one thing is for sure, the last wave of triple A MMOs with short and rushed out development cycles nearly killed the MMO genre, almost burying it under a 10km high pile of horse shit.
Im totally willing to give long development cycles a chance, the alternative has proven to be beyond ridiculous...
There's a few problems with Long Development Time. They remind me of eg:
eg China: "These tasks were not successfully carried out during this time."
eg Soviet Union: "Several five-year plans did not take up the full period of time assigned to them: some were successfully completed earlier than expected, while others failed and were abandoned. Altogether, there were thirteen five-year plans."
To cut to the chase: Large/longer development of mmos --> More things can go wrong, already high spending (eg >$30m etc) beyond budget, content/planning can be harder to control eg:
We want to assure fans that we won't be rushed in this, and we won't release a game that does not meet all the strict quality criteria we place upon ourselves and placed upon us by the guys at Games Workshop."
It quickly became obvious that Climax bit off more than it could program, and planned features were scaled back or cut altogether.
Unfortunately for them it didn't happen, and Climax's Warhammer project was officially canceled for good by the end of the year. Climax's CEO, Karl Jeffery, expressed regret about the decision: "It was a deeply sad thing for us to have to do after so much hard work and commitment from the entire team."
Robin Dews, Climax's general manager, posted this good-bye on the now-defunct Warhammer Online website:
"It is with a great deal of sadness that I inform the community that we have decided to discontinue the development of Warhammer Online and will be closing down this website with immediate effect. This has been a difficult and painful decision but it was taken following a full review of the progress of the game, costs to date and future costs of the project. As a result both Games Workshop and Climax Development Limited, the computer games developer, have agreed to terminate the development project. I would like to say a personal thanks to all of the people who have followed our development over the last few years, your constant support and enthusiasm has meant a great deal to us."
About five months later, Mythic Entertainment snapped up the license. Instead of building off of Climax's efforts, the team decided to start over on the entire project, creating their own vision of the Warhammer world. This game would ultimately become Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning, and released in 2008
Not to say MMOs must be rushed or that they do not need longer dev time but that it's a high risk venture ->
OP raises a good point, many of today's up and coming MMORPG's were conceptually developed 4-6 years ago, and it's taken this long to bring them to market.
But the customer base has rapdily evolved in many ways, as pointed out by the many new social networking tools in the OP, and perhaps in one way its changed is its taste for MMO's.
What if the market actually is totally burned out on the standard theme park model. Sure, they'll play it, but won't stay with it for any length of time.
That would explain the rather lukewarm reception given even well polished titles such as Rift, we're just tired of more of the same and can't play yet another game designed like this for a long period of time.
Now, it's possible to change/modify the focus of an MMO after it's underway, however Tabula Rasa is a good example of the risk a team takes in attempting to do so.
So there probably is a real need for the industry to figure out a way to get an MMO done in 3 years or less from concept to release, without taking the quality/feature shortcuts that we saw in Crytpic's titles STO and CO.
Perhaps its not physically possible to do so, but perhaps its just a matter of someone needing to come up with some out of the box approaches.
We're facing the same issue where I work. Right now we're locked into regular, but long (36 weeks) development cycles and we're working on ideas to reduce this so we can deliver more features without a corresponding drop in quality. (its a challenge for sure)
And what we build is nothing close to the complexity of a MMORPG.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
So there probably is a real need for the industry to figure out a way to get an MMO done in 3 years or less from concept to release, without taking the quality/feature shortcuts that we saw in Crytpic's titles STO and CO.
I think that sums it up, someone needs to rethink the process and somehow shorten the cycle. Unfortunately I think the initial attempt at this will just to be releasing games in even more unfinished states and then developing side-by-side with players actively paying for and playing the game... but that sounds like a huge risk.
