Massively Multiplayer Online Games

[Selby]

I'm stingy with my credit card info after the fiasco that was WWIIOnline and AO. Both notoriously buggy crap products that at times didn't allow you to cancel your account\change your payment info...

And SWG is UO in space because the same person (Raph Koster) designed them both.

Selby

[WarLocke]

So what do you all think is the best way for the companies to charge? What is the correct balance between the user's needs and the company's needs?

Well, they could handle it like Neocron does - the game itself is a free download, but you have to sign up for the first month (at $12US IIRC) to play.

I mean, if MMORPGs are such cash cows, do 'they' really need a box fee on top of a subscription? My gut says no. It's just that the companies are greedy, and the public-at-large will pay twice.

I can certainly understand the reasons for a monthly charge (even if you really can't use CSRs as an excuse since so many of the new MMORPGs are going to automated systems - again, the companies are greedy and don't want to put up with stuff like the UO Guide lawsuits and Tweety/Lum nonsense), but the charge-me-twice thing just grates on me, philosophically. Not enough that I would swear of the games - for the right one (like City of Heroes, perhaps) I'd pay both; I just wouldn't like it.

[nobbie]

Well, they could handle it like Neocron does - the game itself is a free download, but you have to sign up for the first month (at $12US IIRC) to play.

I mean, if MMORPGs are such cash cows, do 'they' really need a box fee on top of a subscription?  My gut says no.  It's just that the companies are greedy, and the public-at-large will pay twice.

They could also sell the box with CD's/DVD, manuals etc for ~50$, but offer 3 months of free playing time then. This would be very fair for both sides (buy-and-try), but obviously companies/producers are not only greedy, as you've stated already (I 100% agree, btw), but also want to take over no risk whatsoever if the game should turn out to be a flop. I see no reason to take over that risk with my money.

[Mithrandir]

Still, there is a huge profit left once the sales reach the 400,000-500,000 mark or more. Sales over 1,000,000 grant immense profits, provided the monthly fees are about 10-15$.

Everquest, the biggest MMOG in the United States, has taken over 4 years to get 430,000 subscribers. DAoC is the second largest, coming in at ~250,000 accounts over 2 years. No MMOG in history has ever sold 500,000 boxes relatively quickly after the game has been released. None have even been on the same stratosphere as 1 million boxes.

The fact is that MMOGs *need* the quick cash that is the box sales. They have longer development cycles than most games because they have to integrate actual game code with network code with the patching service with the billing service, etc. So when these MMOGs finally do hit the market, the company is sapped and needs to pay a lot of bills :) The fast cash that the box provides helps to mitigate that pressure, whereas the monthly payments are more of a long-term goal.

Bolty has put the catch of MMOG's nicely in the intro to his UXO Event article, and here is the quote again

Now, no offense to Bolty or anything (<3 Bolty :) ) but he admits to having never played a MMOG before and then makes a broad sweeping statement about how all MMOGs "work" a few sentences later :unsure: I think you guys have fallen prey to the media :) You've read all these stories on CNN.com, etc. about how MMOGs are the devil because this one guy in Korea played 72 hours staright and died because of it, or how MMOGs ruined this guy's life and his wife divorced him, and so on. The fact is, that's hardly the norm. Only about 2% of the EQ population is actually the "Raid 10 Hours a Day For Great Justice" type - and even the vast majority of those people are completely fine in their daily lives. MMOG/Internet addiction is an incredibly rare occurance, but that's still pretty much all you hear about MMOGs from people and websites not involved with them. Because of this, MMOGs get painted as these evil things "out to get you", addict you, and then turn you into some half-starved monkey work slave donating his unused brain power to the greater collective. Or something like that.

MMOG/Internet addiction occurs in people that already have certain, for whatever reason, tendencies to become addicted to various activities. I believe the figure was that 90% of all definied cases of MMOG/Internet addiction were in people that were already alcoholics, had OCD, were addicted to various drugs, and so on. For whatever reason, there is just some innate brain chemical imbalance which causes some people to become addicted to certain things more easily. I actually wrote a rather long paper on this subject in high school, so I know a little bit about the sbject and am not just pulling numbers out of the sky here either :)

But, I'm getting off-track here... Basically, MMOGs are depicted as tools for getting you addicted by those that have no knowledge on the subject (i.e. the media) and it seems a lot of this people have taken it hook line and sinker :)

The first problem seems to be the paying twice thing. People don't like paying for the product in the store and then again in order to actually play it. So how about if some play time is included with the purchase?

Erm, I am unaware of any MMOG that doesn't offer the first month free.

The first problem seems to be the paying twice thing. People don't like paying for the product in the store and then again in order to actually play it. So how about if some play time is included with the purchase?

