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!

How about an invite only MMO - thinking out loud

13»

Comments

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 , CAPosts: 2,442Member Uncommon

    For early access, yeah, I much rather have this than open betas. But for long term operation, I'd have to try it for myself. It may be too counter-productive. What keeps someone from doing mass invites to anyone?

  • azmundaiazmundai St Louis, MOPosts: 1,417Member

    interesting concept, but I am not sure the reality is any more feasible than a niche mmo that just says, this is what we are, take it or leave it.

    i guess what you are suggesting is a situation where users contribute to the design or at least implementation of the game with their ideas, shaping an mmo for a specific group of people? I have a feeling that once you get to a number of people that would make the monetization of such a project possible, you inherently are dealing with too many different people for that kind of thing to really work.

    otherwise you have to figure that 30% (conservatively) of the people you invite .. won't stay long if it doesn't satisfy something they greatly desire. I'd imagine it would be more like 60 - 70% honestly. There are just too many options and "promises" for people to not wander.

    I think a company would be more successful than what you propose if they just create a great niche game, personally.

    LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
    I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already :)

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    Originally posted by azmundai

    interesting concept, but I am not sure the reality is any more feasible than a niche mmo that just says, this is what we are, take it or leave it.

    i guess what you are suggesting is a situation where users contribute to the design or at least implementation of the game with their ideas, shaping an mmo for a specific group of people? I have a feeling that once you get to a number of people that would make the monetization of such a project possible, you inherently are dealing with too many different people for that kind of thing to really work.

    otherwise you have to figure that 30% (conservatively) of the people you invite .. won't stay long if it doesn't satisfy something they greatly desire. I'd imagine it would be more like 60 - 70% honestly. There are just too many options and "promises" for people to not wander.

    I think a company would be more successful than what you propose if they just create a great niche game, personally.

    Are you sure  they wouldn't stay longer?

     

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • TheRealBanangoTheRealBanango Fairfax, VAPosts: 75Member
    Why put a limit on your player base from the start? Even if this concept would work, you are going to have to spend even more amounts of money on marketing to spark interest to make this game relevant enough where you create the sense of elitism you want...Not only that but the game still has to be good, and people are going to have to want to play it. Quite frankly, keeping it a secret and telling people nothing about the game is not going to achieve that. Besides, if the game is actually good, then why are you limiting your potential for growth, there are plenty of other ways to develop community if it doesn't come about naturally.

    image
  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by FinalFikus
    Originally posted by azmundai

    interesting concept, but I am not sure the reality is any more feasible than a niche mmo that just says, this is what we are, take it or leave it.

    i guess what you are suggesting is a situation where users contribute to the design or at least implementation of the game with their ideas, shaping an mmo for a specific group of people? I have a feeling that once you get to a number of people that would make the monetization of such a project possible, you inherently are dealing with too many different people for that kind of thing to really work.

    otherwise you have to figure that 30% (conservatively) of the people you invite .. won't stay long if it doesn't satisfy something they greatly desire. I'd imagine it would be more like 60 - 70% honestly. There are just too many options and "promises" for people to not wander.

    I think a company would be more successful than what you propose if they just create a great niche game, personally.

    Are you sure  they wouldn't stay longer?

     

    The entire notion is predicated on people never changing.

    "Invite only Our Sort" "Ok, done, 1500 invites sent"

    (a year later)

    "WTH? Where is all of this dissent coming from? Did the Wrong Sort sneak in?"

    "No sir, just some of Our Sort apparently changed their minds."

    "Ban them immediately!"

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by FinalFikus
    Originally posted by azmundai

    interesting concept, but I am not sure the reality is any more feasible than a niche mmo that just says, this is what we are, take it or leave it.

    i guess what you are suggesting is a situation where users contribute to the design or at least implementation of the game with their ideas, shaping an mmo for a specific group of people? I have a feeling that once you get to a number of people that would make the monetization of such a project possible, you inherently are dealing with too many different people for that kind of thing to really work.

    otherwise you have to figure that 30% (conservatively) of the people you invite .. won't stay long if it doesn't satisfy something they greatly desire. I'd imagine it would be more like 60 - 70% honestly. There are just too many options and "promises" for people to not wander.

    I think a company would be more successful than what you propose if they just create a great niche game, personally.

    Are you sure  they wouldn't stay longer?

     

    The entire notion is predicated on people never changing.