"They essentially want to say 'Correlation proves Causation' when it's just not true." - Sovrath
when i first read this i got kind of mad at the OP TBH... but then i read answers and thought about it again and 6 years is kinda long... not only do graphics,quality,sound,even mechanics change but so do peoples minds... even developers... but i will say it goes to show that taking time on a game pays off (EQ)... no other game ive played comes close to the immersion of EQ's world,lore, or customization... as people have said before consumers type of gaming changes... people hated waiting for boats or dieing and corpse running, zoning, etc. etc. that EQ had to offer after WoW came out and took away all that... made it easier for gamers to get right back into the action... EQ made you think up a game plan to taking down a mob, or group up to increase your chances of success... not saying WoW doesnt do that but its alot easier.... EQ didnt care about how hard its game was for a long time... but as my favorite goblin quote from WoW goes "time is money friend"... all gaming companies follow this to a T now... its sad... as long as they can make their quick buck they are happy... so they will keep releasing sub par games... we as gamers need to put a stop to this... tell them to release games where we take on a challenge... i dont like killing non-stop to max level to enjoy the game... give us a huge world to explore, random quest givers without the "!" over head... give us fun spells/skills that dont do anything but make us laugh... make us group more and give us Incentive to do so... give us low-level/ mid-level raids that max level character cant participate in (Lady Vox from EQ)... give us more than two factions also... idc if i have to zone for 30-60 secs. to get to another area... make my world huge and make me feel like i am in a different world... please USE your time wisely and make a great game... sorry for going on and on fellow gamers
I kind of agree here. 6 years to develope a single game is kind of ridiculous.. I hope it is good.
We've seen what happens when Dev time is chopped to make the venture capital happy (AoC or WAR, anyone?)
Given the big-name failures of recent times, the only sensible course of action is to keep working on it until it's done.
Gamers are expecting the WoW-Killer. Expectations that high are impossible to live up to, but at least they have enough integrity to give it a real effort, and not half-ass it.
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.
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
Thing is, there are different ways to make it quicker and cheaper. There are all different ways to cut corners, sacrificing quality in very different ways.
For example, just look at WoW. Its low-poly, low texture size graphics weren't just about making it accessible to more players, but also made it a lot easier for Blizzard to add content and make sure it was polished. By aiming lower in that respect, they were able to put out what most would consider a higher quality product overall. More quickly, and more cheaply.
They chose not to be particularly innovative, that's besides the point, but for what it is, I bet they had plenty of development time/money to make sure it was solid, due saving huge amounts by cutting corners in terms of graphics.
It's funny how few devs copy them in this respect. Games like SWTOR, people calling a WoW clone already, but they went in the completely opposite direction, making an immensely bloated product that's insanely expensive to polish and add content to.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
Great observation.
Another factor I see in this is obsolescence. With long development times it is very difficult to produce an MMO that isn't obsolete by the time it gets released. The graphics bar keeps raising so quickly that a 5 year development schedule will produce a game substandard to what is current.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
So there probably is a real need for the industry to figure out a way to get an MMO done in 3 years or less from concept to release, without taking the quality/feature shortcuts that we saw in Crytpic's titles STO and CO.
Not gonna happen anytime soon, at least with the current technology we have.
Most console games have a two year development cycle, and that's acutally cutting it short. An MMO by design NEEDS a longer development time just because of the sheer scope involved. Developing an MMO in under three years would be like trying to condense the entire Dark Tower series into one film. You could do it, but you'd have to cut out so many things that it would be pointless.
For example, just look at WoW. Its low-poly, low texture size graphics weren't just about making it accessible to more players, but also made it a lot easier for Blizzard to add content and make sure it was polished. By aiming lower in that respect, they were able to put out what most would consider a higher quality product overall.
They chose not to be particularly innovative, that's besides the point, but for what it is, I bet they had plenty of development time/money to make sure it was solid, due saving huge amounts by cutting corners in terms of graphics.
What people tend to forget is that World of Warcraft engine took alot from Warcraft III engine. Maybe some younger players don't know but Warcraft III was VERY succesful rts. Hugely popular and well received.
World of Warcraft used parts of graphic engine from Warcraft III , also whole style graphic style was very similar. Not to mention WoW initial popularity was also possible because of W3 to some degree.
WoW was made on very popular IP, released shortly after huge success of game on the same IP, polished as most of Blizzard products and providing more streamlined experience than previous MMO's. Not to mention that competition was smller than now in MMO genre.