Charging by play time is a horrible idea. Lots and lots and lots of people go afk for significant amounts of time in-game rather than just logging out so if people need them they can just leave messages, so they can come back and read /gu later, or whatever. The point is: it is utterly ridiculous to make people quit out of the game every single time they leave their computer in an effort to save money... it discourages everything that a MMOG is about.

Easy: Dynamic monthly fees. Adapt the fees according to the copies sold, or the paying active customers. More customers = lower fees, fewer customers = higher fees.

Oh my, this is bad. Let's think this through here: What's a good idea to get ALL of your customers to quit your game? It's like a contest! Yay! The answer is, of course, dynamic monthly fees.

Do you really think it's a good idea that if a bunch of people leave your game to make the people who still enjoy it pay even more just because the people who ended up not liking it left? I can't even describe in words how pissed I would be if by DAoC bill fluctuated every month just because people were entering/leaving the game. All a fluctuating bill does is makes people suspicious and pissed - which is a good way to get even more to quit and pissed which makes those still there pay EVEN MORE. A "dynamic monthly fee" would be the worst of business practices.

I mean, if MMORPGs are such cash cows, do 'they' really need a box fee on top of a subscription?

They're not cash cows. That's the misconception that is being perpetuated across the internet. Microsoft regularly makes over an 80% profit margin on their latest OS. The two most succesful MMOGs (DAoC and EQ) have a 15-25% profit margin each year. 15-25% is "good", but it's hardly breaking the bank here folks.

even if you really can't use CSRs as an excuse since so many of the new MMORPGs are going to automated systems - again, the companies are greedy and don't want to put up with stuff like the UO Guide lawsuits and Tweety/Lum nonsense

DAoC is still 100% CSRs. Even with automated systems, it's not like people aren't handling the in-game questions, bug reports, etc. - it's just the appeals go through a bit more filtration before being handled.

charge-me-twice thing just grates on me

I guess I have to ask... why? People put money upfront for cars and then pay "monthly fees" for them for a long time after that. Except that MMOGs are like cars that have little mechanics inside constantly running around fixing stuff and adding new features :)

They could also sell the box with CD's/DVD, manuals etc for ~50$, but offer 3 months of free playing time then.

I think you guys don't really understand how expensive bandwdith is when you're paying for 250,000 people across 13 servers playing a game. Box prices take a decent chunk out of the bills a company has piled up during the development process, but it doesn't cover all of them. You can't expect a company to run on empty for 3 months unless you want to grind it into the ground.

[jahcs]

Paying for the game and not being able to use it unless you keep paying is what bothers me. If the manufacturers included a single player mode or the ability to play over LAN or something I would be more inclined to buy. Even if the single player version was only a small portion of the game.

[Mithrandir]

Paying for the game and not being able to use it unless you keep paying is what bothers me. If the manufacturers included a single player mode or the ability to play over LAN or something I would be more inclined to buy. Even if the single player version was only a small portion of the game.

Single player version of WHAT? You can't make the zones client-side because that would just make it open season to cheat. You can't make a completely seperate 1-player game because there is absolutely nothing in the MMOG that lends itself to being a 1-player game in the least. You would have to make a completely new game and package it in the same box - with its own bugs, development cycle, patchs, etc. Completely inefficient and unneeded... You play a MMORPG to play a MMORPG. What's the point of a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game if it's not massive, not multiplayer, and not online?

And even if they did for some unknown reason stick the same zones on your computer client-side and just let you run around in them all by yourself online... what's the point? Yeah, running around empty zones talking to nobody by Bob the Weapon Merchant and Sarah the Shield Merchant sounds fun!

<_<

A MMORPG is a MMORPG. Wasting development time to make it anything other than that would be a betrayal to the real customers.


On a side note, the Mythic Content Producer provided me with this link for further discussion on costs of running a MMOG:

http://www.gameconference.com/conference/j...icamulligan.ppt (It's a Powerpoint presentation)

[swirly]

I think you guys don't really understand how expensive bandwdith is when you're paying for 250,000 people across 13 servers playing a game. Box prices take a decent chunk out of the bills a company has piled up during the development process, but it doesn't cover all of them. You can't expect a company to run on empty for 3 months unless you want to grind it into the ground.

I think how I view it is that the price of the box matches up with the monthly free time you get. What I mean is say you buy a game for $45 and it has a $15 per month fee. Then I say you get 3 months of play time with your purchase. I know this means that the game company isn't making any money off of the initial sale and is even losing money. I also think this is how it should be. I think these companies have to be prepared to take a loss for some time after they are released. Eventually, if its a good game, they will get a big enough user base that the small profit from the monthly fees well cover the assorted costs they have built up and then they can actually start profiting from the games.

With these kind of systems you can't look at the short term when you are the one putting the game out. You have to fully expect to take a loss for a good length of time, gradually (as you get more users and users have been playing and paying for a while) break even, and then eventually start profiting.

