo, Hotline Miami, etc.  As far as advertising and budget goes, when you are paying less than 10 developers to work on a game as opposed to 400+ you typically see in a modern triple A game, then you don't need to sell as many copies of a game so an advertising budget does not become as important.

    I'm willing to bet that the average developer who worked on a game like Bastion made more per year than the average developer who worked on any of the huge triple A titles which is a better measurement of success than sheer number of copies sold.

    There is no need to hate on indie titles.  Sure, there is a lot more crap out there (debatable though, as there is plenty of triple A shovelware too) than triple A titles, but that doesn't mean you don't get a few - well more than a few - gems every once in a while.  I play a lot of both triple A and indie titles, and one of my most anticipated titles this year is No Man's Sky which is an indie game as well as looking forward to a few others like Rime, Shiness, Chasm, and a few others.

    Not sure where you got the information in red but you are way off...

     

    http://www.raphkoster.com/gaming/arey.shtml

     

    Expectation for the average AAA team size next generation?
    Around 120 people. Aren't we here already?

    10 : 400 vs 10: 120 doesnt make his point any less valid in this case.

    at a 10 :120 ratio a AAA game 'should' be more than 10 times as good and bring in more than 10 times as much money for all people invested.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    lol..

    now that logic was funny.

    why do they not sell more? BECAUSE THE MASSES DONT KNOW THEY EXIST..

    why do the masses not know they exist? BECAUSE THEY DONT ADVERTISE.

    For AAA games advertising is more important than the game itself. this is why they spend more money on adds then they do game development. Advertising makes a huge difference.

    This is wrong. Most of the past 10 years AAA MMO developer/publisher only spend a fraction on marketing compared to their development budget. Usually it equals to 10 - 30% of the game development budget ( as a seperate budget not taken from the dev budget). Yes 10-30% is in fact  already quite a lot to market an AAA MMO with dev bugdets around 30-50 Million $US and reaching questionable levels but its far from as much as development costs. Of course it feels wasteful to the gamer, but it works and finally it will probably benefit you as a player as well if you game is doing well thanks to some ads luring in new player.

    The widespread impression of a much bolder sums spent on marketing such as yours exists because in the West the the few dominant big publishing houses going for the massmarket are spending ridiculously large sums on marketing.

    Blizzard is one of these companies who despite the equaly bold denial of fanbase rely very much on the constant massive and forced hype going on around their products reaching far beyond your little mmo fansites beta invite ad and their marketing budget tends to equal 80-90% of their development budget going up and down with new releases. EA is another hype machine with similar figures on the balance sheets. These hype machines are however just bad apples and exceptions. Not every burger selling restaurant is rolling out ads on the Time Square and Piccadilly Circus.

    proove it

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by AIMonster

    I know I'm going a little offtopic here, but:

    Why are some of you hating on indie games so much?  You can have your next triple A game like Call of Duty, and I'll continue enjoying games like Journey, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Transistor, Recettear, Amensia, Fez, LIMBO, World of Goo, Hotline Miami, etc.  As far as advertising and budget goes, when you are paying less than 10 developers to work on a game as opposed to 400+ you typically see in a modern triple A game, then you don't need to sell as many copies of a game so an advertising budget does not become as important.

    I'm willing to bet that the average developer who worked on a game like Bastion made more per year than the average developer who worked on any of the huge triple A titles which is a better measurement of success than sheer number of copies sold.

    There is no need to hate on indie titles.  Sure, there is a lot more crap out there (debatable though, as there is plenty of triple A shovelware too) than triple A titles, but that doesn't mean you don't get a few - well more than a few - gems every once in a while.  I play a lot of both triple A and indie titles, and one of my most anticipated titles this year is No Man's Sky which is an indie game as well as looking forward to a few others like Rime, Shiness, Chasm, and a few others.

    Not sure where you got the information in red but you are way off...