Imo it is almost impossible to repeat that big of a success atm. Especially by copying 7 year old ideas.
For example, just look at WoW. Its low-poly, low texture size graphics weren't just about making it accessible to more players, but also made it a lot easier for Blizzard to add content and make sure it was polished. By aiming lower in that respect, they were able to put out what most would consider a higher quality product overall.
They chose not to be particularly innovative, that's besides the point, but for what it is, I bet they had plenty of development time/money to make sure it was solid, due saving huge amounts by cutting corners in terms of graphics.
What people tend to forget is that World of Warcraft engine took alot from Warcraft III engine. Maybe some younger players don't know but Warcraft III was VERY succesful rts. Hugely popular and well received.
World of Warcraft used parts of graphic engine from Warcraft III , also whole style graphic style was very similar. Not to mention WoW initial popularity was also possible because of W3 to some degree.
WoW was made on very popular IP, released shortly after huge success of game on the same IP, polished as most of Blizzard products and providing more streamlined experience than previous MMO's. Not to mention that competition was smller than now in MMO genre.
Imo it is almost impossible to repeat that big of a success atm. Especially by copying 7 year old ideas.
Are you suggesting that WoW was able reuse assets from this? As for copying its success, I'm not talking about that. I'm just refering to their development approach, and why it resulted in a basic quality product. Why it became so successful is a whole other issue. The quality/cost/speed probably helped, but I know there's a lot more to it than that, and I'd be the last one to suggest anyone should be aiming for similar success.
I think EVE makes another good example. It's so graphically lacking, people compare it to playing a spread sheet. Instead of low quality graphics, they just stayed very focused on making it all about the ships flying through space. No need to render the inside of space stations, planetary surfaces, or even people. Not the most popular approach, and yet its been a lot easier for CCP to polish it, and keep building on it - which has probably had something to do with their success as well.
Am I saying "copy EVE" now? No, I'm just saying there are different ways to save time and money than putting out an unfinished mess of a product.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I bet if we had much better mmos noone would care how long it took to make. Sadly not many people are successful at making mmos.
I would say the two are related. Let's face it: the companies making "MMOs" these days (and I use the term loosely) are absolutely terrible at it, leading to both long development times and terrible gameplay and/or design choices.
When single player games makes new engine they can spend years on it, Eidos have spent 5 years on theyr new engine and hitman game. Im unsure how engine works when it comes to renting but other might have a better knowledge on this then me. But when sp games can use that long i dont see why mmo company complains as theyr profit is likley higher.
If an mmo manage to get someone to sub for 3 months they have pretty much sold another game, and i doubt anyone can keep up with that income speed when it comes to makeing sp games. What they loose on costumer support and servers they earn back in dev costs as you need a smaler team to maintain an mmo then make a new sp game.
I might be far off the mark as i have limited knowledge in this area.
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
Great observation.
Another factor I see in this is obsolescence. With long development times it is very difficult to produce an MMO that isn't obsolete by the time it gets released. The graphics bar keeps raising so quickly that a 5 year development schedule will produce a game substandard to what is current.
For me graphics are all about style and not detail and this is where I feel companies should go. If you nail a really distinct style your game will never really look dated and of course you can update at regular intervals to add in more detail but the style has to be great in the first place. Also with MMO's being multiplayer you really have to set your sites lower than with a SP game as there is extra strain on your PC, Blizzard understand this and it seems Bioware do too because having loads of people to play with in a low resource using graphically stylish MMO is better than with having no-one to play with in a resource hogging realistically detailed MMO.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
Thing is, there are different ways to make it quicker and cheaper. There are all different ways to cut corners, sacrificing quality in very different ways.
For example, just look at WoW. Its low-poly, low texture size graphics weren't just about making it accessible to more players, but also made it a lot easier for Blizzard to add content and make sure it was polished. By aiming lower in that respect, they were able to put out what most would consider a higher quality product overall. More quickly, and more cheaply.
They chose not to be particularly innovative, that's besides the point, but for what it is, I bet they had plenty of development time/money to make sure it was solid, due saving huge amounts by cutting corners in terms of graphics.