So do I expect a company to run on empty for 3 months? Well no, I expect that the $45 I spent on the game will be used to keep it going for those 3 months just like the monthly payment would. I do expect them to eat the loss of the initial box price though. Eventually they will get it back from whatever small profit they make from the monthly fees, but they have to expect to not even break even for a good length of time.

[Guest]

Im not saying that MMOGs are tight for everyone, but many people bash them with out giving it much thought.

Also for an adult(who actually likes to socialize) they probably save you money.

Time spent playing for me is ussually cut out of time I would spend in a real life activity that costs more money.

Gas, beer(at bar prices), overpriced food and addimission fees to whatever. Real life activities are exspensive. So lets say I play an average of 30 hours in a month. Those 30 hours spent in some other social activity would cost more.

Now kids see the money different I know. And I am not daring to say whether time spent in bars or playing a mmog are healthier.

But it is not much money for an adult.

[Chaerophon]

MMOG/Internet addiction occurs in people that already have certain, for whatever reason, tendencies to become addicted to various activities. I believe the figure was that 90% of all definied cases of MMOG/Internet addiction were in people that were already alcoholics, had OCD, were addicted to various drugs, and so on. For whatever reason, there is just some innate brain chemical imbalance which causes some people to become addicted to certain things more easily. I actually wrote a rather long paper on this subject in high school, so I know a little bit about the sbject and am not just pulling numbers out of the sky here either

Quite frankly, I think that you're deceiving yourself if you don't believe that a rather large percentage of longtime lurkers, including myself, have not been addicted even to only a comparatively moderately addictive game such as Diablo for at least a period of months, if not years. While I love the game, I fear it as well, strange as that may sound. For a period of about six months, my hockey career, school, and even my relationship with my girlfriend took a psychological back seat to the "realities" of my online world. Whether or not you have experienced the same thing, the ability of an MMORPG to make money depends upon longtime subscribers and a large proportion of these subscribers are addicted, whether they want to believe it or not. I will acknowledge that for some people, online gaming has come to represent a large part of their real life; however, as soon as it has a detrimental effect on real life, the gaming, in my opinion, has gone too far. I'm not going to blame the gaming companies for making an addictive product - that's why they're in business. However, the notion that some prior weakness must exist in order for an individual to become addicted is only a half truth. Perhaps it is weakness that leads to addiction, if you're willing to consider familial problems, relationship issues, excessive stress, etc. to be "weakness". That being said, the gaming addicted world is not solely populated by drug and alcohol addicts, the severely depressed, and other such individuals. A large portion of the addicted gaming world is merely seeking a place where they feel that their presence makes a large difference or where they can be recognized as a prominent member of a community; opportunities that they may not feel that they have available to them in real life. As an intrinsic part of the business, gaming companies prey upon this "instinctive desire" to "be someone".

In my opinion, gaming addiction is a much larger problem than many people realize and often people pass off their own addictions as "passions" without realizing that their behaviour is actually rather compulsive. I've made the same arguments to my family, to my girlfriend, and to some of my friends in the past; "it's just escapism", "I just love to play the game", etc. Studies and experimentation may say one thing, but based on experience and overcoming such an addiction myself, I would make the case that although I may suffer from clinical depression, many, many of the people with whom I regularly played, from all around the world, exhibited the same or even worse behaviours than my own and I have a hard time believing that they all suffered from some sort of psycholgical ailment prior to their participation in the online world. I suppose my argument is this: gambling addicts don't know that they're addicted until they gamble. At the core of your argument is that those who become addicted to gaming are seeking some sort of escape just like those who are alcoholics, drug addicts, and compulsive gamblers. However, the fact that there is such a societal stigma attached to those activities and that the same stigma is not attached to gaming speaks volumes to me. Perhaps those who are addicted to gaming are merely choosing an avenue for their hidden desires that is not so frowned upon by the rest of society. Does that mean that they are any less addicted? I suppose that a case could be made that they are not; however, the effects of gaming upon an individual's life can be just as damaging as any other addiction and I would make the argument that the allure goes beyond the chemical in nature.

[WarLocke]

I guess I have to ask... why? People put money upfront for cars and then pay "monthly fees" for them for a long time after that. Except that MMOGs are like cars that have little mechanics inside constantly running around fixing stuff and adding new features

Well... That's one of the reasons why I don't own a car. :P

The two most succesful MMOGs (DAoC and EQ) have a 15-25% profit margin each year. 15-25% is "good", but it's hardly breaking the bank here folks.

All I'm saying is, if some smaller MMORPGs are surviving by letting players download the client for free, couldn't the 'brand name' ones also? Yes, they'd lose out on some profits, but at the same time the monthly income isn't anything to sneeze at - using your numbers for DAoC, 250,000 accounts paying ~$13 a month (it is still $13, right?), comes to $3,250,000 monthly.

