Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

If given $100 million,you think you could produce a AAA mmo?

1246789

Comments

  • YalexyYalexy BerlinPosts: 1,053Member Uncommon

    Wouldn't even require that much. I'd say that 10 million is sufficient allready to produce a AAA-MMO.

    The problem why alot of MMOs these days are crap is, that the publishers and investors want to see the game making profits to refinance their investments within the first year.

    I'd emphasize on RPG and grouping instead of developing alot of soloable content. there wouldn't be levels, so no leveling content would be required.
    Basically I'd try to do something similar to EvE Online and go more for a niche-crowd right form the beginning instead of aiming for millions of subscribers as that guarantees, that you make to many compromises.

    Think of a MMORPG along the lines of Shadowrun (the P&P). You create a character and you would play this character without leveling up or without gaining any form of XP. The only character-progression would be to amass riches and some equipment, but there would be a good amount of raids and dungeons, territorial warfare, crafting and trading, where you could take part from the second you enter the game for the first time.
    Let's say I've spent 25 million to develop the game, that leaves me with 75 million to constantly develop new raids/dungeons (released every two month) and to keep the system running.

    Oh, and there would be permadeath in some cases, but that wouldn't be that harsh, as you don't need to level up your character first and your new character would be the legal heir of your former character, getting alot of the money and the equipment left over :)

    Developers aren't the problem really imho, but the publishers and investors, who are greedy b*tards not allowing the devs to make good games anymore.
    There's a reason why old games like WoW, EvE, DAoC, UO, EQ, L2 etc were so successful for long periods of time allthough they were all developed with less then 20 million to begin with... back then the publishers and investors weren't the ones deciding.

  • wrightstufwrightstuf Carlsbad, CAPosts: 655Member Uncommon
    No, but i'd definately be set for hookers and blow.
  • IncomparableIncomparable KuwaitPosts: 872Member

    Yes, i could.

    there are limitations to imagination such as engine capabilities. But once a person understands those limitations then they know what they can make.

    So that question is relative to really the competence in developing an engine. Creativity is a gift, but a lot of people have it, and that means a lot of smart people could make a tripple a mmo with the right engine.

    “Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble”

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    People have made aaa mmos for a lot less, both daoc and eve were around the $5m mark.
  • ArakaziArakazi OxfordPosts: 889Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    Having many RL friends in the game industry (some ex and some current large AAA studio employees), I remember us talking about this scenario, except that the budget was $150mil.

    Long story short, about half would not make a game, the rest would but not a single expensive game, but many smaller games - because given a 4-6 year Dev cycle you are designing a game for a future market that is unpredictable is far too risky. Why put all eggs in one basket that the players in 5 years may not like?

    And 5 years from now is huge, because the tech is changing at an accelerated rate, the difference from 2013 to 2018 will be far more drastic than then last five years.

    I am in the same boat, instead of risking it all on a single game i'd make ten 1-2mil dollar games with short Dev cycles, and one of those has a much higher potential of getting some marker share than betting it all on a single game.

    I would also make sure that some of those game were mobile/cross platform as limiting a game to a single platform is not a good financial move.

    I have a feeling that the days of large AAA 100mil+ budget games are numbered, far too risky for future market.

    What are these large tech changes? To be honest, I think the rate of growth of processing power has slowed down in the last 5 years. The only major tech change I have seen is the growth of mobile and tablet devices.

  • HappyFunBallHappyFunBall Boston, MAPosts: 225Member

    OMG yes.  I don't believe there's a single AAA sandbox right now like Ultima Online (or in general).  I've tried every one that's out there, and most of them, to be honest, SUCK.  Most of the so-called sandbox games out there now aren't even close to AAA titles.  The graphics and gameplay sucks, they are full of bugs, let alone completely unfinished, unpolished, stable, etc. (good example, Mortal Online.  What a piece of trash).

    There are WAY too many theme-parks, and most are exactly the same with just a new coat of graphics.  None of them have any exploration.  It's just a fairly linear romp from one predefined area to the next that puts me to sleep...The monsters are ALWAYS in the exact same place, especially all those instances which are identical each time you run them, which I find mindless and boring.  Then there's that rush to "end-game" which I absolutely hate, nor understand.. but I guess if the game offers nothing else, that's what players do. 