It's funny how few devs copy them in this respect. Games like SWTOR, people calling a WoW clone already, but they went in the completely opposite direction, making an immensely bloated product that's insanely expensive to polish and add content to.
From what I understand Blizzard spend lots of time fine tuning their games and having low poly count graphics help facillitate that so they are really just prioritising on gameplay rather than graphics, which is smart and not cutting corners to me, which was reversed in the case of EQ2 and AOC so those games released without lots of content. Blizzard understand what gamers want but that still takes time to get the content right and working and if WoW was made today it would cost far more than the $60 miliion that is reported they spent on my making it, also Blizzard are famous for taking their time with games and releasing only when ready, used to be same with Bioware until EA decided to rush DA2, DA1 took 5 years to make and it shows in its content and replayablilty unlike DA2's 2 years. Its why in the MMO world WoW = big success while EQ2 & AOC = relative flops. This is the mantra I have followed ever since I started playing games GAMEPLAY IS KING.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I don't necessarilly agree or disagree. What I mean by that is:
Even though SWToR has taken many years, once it comes out in the next year or so, fully voiced, full cut scene games will not be de rigueur. Everything they will have implemented will work just fine with the current gaming crowd except for hard core gamers who are constantly looking for "something else".
Secondly, most movies that we all watch follow the same tropes thave have been used for years. Music is pretty much the same as well, at least how it's put together. Nothing really ground breaking for many years.
So "being new and current" really isn't "all that".
However, I do see a point to Lobotomist's, er "point".
There are lines where something might become yesterday's news. However, in SWToR's case I don't think they have anything to worry about.
but for instance, if an mmo was to put all this work and engegy into an isometric game and "suddenly" during its development, full 3D games took off, then "yes" that could be an issue for that isometric game.
The issue is not how long a game takes to be created but what are the changes that happen during its development and what does it offer upon release that is different from its competition.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Well the real trick is trying to guess what the market will want 6 years hence and deliver something new. Not sure if anyone will be able to deliver though.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I understand why you may think that way, but youre not considering something. Those trends you listed int he various years wer ethings that ALREADY existed in that year.
In the case of MMORPGs, theyre not relevant when theyre announced, theyre relevant when theyre released. So even though a game might get announced in 2006, its not an actual product on the market (and therefore able to be "the trend") until 2011 or whatever year it comes out.
Think of it like this. Lets say apple announced in 2012 they were making something, let just say for the hell of it they call it an iBrain, and its some microchip you can get implanted in your brain which has all the functions and then some of an iPad built right into you. Thing is, even though it would get lots of attention and hype from the announcement, it wouldnt actually be "the trend" until it was out of development and was being sold to the public in like 2015 or whatever.
Pretty much all products related to technology suffer from the time delay, not just MMORPGS. By the time theyre released, theres already newer and better things being developed. The key to being succesful is being able to follow all the trends and gauge where the market will be when you plan on releasing your product, wethe rit is 1 year, 5 years, or 10 years away. If you were to start working on a product based on where the market used to be, rathe rthan where it will be, thats when you start running into problems. Thats the reason so many games have flopped as well. They run their development based on archaic ideas of what people want, and try to follow those who have already done the exact same thing. Very few dev studios have leadership with enough brains to instead say "who cares what people want now, or wanted 5 years ago. What will they want 5 years from now".
For example, the combat systems that have existed in MMOs for the past decade+. Only a stupid developer would say "hey, lets do the same exact combat system theyve done in every game for the past 10 years. surely they'll still find it exciting 3-5 years from now when we get around to releasing our game". A smart one would say "hey, people are already growing bored with the same old same old. How much MORE bored are they going to be in another 3-5 years of still repeating the same thing? We need to come up with something different that will definitely interest people a few years from now".
Comments
There's a few problems with Long Development Time. They remind me of eg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-year_plan
eg China: "These tasks were not successfully carried out during this time."
eg Soviet Union: "Several five-year plans did not take up the full period of time assigned to them: some were successfully completed earlier than expected, while others failed and were abandoned. Altogether, there were thirteen five-year plans."
