MMOs were successful in the US until they all started copying the same damn game over and over. Any idiot can see this. The fact "top suits" in the industry don't understand this is disgusting.
I haven't read the article in question so I'll refrain from commenting on it, but I'll share one simple insight that I thought would have been self-evident. There is only one measure of success for a for-profit business in the US. That measure is profit. If a company makes a crappy, buggy, derivative MMO and then shuts the servers down 2 months later because no one is playing, but in that time they make 20 million dollars of profit, guess what? That game was a sucess in the one and only way that matters to a business.
Originally posted by RollieJoe I haven't read the article in question so I'll refrain from commenting on it, but I'll share one simple insight that I thought would have been self-evident. There is only one measure of success for a for-profit business in the US. That measure is profit. If a company makes a crappy, buggy, derivative MMO and then shuts the servers down 2 months later because no one is playing, but in that time they make 20 million dollars of profit, guess what? That game was a sucess in the one and only way that matters to a business.
Correct! Which is what I was trying to say on my previous post. The problem is, most gamers measure success as "I like the game as it caters to my likes/play style". If they don't like it, it isn't a success.
BTW---> By my definition, no game since Shadowbane has been a true success...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Success is making a game people enjoy playing and turns enough profit to keep it going and fund your next project.
In which case: Good news! Most of the last decade's (omgFail!!!) games have actually been fairly successful.
I remember most of those early MMO sub arguments. Most anything that topped 200k was a "hit", at least up until the Behemoth. The EQ boys (early on) spent most of their time denying L1 or L2 mattered, only rarely coming outside to look around the rest of the market.
The 100-200-300k American games quietly just did their thang and kept 'a rollin' (now pink-tinged nostalgia magnets).
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.
MMOs were successful in the US until they all started copying the same damn game over and over. Any idiot can see this. The fact "top suits" in the industry don't understand this is disgusting.
Yup. SWG, for example, was quite successful, financially speaking before the NGE. It was booking almost 10% the gross cost of the game (reportedly) per month in sub fees right up until SOE nuked it with the unwanted NGE. That game paid for itself several times over in its 2+ year life before being destroyed (chasing WoW), and funded several other projects. In most industries, that is considered a "success".
MMO's are not going to progress until wow is dead and off the radar..developers are still obsessing over wow and how to emulate it. This why wow is killing the genre.
The author in the OP may want to get his facts straight before talking about there only being 2 successful MMOs in the U.S.
A very obvious one he overlooked would be GW2. Trion also has one successful game. There was also DAoC. Etc. etc.
It is true that making an MMO is very, very risky, and that making games in the U.S. is generally more expensive than other parts of the world. However Blizzard is definitely not the only success story. Neither is Sony. They're just the 2 most obvious.
I don't see it as "MMOs don't work in America." I see it as "You don't have to be all that good to make it in Asia." Any old crap can make money in Asia, just so long as it has the five G's: Grind, Gamble, Graphics, Girls and Gank. That formula alone won't work here very well. American audiences want a narrative and context, rather than just G5.
I agree with this. Although I think the G for "Graphics", should be replaced with "Pay To Win". Unfortunately though that doesn't start with a G.
Originally posted by Ausare If I went out on the street and had a list of mmo which two would people probably have heard of. From news stories or ads.
None of them. Most people can't tell you who the vice president is.
But Defiance has TV ads right now!
This criteria just might produce some very unusual answers...
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.
Originally posted by nerovipus32 MMO's are not going to progress until wow is dead and off the radar..developers are still obsessing over wow and how to emulate it. This why wow is killing the genre.
It's easy to blame WoW for everything. And while WoW is playing a big part in the stagnation of the genre, it's a 2-way street. We, as players, are just as guilty for the current state of the MMO genre. Developers wouldn't be nearly as obsessed w/ WoW if we stopped buying WoW clones. Or immediately going back to WoW everytime they promise a new mount.
The genre is already changing, as seen by the latest batch of MMOs. However, if players want them to continue to change, they need to be more willing to support different types of games & gameplay.
For example, look at Darkfall. People on these forums constantly complain about the lack of sandboxes. Here comes one, and then it 'doesn't count' because it's not the specific sandbox each individual person wanted. While that's fine, what it shows developers is that sandboxes (in general) still aren't that popular.