    Don't even get me started on the never ending stream of Asian-made games that almost identical in design and gameplay, just with slightly different graphics.  Most are unpolished and the gameplay mechanics are terrible.  Talk about mindless cookie-cutter garbage.  Bleah.  Wow, another game that lets be choose between tank/fighter, thief/ranger, priest, and mage.  What a new concept!  By all means, keep churning out games like this over and over again.  Zzzzzzz.

    I'd bring back an open world game like Ultima Online, with a 2013+ engine, graphics, sound, etc, and add dynamic events like Rift and other games have added.  There's a reason why UO is STILL running.

    I'd add a real sense of danger as well, that most new games lack completely.  For example, I tried Neverwinter and found it completely mindless and challenge-less.  I liked GW2 more, mostly for the exploration aspects, but again, it's easy-mode.  You can solo most of the outside areas, if not all, and I never ever felt like I was in danger of dying, and if I did, I didn't care because there's almost no penalty for it.

    Most games now have PVE just to get your toon ready for PVP.  I think that's a terrible design.  I mean, awful.  The PVE should be a great alternative to PVP that people can choose to enjoy over PVP, instead of just using it to get strong enough for PVP.  A player should also be able to do both, where both types of play are challenging.  True coop gameplay is great too, and most games now focus on soloing, with groups only needed for instances.  Puke.

    I'd create a living, breathing world, where you can do anything you want, with the main focus put back on exploration and discovery, which is almost never the same twice.  I grew up on RPG's that let you explore and find new areas, monsters, treasure, etc.  I can't find a single AAA game that offers that (maybe Eve, but I didn't care for it.  Way too boring for me).

    I'd remove mindless ganker/griefer pvp completely, but allow pvp (I won't elaborate how right now, but I have many thoughts about this in mind).  You can't go around the world and beat the shit out of a baby and then take it's pacifier without prison, a mob of people ripping you apart, and so on.  Also, there's no gain in the real world from beating up a child, then stealing every worthless item they have on them... so, I'm not sure why this is allowed in any video game.  I'd allow players to be somewhat immoral, but I'd introduce morality systems, like reputation, bounties, even npcs that hunt you down like the animal you are, that have been done before, but never implemented very well.  I did always like a criminal element in games, which could even have their own town, hideout, etc.

    I'd make herds of creatures roaming the countryside.  They would vigorously protect their young ones, just like in the real world.  The creatures would vary wildly, again, like UO.  Some could use teamwork to defeat you, poison you, immobilize you, and even hunt, which I NEVER see in video games.  I'd like to roam around the countryside being stalked by creatures or humanoids that pick up your scent, track you in other ways, etc.  A real sense of danger.

    I'd allow intelligent humanoid npcs to build forts, structures, traps, communities, that you could either attack, steal from, barter with, etc, including reputation systems, faction building, etc.  If you worked for a certain village, cult, etc, you could get new skills found nowhere else in the game, get an npc from the villiage to help you or work for you, etc.

    I'd also add destructible environments than can be repaired by enemies, players, etc.  I see NONE of this in games.  I'd like to be able to take over a fort with fellow players, and take control of it.  I'd like to see mobs do the same thing.  You could visit a fort being attacked by NPC's fighting for control of it, and each time you go there, it could be abandoned, owned my different intelligent races, etc.

    These are just a few of my ideas.  I don't want to spill them all. ;)

    I'll probably never see a game like this.  So sad.

     

  • nakkinakki KauniainenPosts: 56Member

    My game would be generic mmorpg except I would implement atleast these features in it:

    - No bop or boe items

    - some low level items would be useful at higher level

    - some low level items would be extremely imbalanced to their level

    - some items would require only attributes(str,dex,int etc.) and no levels.

    - No automatic character attributes. You have to place them yourself and make choices.

    - attributes determines what kind of character you are and which skills and items you could learn/wear

    - every "class" would have some extremely useful active skills that gets unlocked at certain level so that people would enjoy reaching those milestones. (for example vanilla wow had mostly boring skills for many of the classes compared to what  I was used to having with earlier mmorpgs)

    - passive skills could be leveled up and they wouldn't be meaningless(swords skill, magic, bows. etc) . These would be mini milestones with active skills and character levels. Some items requires passive skill level.

    -tradeskills(cooking, harvesting, mining, building lots of lots of things,all kinds of crafting). I would include lots of customization possibilites through crafting. mounts could be replaced with crafted steam cars which would be very expensive. Yeah something like that.