& http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#Prolonged.2Fworsened_the_Depression
To cut to the chase: Large/longer development of mmos --> More things can go wrong, already high spending (eg >$30m etc) beyond budget, content/planning can be harder to control eg:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/35879/Opinion_On_Time_and_On_Budget.php
eg WAR: Cut several capital cities content, 2 classes and other features that never made it in.
eg Climax orinally developing the IP: The Game Archaeologist and the What Ifs: Climax's Warhammer Online
Not to say MMOs must be rushed or that they do not need longer dev time but that it's a high risk venture ->
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
OP raises a good point, many of today's up and coming MMORPG's were conceptually developed 4-6 years ago, and it's taken this long to bring them to market.
But the customer base has rapdily evolved in many ways, as pointed out by the many new social networking tools in the OP, and perhaps in one way its changed is its taste for MMO's.
What if the market actually is totally burned out on the standard theme park model. Sure, they'll play it, but won't stay with it for any length of time.
That would explain the rather lukewarm reception given even well polished titles such as Rift, we're just tired of more of the same and can't play yet another game designed like this for a long period of time.
Now, it's possible to change/modify the focus of an MMO after it's underway, however Tabula Rasa is a good example of the risk a team takes in attempting to do so.
So there probably is a real need for the industry to figure out a way to get an MMO done in 3 years or less from concept to release, without taking the quality/feature shortcuts that we saw in Crytpic's titles STO and CO.
Perhaps its not physically possible to do so, but perhaps its just a matter of someone needing to come up with some out of the box approaches.
We're facing the same issue where I work. Right now we're locked into regular, but long (36 weeks) development cycles and we're working on ideas to reduce this so we can deliver more features without a corresponding drop in quality. (its a challenge for sure)
And what we build is nothing close to the complexity of a MMORPG.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
That's the problem all companies have to decide on its that simple.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I think that sums it up, someone needs to rethink the process and somehow shorten the cycle. Unfortunately I think the initial attempt at this will just to be releasing games in even more unfinished states and then developing side-by-side with players actively paying for and playing the game... but that sounds like a huge risk.
"They essentially want to say 'Correlation proves Causation' when it's just not true." - Sovrath
when i first read this i got kind of mad at the OP TBH... but then i read answers and thought about it again and 6 years is kinda long... not only do graphics,quality,sound,even mechanics change but so do peoples minds... even developers... but i will say it goes to show that taking time on a game pays off (EQ)... no other game ive played comes close to the immersion of EQ's world,lore, or customization... as people have said before consumers type of gaming changes... people hated waiting for boats or dieing and corpse running, zoning, etc. etc. that EQ had to offer after WoW came out and took away all that... made it easier for gamers to get right back into the action... EQ made you think up a game plan to taking down a mob, or group up to increase your chances of success... not saying WoW doesnt do that but its alot easier.... EQ didnt care about how hard its game was for a long time... but as my favorite goblin quote from WoW goes "time is money friend"... all gaming companies follow this to a T now... its sad... as long as they can make their quick buck they are happy... so they will keep releasing sub par games... we as gamers need to put a stop to this... tell them to release games where we take on a challenge... i dont like killing non-stop to max level to enjoy the game... give us a huge world to explore, random quest givers without the "!" over head... give us fun spells/skills that dont do anything but make us laugh... make us group more and give us Incentive to do so... give us low-level/ mid-level raids that max level character cant participate in (Lady Vox from EQ)... give us more than two factions also... idc if i have to zone for 30-60 secs. to get to another area... make my world huge and make me feel like i am in a different world... please USE your time wisely and make a great game... sorry for going on and on fellow gamers
Change in game 2004 DX9-2011 ABOUT 99% still DX9 so not much have changed in all these years in gaming:P
Example 2005 DX9 mmo World of warcraft released playable on pc's from early as 2002 this still posible in 2011.
Swtor DX9 will almost be playable on 2002 pc and looks about same as WoW.