     

    http://www.raphkoster.com/gaming/arey.shtml

     

    Expectation for the average AAA team size next generation?
    Around 120 people. Aren't we here already?

    10 : 400 vs 10: 120 doesnt make his point any less valid in this case.

    at a 10 :120 ratio a AAA game 'should' be more than 10 times as good and bring in more than 10 times as much money for all people invested.

    Ok I stopped replying to you for a reason...but if you want to reply to me i will gladly engage you.

    AAA "should" be more than 10 times as good and bring in more than 10 times as much money 

    I am pretty sure that games like WoW, Mass effect franchise, Dragon Age franchise, Madden Franchise, and  a ton of other AAA have made more than 10 times their indie competition.  

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    Well if it was a linear relationship between the amount of devs the quality of a project and the amount of money earned you would be right.

    Since that is a completely ridiculous and totally unsupported position you are completely wrong
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Well if it was a linear relationship between the amount of devs the quality of a project and the amount of money earned you would be right.

    Since that is a completely ridiculous and totally unsupported position you are completely wrong

    the problem is comparing me again a team of lets say 20 as the same playing field is silly.

    1 vs 20 on the football field would be an easy bet...but you disagree?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    It's more because we don't care why you like them better. That would be a fruitless argument about tastes
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by allday88

    Not sure where you got the information in red but you are way off...

     

    http://www.raphkoster.com/gaming/arey.shtml

     

    Expectation for the average AAA team size next generation?
    Around 120 people. Aren't we here already?

    10 : 400 vs 10: 120 doesnt make his point any less valid in this case.

    at a 10 :120 ratio a AAA game 'should' be more than 10 times as good and bring in more than 10 times as much money for all people invested.

    Ok I stopped replying to you for a reason...but if you want to reply to me i will gladly engage you.

    AAA "should" be more than 10 times as good and bring in more than 10 times as much money 

    I am pretty sure that games like WoW, Mass effect franchise, Dragon Age franchise, Madden Franchise, and  a ton of other AAA have made more than 10 times their indie competition.  

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I dont care what you like.  I was not replying to what you like.  You said "BRING IN MORE THAN 10 TIMES AS MUCH MONEY FOR ALL PEOPLE INVESTED"  I understand you don't like to talk about facts but if you want to engage me in a conversation please stay on topic.  

     

    So which one of the games i listed did the indie competition come within 10X of what the AAA brought in?  Now if you are going to do your change the subject please dont reply, I will take that as you cant back up what you said.    

    my bad I missed that.

    your right though. I do not equate income with quallty so how much they make really is mute point to me unless you are talking about economics

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    Once again I'm saying there is not a linear relationship between the number of people, the quality and the revenue.

    Bad analogies should not be discussed
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • DamonVileDamonVile Member UncommonPosts: 4,818
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    Everywhere in world good, better best is subjective....not just here. Your issue seems to be that you can't handle other people not agreeing with you. That somehow one opinion can be more right than anothers and that there are facts to prove it right.

    Your feature list would be a list of things important to you. If someone didn't care about the items on it or listed them in a different priority they probably wont agree with you.

     

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    Everywhere in world good, better best is subjective....not just here. Your issue seems to be that you can't handle other people not agreeing with you. That somehow one opinion can be more right than anothers and that there are facts to prove it right.

    Your feature list would be a list of things important to you. If someone didn't care about the items on it or listed them in a different priority they probably wont agree with you.

     

    no...people are stating that AAA are better as a fact and are wanting me to say that me thinking indies is better is subjective.

    that is my core issue here.

    if everyone asked of themselves the same parameters they asked of me I would be very happy

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • DamonVileDamonVile Member UncommonPosts: 4,818
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    Everywhere in world good, better best is subjective....not just here. Your issue seems to be that you can't handle other people not agreeing with you. That somehow one opinion can be more right than anothers and that there are facts to prove it right.

    Your feature list would be a list of things important to you. If someone didn't care about the items on it or listed them in a different priority they probably wont agree with you.