    -  atleast one zone would be exclusively for low and mid level characters where there will be both pvp and pve content with increased drop rates

    - whatever needed to have player based economy without too much inflation

    - some very rare and useful drops you could find with small group or alone.

    - wow style pve progression with some mediocre to very hard instances at max level just ilke in vanilla wow

    - guilds could earn pve and pvp points. best guilds in server would get added benefits. these points could be lost depending if a guild starts to function badly in these activities.

    - first person view possible

    - no tab targeting

    - harsh penalties for dying in some zones

    - alignment system

    yup sounds good

  • PWN_FACEPWN_FACE SeoulPosts: 670Member
    Originally posted by kabitoshin

    What we need is multiple niche ideas targeting a certain audiences instead of making a game to please millions. These games were at its best when they weren't trying to re create the success of others.

    Yes. This is exactly what I wanted to say. But kabitoshin just came out and said it. Well done.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Yalexy

    Wouldn't even require that much. I'd say that 10 million is sufficient allready to produce a AAA-MMO.

    That wasn't the question, though. :)

    Could you produce a AAA MMO on a budget of $100 million?

    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

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    Yes.

    Now where is my money?

  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Sacramento, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

     

    That's simple.

    You get experienced coders who have worked on other titles.

    You get them to work for you because you offer them a chance to make a great game, and when they find out they don't have to compromise their ideas in order to meet money deadlines, they will flock to you!

    I think your being far too pessimistic.

    No more pessimistic than you are idealistic.

     

    Coming from someone who crys about every game, because its not perfect, or solo enough.

    image
  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Sacramento, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    People have made aaa mmos for a lot less, both daoc and eve were around the $5m mark.

     

    Exactly, and look at how many peeps we got here who think it would be impossible.

    I have never seen so much pessimism on any board here at MMORPG, and that's saying a lot!!

    image
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    nm

    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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

     

    That's simple.

    You get experienced coders who have worked on other titles.

    You get them to work for you because you offer them a chance to make a great game, and when they find out they don't have to compromise their ideas in order to meet money deadlines, they will flock to you!

    I think your being far too pessimistic.

    No more pessimistic than you are idealistic.

    Coming from someone who crys about every game, because its not perfect, or solo enough.

    Going to call you on that one.  Seriously, dude... it's one thing to make stuff up and try to get away with it, but it's another to try to pull that off when anyone can look through my post history and see your just lying out your ass. Uncalled for.

    Would be great if you could link something to support that or post a retraction.

     

     

    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

  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Boca Raton, FLPosts: 867Member Uncommon

    Sure.

    2 million on coding and architecture

    28 million on artwork and polish

    30 million on customer support and post-release features/expansions

    40 million on marketing

    It will be out in 2.5 years.  Bam! image

    "To be what you are not, experience what you are not." -Saint John of the Cross
    Authored 110 missions in Vendetta Online
    Check it out on Steam

  • Whiskey_SamWhiskey_Sam Lynchburg, VAPosts: 294Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    I think I could pick a team that could produce a AAA MMO. My part would be the money and an idea and that would be it though.

    If we're not saying actually programming one ourselves, then I agree with this.  Have an idea and funding, and you will get people to take you seriously enough to hear you out and get interested.  If you're overseeing the project, it's more about project management than about technical skills.  You don't need to micromanage every detail if you hire the right people for the project.

    ___________________________
    Have flask; will travel.

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,278Member Uncommon
    Yep I would clone Age of Wushu and put it in a high fantasy setting, then make all the monies.
  • AdalwulffAdalwulff Sacramento, CAPosts: 1,152Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

     

    That's simple.

    You get experienced coders who have worked on other titles.

    You get them to work for you because you offer them a chance to make a great game, and when they find out they don't have to compromise their ideas in order to meet money deadlines, they will flock to you!

    I think your being far too pessimistic.

    No more pessimistic than you are idealistic.

    Coming from someone who crys about every game, because its not perfect, or solo enough.

    Going to call you on that one.  Seriously, dude... it's one thing to make stuff up and try to get away with it, but it's another to try to pull that off when anyone can look through my post history and see your just lying out your ass. Uncalled for.

    Would be great if you could link something to support that or post a retraction.

     

     

     

    Referring mainly to the thread about "group play over solo play", perhaps your memory is failing you.