Standstill in gaming industry for nearly 8 years:(
51% still on the rediculous OS version XP Microsoft did something teribly wrong along the timeline:P
PC can handle Full HD 25xx resolution super realistic graphics but gaming industry standstill at ancient 2004 DX9 graphics.
We've seen what happens when Dev time is chopped to make the venture capital happy (AoC or WAR, anyone?)
Given the big-name failures of recent times, the only sensible course of action is to keep working on it until it's done.
Gamers are expecting the WoW-Killer. Expectations that high are impossible to live up to, but at least they have enough integrity to give it a real effort, and not half-ass it.
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.
Thing is, there are different ways to make it quicker and cheaper. There are all different ways to cut corners, sacrificing quality in very different ways.
For example, just look at WoW. Its low-poly, low texture size graphics weren't just about making it accessible to more players, but also made it a lot easier for Blizzard to add content and make sure it was polished. By aiming lower in that respect, they were able to put out what most would consider a higher quality product overall. More quickly, and more cheaply.
They chose not to be particularly innovative, that's besides the point, but for what it is, I bet they had plenty of development time/money to make sure it was solid, due saving huge amounts by cutting corners in terms of graphics.
It's funny how few devs copy them in this respect. Games like SWTOR, people calling a WoW clone already, but they went in the completely opposite direction, making an immensely bloated product that's insanely expensive to polish and add content to.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Great observation.
Another factor I see in this is obsolescence. With long development times it is very difficult to produce an MMO that isn't obsolete by the time it gets released. The graphics bar keeps raising so quickly that a 5 year development schedule will produce a game substandard to what is current.
Not gonna happen anytime soon, at least with the current technology we have.
Most console games have a two year development cycle, and that's acutally cutting it short. An MMO by design NEEDS a longer development time just because of the sheer scope involved. Developing an MMO in under three years would be like trying to condense the entire Dark Tower series into one film. You could do it, but you'd have to cut out so many things that it would be pointless.
What people tend to forget is that World of Warcraft engine took alot from Warcraft III engine. Maybe some younger players don't know but Warcraft III was VERY succesful rts. Hugely popular and well received.
World of Warcraft used parts of graphic engine from Warcraft III , also whole style graphic style was very similar. Not to mention WoW initial popularity was also possible because of W3 to some degree.
WoW was made on very popular IP, released shortly after huge success of game on the same IP, polished as most of Blizzard products and providing more streamlined experience than previous MMO's. Not to mention that competition was smller than now in MMO genre.
Imo it is almost impossible to repeat that big of a success atm. Especially by copying 7 year old ideas.
Are you suggesting that WoW was able reuse assets from this? As for copying its success, I'm not talking about that. I'm just refering to their development approach, and why it resulted in a basic quality product. Why it became so successful is a whole other issue. The quality/cost/speed probably helped, but I know there's a lot more to it than that, and I'd be the last one to suggest anyone should be aiming for similar success.
I think EVE makes another good example. It's so graphically lacking, people compare it to playing a spread sheet. Instead of low quality graphics, they just stayed very focused on making it all about the ships flying through space. No need to render the inside of space stations, planetary surfaces, or even people. Not the most popular approach, and yet its been a lot easier for CCP to polish it, and keep building on it - which has probably had something to do with their success as well.
Am I saying "copy EVE" now? No, I'm just saying there are different ways to save time and money than putting out an unfinished mess of a product.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I bet if we had much better mmos noone would care how long it took to make. Sadly not many people are successful at making mmos.
I would say the two are related. Let's face it: the companies making "MMOs" these days (and I use the term loosely) are absolutely terrible at it, leading to both long development times and terrible gameplay and/or design choices.
When single player games makes new engine they can spend years on it, Eidos have spent 5 years on theyr new engine and hitman game. Im unsure how engine works when it comes to renting but other might have a better knowledge on this then me. But when sp games can use that long i dont see why mmo company complains as theyr profit is likley higher.
If an mmo manage to get someone to sub for 3 months they have pretty much sold another game, and i doubt anyone can keep up with that income speed when it comes to makeing sp games. What they loose on costumer support and servers they earn back in dev costs as you need a smaler team to maintain an mmo then make a new sp game.