     

    no...people are stating that AAA are better as a fact and are wanting me to say that me thinking indies is better is subjective.

    that is my core issue here.

    if everyone asked of themselves the same parameters they asked of me I would be very happy

     

    There are no facts that would let them win. You trying to argue it with them make you lose.

  • ShaighShaigh Member EpicPosts: 2,142

    F2P popularity has nothing to do with the state of MMO's in 2014. The reason for this is games like tera, archeage, tsw, rift and swtor all started as P2P, f2p games like planetside 2 and neverwinter, and b2p like gw2 started its development before f2p became a big deal, and ff14arr, wildstar and elder scrolls online were always intended as P2P.

     

    It wont be until games like eq next, the repopulation and wh40k:EC and many others gets released that we will see the real effect that f2p popularity has on game design. However, when it comes to eq next its gw2 that has the biggest impact on the games design.

    Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    lol..

    now that logic was funny.

    why do they not sell more? BECAUSE THE MASSES DONT KNOW THEY EXIST..

    why do the masses not know they exist? BECAUSE THEY DONT ADVERTISE.

    For AAA games advertising is more important than the game itself. this is why they spend more money on adds then they do game development. Advertising makes a huge difference.

    This is wrong. Most of the past 10 years AAA MMO developer/publisher only spend a fraction on marketing compared to their development budget. Usually it equals to 10 - 30% of the game development budget ( as a seperate budget not taken from the dev budget). Yes 10-30% is in fact  already quite a lot to market an AAA MMO with dev bugdets around 30-50 Million $US and reaching questionable levels but its far from as much as development costs. Of course it feels wasteful to the gamer, but it works and finally it will probably benefit you as a player as well if you game is doing well thanks to some ads luring in new player.

    The widespread impression of a much bolder sums spent on marketing such as yours exists because in the West the the few dominant big publishing houses going for the massmarket are spending ridiculously large sums on marketing.

    Blizzard is one of these companies who despite the equaly bold denial of fanbase rely very much on the constant massive and forced hype going on around their products reaching far beyond your little mmo fansites beta invite ad and their marketing budget tends to equal 80-90% of their development budget going up and down with new releases. EA is another hype machine with similar figures on the balance sheets. These hype machines are however just bad apples and exceptions. Not every burger selling restaurant is rolling out ads on the Time Square and Piccadilly Circus.

    proove it

    I point at the public financial reports released by almost every relevant AAA developer including private held ones like CCCP of the past 10 years. Usually found after 3 second of typing  "company name + IR" into google, click on the first or second result and pick a report and then scrolling to the cost of sales or expenses page.

    The first place where everyone would look if he honestly would bother about these figures.

    please provide links of marketing budgets compared to dev budgets. I will provide you with an easy hint.

    Look up GTA 5 and post the link proving that its around 10-30%

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Once again I'm saying there is not a linear relationship between the number of people, the quality and the revenue.

    Bad analogies should not be discussed

    its your choice to believe that a team of 1 vs a team of 20 doesnt impact the outcome. Its your choice to not want to talk about it.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • AIMonsterAIMonster Member UncommonPosts: 2,059
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by AIMonster

    I know I'm going a little offtopic here, but:

    Why are some of you hating on indie games so much?  You can have your next triple A game like Call of Duty, and I'll continue enjoying games like Journey, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Transistor, Recettear, Amensia, Fez, LIMBO, World of Goo, Hotline Miami, etc.  As far as advertising and budget goes, when you are paying less than 10 developers to work on a game as opposed to 400+ you typically see in a modern triple A game, then you don't need to sell as many copies of a game so an advertising budget does not become as important.

    I'm willing to bet that the average developer who worked on a game like Bastion made more per year than the average developer who worked on any of the huge triple A titles which is a better measurement of success than sheer number of copies sold.