    "Invite only Our Sort" "Ok, done, 1500 invites sent"

    (a year later)

    "WTH? Where is all of this dissent coming from? Did the Wrong Sort sneak in?"

    "No sir, just some of Our Sort apparently changed their minds."

    "Ban them immediately!"

    It's not about keeping anyone out.

    Nice scenario though.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • EncephalitisEncephalitis anchorage, AKPosts: 75Member

    I like the basis on which this thread was created, but I'm failing to understand everybody's riffraff. Half of the arguments against this idea are the exact same arguments used in other threads on why the MMO genre is becoming a bad joke. When Firefall was in closed beta for a few years, they used this concept and everything went just fine. Periodically they would open the flood gates and let everybody in for a few days, then seal it all back up.

    "You're committing corporate suicide, you're no longer making an mmo, the idea is dumb because VIP" etc etc....People on this forum mention every day that more company's should explore idea's to help find the limits of an MMO, but the moment anybody does, they bash it in the face with a spiked club and then mope around about "How stagnant the MMO genre is. why can't we have any new idea's".

    Yes, I'll admit, "limiting membership to a game" wouldn't be an idea that moves the genre forward...But who's to say it wouldn't, at least, broaden the horizon a bit.

  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon
    I'd like to see it done for no other reason then to read posts from people foaming at the mouth because they cannot get invites.

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • greenreengreenreen Punchoo, AKPosts: 2,101Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by FinalFikus
    Originally posted by azmundai
    ...snip

    ...snip

     

    The entire notion is predicated on people never changing.

    "Invite only Our Sort" "Ok, done, 1500 invites sent"

    (a year later)

    "WTH? Where is all of this dissent coming from? Did the Wrong Sort sneak in?"

    "No sir, just some of Our Sort apparently changed their minds."

    "Ban them immediately!"

    Logic isn't working on those complaints. It's veering into exaggeration.

    The original people can invite others therefore the original people are not the only people there. The goal isn't to satisfy 1500 people for 5 years (which is the average time that people take to change) . The goal is to let 1500 people pass out the key to 1500 more people who would be a good part of the community. Certainly some would come and go like every game. If the same people were there even 5 years later that would be a massive win. If they weren't but 1500 more were with the same ideals, how would you consider it a failure. It's only stagnant in population but may not be in personality. Maybe I don't think a game needs billions served to be a success if it were being enjoyed.

    No one said ban immediately. I didn't see that posted anywhere. I posted something about a justice system once someone brought up the reversal of invites. Removing people that don't fit within the game would be the only way to maintain the integrity of the original reason for invites. That seems logical to remove as much as invite. I read about that Inferno MUD too, it wasn't all bad, they were successful enough to continue making games and made a follow-up to the game :P

    We can all imagine it our own way since it doesn't exist right now but no reason to overextend. I'm as doom and gloomy as the next person but I know that different people want different things. This would be a little different. Some might call it refreshing after so many games have went free to play and open their doors to any warm body. What barriers are there to play the majority of MMOs now... hard drive space?

    That's why I consider it disruptive and disruptive means change which is scary to some because you can't predict the outcome so doom is easier to predict. Look at Twitter, imagine pitching that to someone... we want people to be able to write messages... messages oh cool, like blogs? ... no shorter... like forum posts... shorter? how short? ... like 140 characters short... what! that will never work, who can say something of importance in so few characters??? ... sounds to me like someone saying now... who can have a good game without unlimited "characters". Change is scary so thinking of a game not wanting as many people packed inside as they possibly could get also sounds like, well, a change. I'm actually surprised so many people think it could work. Of course, I do or I wouldn't have brought it up. I wanted to see the opposite opinions and weigh those too.

     

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,214Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by dave6660
    I'd like to see it done for no other reason then to read posts from people foaming at the mouth because they cannot get invites.

    I think the posts of the fallen would be better. You would see some group disagree with the string pullers and boom, all those years of financial support and effort put into the game gone.

    Think about alliances in open pvp games like EVE and Lineage where everyone is all buddy buddy until they're not and then the drama. That's stuff soap opera writers couldn't pay to get.

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,549Member Uncommon

    The best way to get a specific audience is to provide a game that has content that audience will enjoy but the "unwanted" ones won't.

    For instance, don't want the farm raid or die elitist community? Just don't put that kind of content with dungeon gear grinds in your game, and they will leave less than a month later (and pretend the game is doomed on all forums, of course).