Another example would be GW2. This is a game that sold on the statement that it was 'trying to do this differently than WoW, than standard MMOs'. For the most part, it does that. However, when you look at the general public reaction / criticisms, you have an awful lot of people who complained about a lack of gear progression, needing that carrot on a stick, not having a holy trinity, etc. Again, reaffirming the idea that players say they want something else, but in reality just want to be fooled into playing more of the same (without realizing it).
I hope I don't get bored of The Elder Scrolls Online as I haven't played an MMO for awhile. I went back to single player games and I don't wanna go back to WoW (2 years without it and counting).
For example, look at Darkfall. People on these forums constantly complain about the lack of sandboxes. Here comes one, and then it 'doesn't count' because it's not the specific sandbox each individual person wanted. While that's fine, what it shows developers is that sandboxes (in general) still aren't that popular.
The thing that people miss when they use this argument, is that people don't object to DF/DFUW because it is a sandbox, or not the sandbox they want, or even that it is mostly a PvP game. Many MMO fans object to DF because it is not well made, is highly exploitable, rarely fixed and run by a company with a very poor history of running a game well or delivering on promises. In other words, it is not a very good game. The next well-made and well run sandbox that comes around will do very well I think (and CCP shows that it can be done).
Originally posted by Sukiyaki Way to blame your own failures on the market and stick your head into the sand.He is not putting up a higher bar for success, he is just fabricating an excuse to justify why their own "MMO publishing for the big moneyz!" plan had utterly failed.
They could rephrase what they were saying as, "The MMOs we wanted to make will not work in the U.S." which could be entirely true.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by IridescentOrk I hope I don't get bored of The Elder Scrolls Online as I haven't played an MMO for awhile. I went back to single player games and I don't wanna go back to WoW (2 years without it and counting).
There are enough good SP & online MP games (online ARPGs, instanced pvp games, ....) that if MMO disappear tomorrow, i probably won't shed a tear.
Originally posted by IridescentOrk I hope I don't get bored of The Elder Scrolls Online as I haven't played an MMO for awhile. I went back to single player games and I don't wanna go back to WoW (2 years without it and counting).
There are enough good SP & online MP games (online ARPGs, instanced pvp games, ....) that if MMO disappear tomorrow, i probably won't shed a tear.
Not everyone is into single player games, i personally don't play them.
If it made more money in sales than it took to develop it than the product is a success. The problem is over hype so when a game doesn't live up to the hype it is called a failure.
What is the difference between Everquest and Everquest 2? They both peaked at about 350k subs and maintained strong sales and loyalty for a decade. Both games were cash cows for SoE. The only difference is EQ2 was hyped as the second coming while original Everquest was not. You want success then stop the hype.
There has really only been one game that ever lived up to the hype and that was WoW.
"A couple of our competitors have found out that through very, very expensive lessons--one of our competitors just recently announced they're restarting an MMO project in the US," Zelnick said. "We look at it and say 'How many MMOs have ever been successful in the US?' Two. World of Warcraft and EverQuest. That's kind of a bad slugging percentage."
Been saying that here for years. There's little reason for most (not all) developers to sell an MMO to the US (not NA as a whole) market.
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
Originally posted by IridescentOrk I hope I don't get bored of The Elder Scrolls Online as I haven't played an MMO for awhile. I went back to single player games and I don't wanna go back to WoW (2 years without it and counting).
There are enough good SP & online MP games (online ARPGs, instanced pvp games, ....) that if MMO disappear tomorrow, i probably won't shed a tear.
Not everyone is into single player games, i personally don't play them.
And i was talking about me. If you want to miss out on good SP games, that is your prerogative. Personally, I found many SP games much better entertainment than MMOs.
Originally posted by IridescentOrk I hope I don't get bored of The Elder Scrolls Online as I haven't played an MMO for awhile. I went back to single player games and I don't wanna go back to WoW (2 years without it and counting).
There are enough good SP & online MP games (online ARPGs, instanced pvp games, ....) that if MMO disappear tomorrow, i probably won't shed a tear.
Not everyone is into single player games, i personally don't play them.
And i was talking about me. If you want to miss out on good SP games, that is your prerogative. Personally, I found many SP games much better entertainment than MMOs.
^^ This. Some have this need to play with others and will pass on games right up their alley...simply because they can't "/s check out my gear."