    There is no need to hate on indie titles.  Sure, there is a lot more crap out there (debatable though, as there is plenty of triple A shovelware too) than triple A titles, but that doesn't mean you don't get a few - well more than a few - gems every once in a while.  I play a lot of both triple A and indie titles, and one of my most anticipated titles this year is No Man's Sky which is an indie game as well as looking forward to a few others like Rime, Shiness, Chasm, and a few others.

    Not sure where you got the information in red but you are way off...

     

    http://www.raphkoster.com/gaming/arey.shtml

     

    Expectation for the average AAA team size next generation?
    Around 120 people. Aren't we here already?

    That's an article from 2005.  AAA budget games have gotten significantly larger.  Granted I was including publishers/QA, contract workers (such as voice actors), and basing it off MMOs mostly (which have significantly larger teams typically).  Even if the number if the 120 number is more accurate, it doesn't diminish the point I was trying to make.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,601
    I didn't say it doesn't impact the outcome. I said it is not a linear relationship.

    Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by AIMonster
    Originally posted by allday88
    Originally posted by AIMonster

    I know I'm going a little offtopic here, but:

    Why are some of you hating on indie games so much?  You can have your next triple A game like Call of Duty, and I'll continue enjoying games like Journey, Dungeon Defenders, Bastion, Transistor, Recettear, Amensia, Fez, LIMBO, World of Goo, Hotline Miami, etc.  As far as advertising and budget goes, when you are paying less than 10 developers to work on a game as opposed to 400+ you typically see in a modern triple A game, then you don't need to sell as many copies of a game so an advertising budget does not become as important.

    I'm willing to bet that the average developer who worked on a game like Bastion made more per year than the average developer who worked on any of the huge triple A titles which is a better measurement of success than sheer number of copies sold.

    There is no need to hate on indie titles.  Sure, there is a lot more crap out there (debatable though, as there is plenty of triple A shovelware too) than triple A titles, but that doesn't mean you don't get a few - well more than a few - gems every once in a while.  I play a lot of both triple A and indie titles, and one of my most anticipated titles this year is No Man's Sky which is an indie game as well as looking forward to a few others like Rime, Shiness, Chasm, and a few others.

    Not sure where you got the information in red but you are way off...

     

    http://www.raphkoster.com/gaming/arey.shtml

     

    Expectation for the average AAA team size next generation?
    Around 120 people. Aren't we here already?

    That's an article from 2005.  AAA budget games have gotten significantly larger.  Granted I was including publishers/QA, contract workers (such as voice actors), and basing it off MMOs mostly (which have significantly larger teams typically).  Even if the number if the 120 number is more accurate, it doesn't diminish the point I was trying to make.

    Oh you took off what i was replying too...thats ok i will still post it.  

     

    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/189893/Industry_in_flux_What_we_learned_from_Game_Developers_2012_Salary_Survey.php

     

    Indies still struggling. Despite the fact that indie devs are receiving more attention than ever before, the average indie still isn't very well-compensated; individual indie developers averaged $23,130 (down $420 from 2011), and members of indie teams averaged $19,487.

     

    Btw the average Dev is around $83K  so yeah indie devs do not make more the AAA devs.  

    that is most likely the best article every posted here on MMORPG (in my view).

    I would like to see them drill down a bit deeper and look at the income for the indie creator vs what they could make as a AAA developer. Reason is I have this unprooven running theory that the good developers might be able to make more money as a start up indie then they could as a AAA developer. That is different from the people they hire.

    Having said that, its a very fair and eye opening article

     

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
     

    lol..

    now that logic was funny.

    why do they not sell more? BECAUSE THE MASSES DONT KNOW THEY EXIST..

    why do the masses not know they exist? BECAUSE THEY DONT ADVERTISE.

    For AAA games advertising is more important than the game itself. this is why they spend more money on adds then they do game development. Advertising makes a huge difference.