     

    But I'd be ready to pay $30 pet month (double of the normal fee) for an immersion server (in a game I enjoy of course) with strictly enforced chat rules, naming convention and behavior rules. Call that a "mature" server, where players have to behave like in a RPG, and not just a MMO, without it being a RPG server (role playing would not be forced). People who break the rules would get a set amount of warnings, and then be locked out of the immersion server and forced to play on normal servers (with eventual character transfer for free). This would get rid of the kiddies and other idiots who have zero respect for people trying to play a MMORPG and not just a MMO while still allowing the others to play too.

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    A Velvet Rope approach might work well, greenreen, especially if targeting an interest, theme or subject matter that already has established communities. If nothing else, it would build a core community of people genuinely interested in that particular game and not just anyone who likes to click beta links.

    You don't think people would start selling invites once they were tired of the game? I could see that happening very early on.

    I could also see different groups of people getting invited who weren't the "kind of people" that the developer or early adopters expected to see in the game and who probably weren't wanted in the game.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • jazz.bejazz.be Sint-NiklaasPosts: 820Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    A Velvet Rope approach might work well, greenreen, especially if targeting an interest, theme or subject matter that already has established communities. If nothing else, it would build a core community of people genuinely interested in that particular game and not just anyone who likes to click beta links.


    You don't think people would start selling invites once they were tired of the game? I could see that happening very early on.

    I could also see different groups of people getting invited who weren't the "kind of people" that the developer or early adopters expected to see in the game and who probably weren't wanted in the game.

     

    I think it could be considered a success if it gets to the point that people massively want to buy an invite.

    Why would people want to throw out money for an invite? People would barely know the game exist.

    Someone in the thread told us about another game who tried it...well most of us didn't know about it.

    You can't keep something private, but hope on massive popularity at the same time.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by jazz.be
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by Loktofeit A Velvet Rope approach might work well, greenreen, especially if targeting an interest, theme or subject matter that already has established communities. If nothing else, it would build a core community of people genuinely interested in that particular game and not just anyone who likes to click beta links.
    You don't think people would start selling invites once they were tired of the game? I could see that happening very early on. I could also see different groups of people getting invited who weren't the "kind of people" that the developer or early adopters expected to see in the game and who probably weren't wanted in the game.  
    I think it could be considered a success if it gets to the point that people massively want to buy an invite.

    Why would people want to throw out money for an invite? People would barely know the game exist.

    Someone in the thread told us about another game who tried it...well most of us didn't know about it.

    You can't keep something private, but hope on massive popularity at the same time.




    If we're talking about an MMORPG, who in the world is going to plunk down the millions of dollars it takes to build one, and then invite fifty people to play it? Even if they only invited 50 people, those fifty people would invite some people, then more people would get invited, word would eventually spread, videos would show up on Youtube, and if the game was actually good, articles would appear on sites like MMORPG.com.

    I'm not saying it wouldn't work, but the scale at which it would need to happen for a commercially successful MMORPG puts it more in the category of marketing tactic rather than player filter.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • crack_foxcrack_fox WellingtonPosts: 402Member
    Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

    But I'd be ready to pay $30 pet month (double of the normal fee) for an immersion server (in a game I enjoy of course) with strictly enforced chat rules, naming convention and behavior rules. Call that a "mature" server, where players have to behave like in a RPG, and not just a MMO, without it being a RPG server (role playing would not be forced). People who break the rules would get a set amount of warnings, and then be locked out of the immersion server and forced to play on normal servers (with eventual character transfer for free). This would get rid of the kiddies and other idiots who have zero respect for people trying to play a MMORPG and not just a MMO while still allowing the others to play too.

    I think a mature server would be one where rules did not have to be so rigorously enforced. What you describe is an environment in which players are treated like children who get sent to the naughty room if they misbehave. The extra $15 a month would probably be needed to hire additional cs reps to police it and to deal with the incessant reporting over naming violations and other 'immersion infractions'. I'd love to play on a server where players respected certain standards of behaviour because they respected each other, but I don't believe you can impose this sort of thing. 

    I'm not convinced of the merits of the OP's proposal either. Not sure that exclusivity and elitism make good foundations for a community - at least not the sort of community that I'd want to be a part of. It would be an interesting experiment though, I suppose. 

13»
Sign In or Register to comment.