"A couple of our competitors have found out that through very, very expensive lessons--one of our competitors just recently announced they're restarting an MMO project in the US," Zelnick said. "We look at it and say 'How many MMOs have ever been successful in the US?' Two. World of Warcraft and EverQuest. That's kind of a bad slugging percentage."
...Its not MMO's its the instant gratification that players now want because of games like WOW. MMO's took time to get items back when EQ was in its glory days, and it felt special when you finally got that item or piece of gear.
Its like saying Guns kill people, they don't!....people kill people!
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!
Its like saying Guns kill people, they don't!....people kill people ... with vastly improved ability with guns ... that likely wouldn't have happened if guns weren't around ... like the stats back up in every modern Country on the planet that has greater gun control than America!
Its like saying Guns kill people, they don't!....people kill people ... with vastly improved ability with guns ... that likely wouldn't have happened if guns weren't around ... like the stats back up in every modern Country on the planet that has greater gun control than America!
Fixed it for ya
Naw ....people would find ways to kill even without firearms, look at history my friend.
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!
For example, look at Darkfall. People on these forums constantly complain about the lack of sandboxes. Here comes one, and then it 'doesn't count' because it's not the specific sandbox each individual person wanted. While that's fine, what it shows developers is that sandboxes (in general) still aren't that popular.
The thing that people miss when they use this argument, is that people don't object to DF/DFUW because it is a sandbox, or not the sandbox they want, or even that it is mostly a PvP game. Many MMO fans object to DF because it is not well made, is highly exploitable, rarely fixed and run by a company with a very poor history of running a game well or delivering on promises. In other words, it is not a very good game. The next well-made and well run sandbox that comes around will do very well I think (and CCP shows that it can be done).
I've seen all of the above. The result is still the same though. There's just not much support for different types of MMOs atm. How well games like DF are made is kinda besides the point as well. You aren't going to get AAA games that are drastically different. It costs a ton of money to make a AAA game, meaning investors, which means less risks tend to be allowed.
That's what people need to understand if they want change, they need to be willing to accept simpler / sub-par products if they are offering the mechanics they like. If / when that does happen, it'll give enough incentive / funding for such products to get improved, or to pave the way for other games that will probably be even better.
It's the nature of MMO's. They aren't block busters that you switch out every Friday night, you play them for decades, you don't move on and the Industry is growing faster than new blood to the industry.
If games want an emblem to follow, they need to look to EVE Online, not World of Warcraft. Not make a space ship PvP game but make a game that can make money on half a million very loyal followers. 500K x $15 is $9,000,000 a year. It aint rocket surgery. If that's your budget, that's your budget. No, you won't be the next Zuckerberg but you will have a good paying job until you retire.
Comments
nethervoid - Est. '97
[UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|SWTOR|SotA|BDO]
24k subs YouTube Gaming channel
Correct! Which is what I was trying to say on my previous post. The problem is, most gamers measure success as "I like the game as it caters to my likes/play style". If they don't like it, it isn't a success.
BTW---> By my definition, no game since Shadowbane has been a true success...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
In which case: Good news! Most of the last decade's (omgFail!!!) games have actually been fairly successful.
I remember most of those early MMO sub arguments. Most anything that topped 200k was a "hit", at least up until the Behemoth. The EQ boys (early on) spent most of their time denying L1 or L2 mattered, only rarely coming outside to look around the rest of the market.
The 100-200-300k American games quietly just did their thang and kept 'a rollin' (now pink-tinged nostalgia magnets).
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.
Yup. SWG, for example, was quite successful, financially speaking before the NGE. It was booking almost 10% the gross cost of the game (reportedly) per month in sub fees right up until SOE nuked it with the unwanted NGE. That game paid for itself several times over in its 2+ year life before being destroyed (chasing WoW), and funded several other projects. In most industries, that is considered a "success".The author in the OP may want to get his facts straight before talking about there only being 2 successful MMOs in the U.S.
A very obvious one he overlooked would be GW2. Trion also has one successful game. There was also DAoC. Etc. etc.
It is true that making an MMO is very, very risky, and that making games in the U.S. is generally more expensive than other parts of the world. However Blizzard is definitely not the only success story. Neither is Sony. They're just the 2 most obvious.
"MMO's don't work in the US"
Wtf does that even mean ?
They only work outside the US ?
75% of asian MMO's are very successful ?