    I know about most indie games, I don't play them because so far they're not making the types of games I'm interested in. I doubt many people that frequent gaming sites have never heard of games like worm etc. They still don't seem to be playing them. So lack of advertising obviously isn't the only reason these indie games don't appeal to the masses.

    advertising is a huge business and the reason it is is because it works. There is much more to advertising then just making you aware that a game exists. There is also product loyalty manipulation and things of that sort. There is also a lot of money being spent in areas that you are not directly even aware of. 

    I think (although I dont know for sure) that most people who shy away from indies do it strickly because they BELIEVE the games should be better if they are higher budget or because they believe that they should play them. More so then actually playing them and giving them a fair shake. Now granted this is my assumption, not factual by any stretch. Part of why I beleive this is because I used to believe if.

     

    Clearly advertising works or they wouldn't spend what they do on it.  But I don't think just advertising something makes it a huge hit. WoW for example isn't popular because of it's ads on TV, it's popular because of what the game offers. 

    I'll agree with you that many people don't try indie games and advertising would change that, but keeping them in the game after is 100% on the game itself. That is where they lose me. So in your original statement that they're not popular because of a lack of advertising...I'll still have to disagree. Like others have posted. Even without it a good game will grow it's population. Not many indie's can make that claim.

    If advertisement wasn't necessary, even for an existing popular product, then Pepsi, Marlboro and Ford are wasting a ton of money. 

    You have a lot of things at play with advertising. Awareness is just one of them, and awareness costs a lot of money. Organic growth of a game's population, flukes and anomalies aside, needs help, and advertising is a huge part of that help. Another thing is that when people see ads over and over for something, it reinforces with them - "Hey, I'm seeing it a lot. It must be good/popular/fun." Each one of you that just said to yourself "I don't fall for that" more than likely is one of the people most influenced by it. 

    When it comes to online games or games where a community is necessary for its success, ongoing advertising helps to bring more people in. "Build it and they will come" is a neat line for a movie but it isn't how things work in the real world. The developer is going to constantly combat churn, and acquisition of new people is crucial to that. 

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    No one asks you why because it's obvious why. Indie games tend to hit at beats less struck by larger more mass market offerings. They're also less tied down to a set tried and true feature list. This is no secret only you are privy to.

    This is the part, based on your posts, you don't seem to get though. AAA games aren't only more popular because of marketing. They're more popular in a lot of cases because regardless of what goes into a feature list, the features there are more often than not represented at a higher production value. Especially if talking about the PC or MMO platform.

    The biggest reason behind this in the past was that the talent in those producing said titles. Was of a higher caliber than typical indie projects, as most indies were freshman to the field or hobbyists. This is starting to change though, with many from the AAA market starting up smaller studios to work on more personalized projects. This is good for all gamers IMO. 

     

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • aesperusaesperus Member UncommonPosts: 5,135

    Interesting...

    So the OP opens with a statement about how 'sales do not determine the quality of a game', to then complain about business models.

    Bit of a contradiction there, and that kind of sets the precedence for why the OP is wrong. F2P, B2P, Subscriptions, these are all business models. They don't affect the quality of a game, but they do affect how a company plans future updates. Subscription models seem more reliable on paper, and to an extent you have more of a sense of how much revenue you will have each month (up front). Where as F2P has a predictable target model of 'we will get an average of this much per month, with X setup', and tends to last more long-term.

    It still amazes me how attached people have gotten to one business model or another. In the sense that people actually believe that it not only affects, but determines whether or not a game CAN be good. You can plug your eyes and choose to believe otherwise, but the facts show no correlation between the two.

    Good games come from good design philosophies, and developers you trust. Also the simpler a game is, the more likely it is to be 'good' and the more accessible it becomes (the more popular). The more complex a game is, the more potential it has to become great, but the more likely it is to be mediocre / bad / etc. Complex games also tend to have a harder time correcting mistakes.

    As for business model, you can hate one and love another, but that usually becomes a secondary factor. Ask yourself this 'how many MMOs would I still enjoy, if the pricing model changed from sub - f2p or visa versa. And there's your answer. Most F2P games you claim to hate, you would still dislike as a sub game. Most sub games you claim to love, you would probably still love with a f2p model. The only exception is the number of companies that simply don't understand how to properly implement a f2p model (EA looking at you).