    Your pessimism is common knowledge to anyone who frequents these boards.

    image
  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,541Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arakazi
    Originally posted by DMKano

    Having many RL friends in the game industry (some ex and some current large AAA studio employees), I remember us talking about this scenario, except that the budget was $150mil.

    Long story short, about half would not make a game, the rest would but not a single expensive game, but many smaller games - because given a 4-6 year Dev cycle you are designing a game for a future market that is unpredictable is far too risky. Why put all eggs in one basket that the players in 5 years may not like?

    And 5 years from now is huge, because the tech is changing at an accelerated rate, the difference from 2013 to 2018 will be far more drastic than then last five years.

    I am in the same boat, instead of risking it all on a single game i'd make ten 1-2mil dollar games with short Dev cycles, and one of those has a much higher potential of getting some marker share than betting it all on a single game.

    I would also make sure that some of those game were mobile/cross platform as limiting a game to a single platform is not a good financial move.

    I have a feeling that the days of large AAA 100mil+ budget games are numbered, far too risky for future market.

    What are these large tech changes? To be honest, I think the rate of growth of processing power has slowed down in the last 5 years. The only major tech change I have seen is the growth of mobile and tablet devices.

    Its more than just computer tech, its how we interact with it, the gamers wants might be very different in 5 years, we live in a world of accelerated change.

    If you really want to read up on the law of accelerating returns, check this out:

    http://squid314.livejournal.com/354867.html

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phaserlight

    Sure.

    2 million on coding and architecture

    28 million on artwork and polish

    30 million on customer support and post-release features/expansions

    40 million on marketing

    It will be out in 2.5 years.  Bam! image

    Is that for your MMO or your campaign for world domination? :)

    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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Adalwulff

     

    That's simple.

    You get experienced coders who have worked on other titles.

    You get them to work for you because you offer them a chance to make a great game, and when they find out they don't have to compromise their ideas in order to meet money deadlines, they will flock to you!

    I think your being far too pessimistic.

    No more pessimistic than you are idealistic.

    Coming from someone who crys about every game, because its not perfect, or solo enough.

    Going to call you on that one.  Seriously, dude... it's one thing to make stuff up and try to get away with it, but it's another to try to pull that off when anyone can look through my post history and see your just lying out your ass. Uncalled for.

    Would be great if you could link something to support that or post a retraction.

    Referring mainly to the thread about "group play over solo play", perhaps your memory is failing you.

    Your pessimism is common knowledge to anyone who frequents these boards.

    So... no links to me crying a game isn't perfect or that it isn't solo enough?  Well, I knew that was the case, aaaand I probably should have guessed you wouldn't man up and apologize, so let's get back on topic and lay off the ad hominems, especially when they're just made up bullshit.

    Cheers! image

    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

  • kjempffkjempff AarhusPosts: 883Member Uncommon

    First step, target a player audience and focus on making the best game for them, and not a game for everyone. Don't compromise Your main ideas and principles, but stay open enough to make the changes needed. Chase the elusive fun factor and have your target audience in sight at all times.

    I guess it is a matter of surrounding yourself with the right people, and that is probably one of the hardest parts because You will not really know if they were the right people till the project succeed or fail. Anyways, hand me the money and I will let you know in 3 years time.

  • HatefullHatefull Posts: 774Member Uncommon
    yes, with ease.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,668Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kjempff

    First step, target a player audience and focus on making the best game for them, and not a game for everyone. Don't compromise Your main ideas and principles, but stay open enough to make the changes needed. Chase the elusive fun factor and have your target audience in sight at all times.

    I guess it is a matter of surrounding yourself with the right people, and that is probably one of the hardest parts because You will not really know if they were the right people till the project succeed or fail. Anyways, hand me the money and I will let you know in 3 years time.

    The target audience seems to be the one that went out the window post-WOW. Prior to that, it seemed MMOs were more focused on who they were designed for. I think one of the biggest problems is the temptation to expand things a bit in each direction because jsut a little broader scope means a much wider net to cast, however that usually waters down the core gameplay so that it no longer appeals even to that specific audience.

    Puzzle Pirates, Furcadia, EVE, ATITD, There, SWG, Project Entropia... all the pre-2004 MMOs seemed to have a particular type of player at the core of their vision. Not so much anymore.