"Successful" is when your MMO generates profits on the scale of WoW. If not, it's not "working" ?
I agree with this. Although I think the G for "Graphics", should be replaced with "Pay To Win". Unfortunately though that doesn't start with a G.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
But Defiance has TV ads right now!
This criteria just might produce some very unusual answers...
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.
It's easy to blame WoW for everything. And while WoW is playing a big part in the stagnation of the genre, it's a 2-way street. We, as players, are just as guilty for the current state of the MMO genre. Developers wouldn't be nearly as obsessed w/ WoW if we stopped buying WoW clones. Or immediately going back to WoW everytime they promise a new mount.
The genre is already changing, as seen by the latest batch of MMOs. However, if players want them to continue to change, they need to be more willing to support different types of games & gameplay.
For example, look at Darkfall. People on these forums constantly complain about the lack of sandboxes. Here comes one, and then it 'doesn't count' because it's not the specific sandbox each individual person wanted. While that's fine, what it shows developers is that sandboxes (in general) still aren't that popular.
Another example would be GW2. This is a game that sold on the statement that it was 'trying to do this differently than WoW, than standard MMOs'. For the most part, it does that. However, when you look at the general public reaction / criticisms, you have an awful lot of people who complained about a lack of gear progression, needing that carrot on a stick, not having a holy trinity, etc. Again, reaffirming the idea that players say they want something else, but in reality just want to be fooled into playing more of the same (without realizing it).
gameplay > graphics
The thing that people miss when they use this argument, is that people don't object to DF/DFUW because it is a sandbox, or not the sandbox they want, or even that it is mostly a PvP game. Many MMO fans object to DF because it is not well made, is highly exploitable, rarely fixed and run by a company with a very poor history of running a game well or delivering on promises. In other words, it is not a very good game. The next well-made and well run sandbox that comes around will do very well I think (and CCP shows that it can be done).They could rephrase what they were saying as, "The MMOs we wanted to make will not work in the U.S." which could be entirely true.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
There are enough good SP & online MP games (online ARPGs, instanced pvp games, ....) that if MMO disappear tomorrow, i probably won't shed a tear.
Not everyone is into single player games, i personally don't play them.
If it made more money in sales than it took to develop it than the product is a success. The problem is over hype so when a game doesn't live up to the hype it is called a failure.
What is the difference between Everquest and Everquest 2? They both peaked at about 350k subs and maintained strong sales and loyalty for a decade. Both games were cash cows for SoE. The only difference is EQ2 was hyped as the second coming while original Everquest was not. You want success then stop the hype.
There has really only been one game that ever lived up to the hype and that was WoW.
Been saying that here for years. There's little reason for most (not all) developers to sell an MMO to the US (not NA as a whole) market.
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
And i was talking about me. If you want to miss out on good SP games, that is your prerogative. Personally, I found many SP games much better entertainment than MMOs.
^^ This. Some have this need to play with others and will pass on games right up their alley...simply because they can't "/s check out my gear."
...Its not MMO's its the instant gratification that players now want because of games like WOW. MMO's took time to get items back when EQ was in its glory days, and it felt special when you finally got that item or piece of gear.
Its like saying Guns kill people, they don't!....people kill people!
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!
Fixed it for ya
You stay sassy!
Naw ....people would find ways to kill even without firearms, look at history my friend.
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!
I've seen all of the above. The result is still the same though. There's just not much support for different types of MMOs atm. How well games like DF are made is kinda besides the point as well. You aren't going to get AAA games that are drastically different. It costs a ton of money to make a AAA game, meaning investors, which means less risks tend to be allowed.
That's what people need to understand if they want change, they need to be willing to accept simpler / sub-par products if they are offering the mechanics they like. If / when that does happen, it'll give enough incentive / funding for such products to get improved, or to pave the way for other games that will probably be even better.
It's the nature of MMO's. They aren't block busters that you switch out every Friday night, you play them for decades, you don't move on and the Industry is growing faster than new blood to the industry.
If games want an emblem to follow, they need to look to EVE Online, not World of Warcraft. Not make a space ship PvP game but make a game that can make money on half a million very loyal followers. 500K x $15 is $9,000,000 a year. It aint rocket surgery. If that's your budget, that's your budget. No, you won't be the next Zuckerberg but you will have a good paying job until you retire.
You want to work or win the lottery?