  • doodphacedoodphace Member UncommonPosts: 1,858
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD
    Originally posted by Sukiyaki
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    lol..

    now that logic was funny.

    why do they not sell more? BECAUSE THE MASSES DONT KNOW THEY EXIST..

    why do the masses not know they exist? BECAUSE THEY DONT ADVERTISE.

    For AAA games advertising is more important than the game itself. this is why they spend more money on adds then they do game development. Advertising makes a huge difference.

    This is wrong. Most of the past 10 years AAA MMO developer/publisher only spend a fraction on marketing compared to their development budget. Usually it equals to 10 - 30% of the game development budget ( as a seperate budget not taken from the dev budget). Yes 10-30% is in fact  already quite a lot to market an AAA MMO with dev bugdets around 30-50 Million $US and reaching questionable levels but its far from as much as development costs. Of course it feels wasteful to the gamer, but it works and finally it will probably benefit you as a player as well if you game is doing well thanks to some ads luring in new player.

    The widespread impression of a much bolder sums spent on marketing such as yours exists because in the West the the few dominant big publishing houses going for the massmarket are spending ridiculously large sums on marketing.

    Blizzard is one of these companies who despite the equaly bold denial of fanbase rely very much on the constant massive and forced hype going on around their products reaching far beyond your little mmo fansites beta invite ad and their marketing budget tends to equal 80-90% of their development budget going up and down with new releases. EA is another hype machine with similar figures on the balance sheets. These hype machines are however just bad apples and exceptions. Not every burger selling restaurant is rolling out ads on the Time Square and Piccadilly Circus.

    proove it

    I point at the public financial reports released by almost every relevant AAA developer including private held ones like CCCP of the past 10 years. Usually found after 3 second of typing  "company name + IR" into google, click on the first or second result and pick a report and then scrolling to the cost of sales or expenses page.

    The first place where everyone would look if he honestly would bother about these figures.

    please provide links of marketing budgets compared to dev budgets. I will provide you with an easy hint.

    Look up GTA 5 and post the link proving that its around 10-30%

    Only because I'm bored..

    Development = $137.5 million

    Marketing = 109.3 million

    I am pretty sure that's well over 10-30%. To be fair, he did say "AAA MMO Developer/Publisher", which would negate your GTA V example, unless of course you consider GTA Online an "MMO".

    Its hard to read the rest of his post though. if its for a game he likes, its "marketing"...if its for a game he doesn't like, its "constanty forced hype, hype machine" etc etc.

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by SEANMCAD

    here at MMORPG forums 'good' 'better' and 'best' is SUBJECTIVE. and with that to me indie games are considerably better than AAA and I have played both. 

    I have noticed in these debates about indie vs AAA that nobody seems to want to ask WHY I think indies are better. Are people afraid of the feature list?

    No one asks you why because it's obvious why. Indie games tend to hit at beats less struck by larger more mass market offerings. They're also less tied down to a set tried and true feature list. This is no secret only you are privy to.

    This is the part, based on your posts, you don't seem to get though. AAA games aren't only more popular because of marketing. They're more popular in a lot of cases because regardless of what goes into a feature list, the features there are more often than not represented at a higher production value. Especially if talking about the PC or MMO platform.

    The biggest reason behind this in the past was that the talent in those producing said titles. Was of a higher caliber than typical indie projects, as most indies were freshman to the field or hobbyists. This is starting to change though, with many from the AAA market starting up smaller studios to work on more personalized projects. This is good for all gamers IMO. 

     

     

    somewhat acceptable answer although it doesnt address the more specific reasons why I like indies but then again the conversation is not about me in all fairness.

    With that said I am confused by this one statement...'he features there are more often than not represented at a higher production value' exactly what do you mean by production value?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

Sign In or Register to comment.