    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

  • IssieaIssiea SydneyPosts: 75Member
    Originally posted by HappyFunBall

    OMG yes.  I don't believe there's a single AAA sandbox right now like Ultima Online (or in general).  I've tried every one that's out there, and most of them, to be honest, SUCK.  Most of the so-called sandbox games out there now aren't even close to AAA titles.  The graphics and gameplay sucks, they are full of bugs, let alone completely unfinished, unpolished, stable, etc. (good example, Mortal Online.  What a piece of trash).

    There are WAY too many theme-parks, and most are exactly the same with just a new coat of graphics.  None of them have any exploration.  It's just a fairly linear romp from one predefined area to the next that puts me to sleep...The monsters are ALWAYS in the exact same place, especially all those instances which are identical each time you run them, which I find mindless and boring.  Then there's that rush to "end-game" which I absolutely hate, nor understand.. but I guess if the game offers nothing else, that's what players do. 

    Don't even get me started on the never ending stream of Asian-made games that almost identical in design and gameplay, just with slightly different graphics.  Most are unpolished and the gameplay mechanics are terrible.  Talk about mindless cookie-cutter garbage.  Bleah.  Wow, another game that lets be choose between tank/fighter, thief/ranger, priest, and mage.  What a new concept!  By all means, keep churning out games like this over and over again.  Zzzzzzz.

    I'd bring back an open world game like Ultima Online, with a 2013+ engine, graphics, sound, etc, and add dynamic events like Rift and other games have added.  There's a reason why UO is STILL running.

    I'd add a real sense of danger as well, that most new games lack completely.  For example, I tried Neverwinter and found it completely mindless and challenge-less.  I liked GW2 more, mostly for the exploration aspects, but again, it's easy-mode.  You can solo most of the outside areas, if not all, and I never ever felt like I was in danger of dying, and if I did, I didn't care because there's almost no penalty for it.

    Most games now have PVE just to get your toon ready for PVP.  I think that's a terrible design.  I mean, awful.  The PVE should be a great alternative to PVP that people can choose to enjoy over PVP, instead of just using it to get strong enough for PVP.  A player should also be able to do both, where both types of play are challenging.  True coop gameplay is great too, and most games now focus on soloing, with groups only needed for instances.  Puke.

    I'd create a living, breathing world, where you can do anything you want, with the main focus put back on exploration and discovery, which is almost never the same twice.  I grew up on RPG's that let you explore and find new areas, monsters, treasure, etc.  I can't find a single AAA game that offers that (maybe Eve, but I didn't care for it.  Way too boring for me).

    I'd remove mindless ganker/griefer pvp completely, but allow pvp (I won't elaborate how right now, but I have many thoughts about this in mind).  You can't go around the world and beat the shit out of a baby and then take it's pacifier without prison, a mob of people ripping you apart, and so on.  Also, there's no gain in the real world from beating up a child, then stealing every worthless item they have on them... so, I'm not sure why this is allowed in any video game.  I'd allow players to be somewhat immoral, but I'd introduce morality systems, like reputation, bounties, even npcs that hunt you down like the animal you are, that have been done before, but never implemented very well.  I did always like a criminal element in games, which could even have their own town, hideout, etc.

    I'd make herds of creatures roaming the countryside.  They would vigorously protect their young ones, just like in the real world.  The creatures would vary wildly, again, like UO.  Some could use teamwork to defeat you, poison you, immobilize you, and even hunt, which I NEVER see in video games.  I'd like to roam around the countryside being stalked by creatures or humanoids that pick up your scent, track you in other ways, etc.  A real sense of danger.

    I'd allow intelligent humanoid npcs to build forts, structures, traps, communities, that you could either attack, steal from, barter with, etc, including reputation systems, faction building, etc.  If you worked for a certain village, cult, etc, you could get new skills found nowhere else in the game, get an npc from the villiage to help you or work for you, etc.

    I'd also add destructible environments than can be repaired by enemies, players, etc.  I see NONE of this in games.  I'd like to be able to take over a fort with fellow players, and take control of it.  I'd like to see mobs do the same thing.  You could visit a fort being attacked by NPC's fighting for control of it, and each time you go there, it could be abandoned, owned my different intelligent races, etc.

    These are just a few of my ideas.  I don't want to spill them all. ;)

    I'll probably never see a game like this.  So sad.

     

     

    This is a positively brilliant idea for a game.  I would love to play this! :)

     

    I would love to implement a game that mixes the best of all the games I love which would be UO+DaoC+WaR plus other fun elements from other games which aren't great as a whole but I like some aspects like WoW.  If I had the funds I could totally make it work.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.