If MMORPGs actually had better launches (every single MMORPG I've played has had a horrendous launch - including EQ, except for perhaps Asheron's Call and DAoC; although they had little content at launch) it wouldn't be as big a deal, but as it is, the "free month" or however long given to a player is often wasted on getting bugs fixed, or stabilizing servers, or whatnot.

[nobbie]

That being said, the gaming addicted world is not solely populated by drug and alcohol addicts, the severely depressed, and other such individuals.&nbsp; A large portion of the addicted gaming world is merely seeking a place where they feel that their presence makes a large difference or where they can be recognized as a prominent member of a community; opportunities that they may not feel that they have available to them in real life.&nbsp; As an intrinsic part of the business, gaming companies prey upon this "instinctive desire" to "be someone".

That's one very good, to-the-point summary of the reasons for game addiction.

[Guest]

I was there and I had plenty of content. I think theit launch was great, and is still a mark for others to reach.

Sure it had no where near the content it has now, but at least for me the content always kept up with my play and leveling.

In fact I have tried out quite a few other games since and what they called content was not that great.

[Chaerophon]

nt

[Walkiry]

Single player version of WHAT? You can't make the zones client-side because that would just make it open season to cheat. You can't make a completely seperate 1-player game because there is absolutely nothing in the MMOG that lends itself to being a 1-player game in the least. You would have to make a completely new game and package it in the same box - with its own bugs, development cycle, patchs, etc. Completely inefficient and unneeded... You play a MMORPG to play a MMORPG. What's the point of a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game if it's not massive, not multiplayer, and not online?

Exactly. I do not want to pay for a game and then keep paying when I cannot do anything with it unless I'm paying that monthly fee. When I stop paying for the servers, it becomes a 45$ coaster.

I'm not sure if there's nothing in the MMOG that can appeal to single player (Morrowind comes to mind, a few friends said it was great because it was like a MMORPG without all the morons that populate them :lol: I know this is overly simplified so don't burn me :P). The single-player world doesn't need to be so huge after all. They could sell a few-player-oriented server as well for the same price of the client. But until there's some added value to that purchase, a good single-player or P2P small multiplayer game will be superior in my view.

[TaMeOlta]

I wish that each of these types of "Pay-to-play" games at least had a single-player-offline type version of it , to see if you would even like the game . I may have been tempted to snag Everquest , Star Wars Galaxies , or several of the others - and eventually might even have drifted on to one of them if I got addicted . ;)

[Occhidiangela]

You pay more than once to play, since someone needs to maintain the golf course, cut the grass, fix the greens, put the sand in the bunkers.

You buy a PC? I buy some golf clubs. You buy a CD? I buy the balls, or better yet, the golf bag and pull cart. One time cost.

You play on a persistent world that is constantly maintained? I play on a golf course, a Green Realm as it were, that takes maintenance.

Golf is incredibly addictive. I once compared my Golf Habit to a heroin addiction.

Compulsive behaviour is compulsive behaviour, be it Golf, be it Diablo,k be it Starcraft, or be it DAoC. :)

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . that's impossible.

I wish that each of these types of "Pay-to-play" games at least had a single-player-offline type version of it , to see if you would even like the game .

The *essence* of a MMOG is the interaction with other people. No interaction, no game. Asking for a single player version of a MMOG is like asking for a foodless meal, a dry swim, a wordless book, silent music.

Now, griping about the pricing structure, that is reasonable. But bemoaning the lack of single player? That just shows a lack of understanding of the concept.

--Pete

[TaMeOlta]

Oh no , I didn't mean it had to be a fully functional Single Player game -- more like a Demo / Introductory package that could suck me in and leave me wanting more ;) . I guess I might not be able to see the difference between those types of games and games like Starcraft -Warcraft - Diablo - NeverwinterNights , all of which have Multiplayer (and persistent worlds -> NwN) Functions built in . Tell me that anyone of these games doesn't have an area , or times , when you are by yourself attempting to accomplish something ?

Getting a little hands on is different than reading reviews or seeing sample video clips , to me it is ;) .

EDIT - I do realise I had listed Starcraft + Warcraft in there and that those are more Straegy/combat based .

EDIT2 : OOOps ! I didn't mean to rehash this particular debate (serves me right for not reading every reply ;) )

[TaMeOlta]

If I were to by golf gear , I can try to get the feel of it in my backyard .... sure , I can't take a full swing :P . I do understand the analogy completely though :D .

[jahcs]

I remember the old shareware. You got a small taste of the game free and if you wanted more you paid. When Asheron's Call 2 came out it came with a short trial period. Not three months or anything to break the software company's back. The golf analogy is a good one. To get the full experience you must play on a course. Or you get a device for putting practice in the basement. Not the full experience, but a sample.