I might be far off the mark as i have limited knowledge in this area.
For me graphics are all about style and not detail and this is where I feel companies should go. If you nail a really distinct style your game will never really look dated and of course you can update at regular intervals to add in more detail but the style has to be great in the first place. Also with MMO's being multiplayer you really have to set your sites lower than with a SP game as there is extra strain on your PC, Blizzard understand this and it seems Bioware do too because having loads of people to play with in a low resource using graphically stylish MMO is better than with having no-one to play with in a resource hogging realistically detailed MMO.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
From what I understand Blizzard spend lots of time fine tuning their games and having low poly count graphics help facillitate that so they are really just prioritising on gameplay rather than graphics, which is smart and not cutting corners to me, which was reversed in the case of EQ2 and AOC so those games released without lots of content. Blizzard understand what gamers want but that still takes time to get the content right and working and if WoW was made today it would cost far more than the $60 miliion that is reported they spent on my making it, also Blizzard are famous for taking their time with games and releasing only when ready, used to be same with Bioware until EA decided to rush DA2, DA1 took 5 years to make and it shows in its content and replayablilty unlike DA2's 2 years. Its why in the MMO world WoW = big success while EQ2 & AOC = relative flops. This is the mantra I have followed ever since I started playing games GAMEPLAY IS KING.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I don't necessarilly agree or disagree. What I mean by that is:
Even though SWToR has taken many years, once it comes out in the next year or so, fully voiced, full cut scene games will not be de rigueur. Everything they will have implemented will work just fine with the current gaming crowd except for hard core gamers who are constantly looking for "something else".
Secondly, most movies that we all watch follow the same tropes thave have been used for years. Music is pretty much the same as well, at least how it's put together. Nothing really ground breaking for many years.
So "being new and current" really isn't "all that".
However, I do see a point to Lobotomist's, er "point".
There are lines where something might become yesterday's news. However, in SWToR's case I don't think they have anything to worry about.
but for instance, if an mmo was to put all this work and engegy into an isometric game and "suddenly" during its development, full 3D games took off, then "yes" that could be an issue for that isometric game.
The issue is not how long a game takes to be created but what are the changes that happen during its development and what does it offer upon release that is different from its competition.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Huh, the usual complaint is that development is rushed :P
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
@ the OP
I understand why you may think that way, but youre not considering something. Those trends you listed int he various years wer ethings that ALREADY existed in that year.
In the case of MMORPGs, theyre not relevant when theyre announced, theyre relevant when theyre released. So even though a game might get announced in 2006, its not an actual product on the market (and therefore able to be "the trend") until 2011 or whatever year it comes out.
Think of it like this. Lets say apple announced in 2012 they were making something, let just say for the hell of it they call it an iBrain, and its some microchip you can get implanted in your brain which has all the functions and then some of an iPad built right into you. Thing is, even though it would get lots of attention and hype from the announcement, it wouldnt actually be "the trend" until it was out of development and was being sold to the public in like 2015 or whatever.
Pretty much all products related to technology suffer from the time delay, not just MMORPGS. By the time theyre released, theres already newer and better things being developed. The key to being succesful is being able to follow all the trends and gauge where the market will be when you plan on releasing your product, wethe rit is 1 year, 5 years, or 10 years away. If you were to start working on a product based on where the market used to be, rathe rthan where it will be, thats when you start running into problems. Thats the reason so many games have flopped as well. They run their development based on archaic ideas of what people want, and try to follow those who have already done the exact same thing. Very few dev studios have leadership with enough brains to instead say "who cares what people want now, or wanted 5 years ago. What will they want 5 years from now".
For example, the combat systems that have existed in MMOs for the past decade+. Only a stupid developer would say "hey, lets do the same exact combat system theyve done in every game for the past 10 years. surely they'll still find it exciting 3-5 years from now when we get around to releasing our game". A smart one would say "hey, people are already growing bored with the same old same old. How much MORE bored are they going to be in another 3-5 years of still repeating the same thing? We need to come up with something different that will definitely interest people a few years from now".