MMORPG no more?
by AzraelK · in General Discussion · 03/21/2002 (10:25 am) · 29 replies
I invite you to read this article I prepared for the Burningrose Studios Group, is basically an explanation of the mmorpg from (almost) its origins, and truths. From my experience developing and a reachearch made on this subject. If you are considering in making an MMORPG you should read this once and then decide. This are the reasons why we are considering not continuing in the mmorpg business. (and consider the alternatives, which are very good). (is not that accurate so if you find any mistakes please let me know)
MMORPG no more?
"The ultimate business model", for most, an unachievable goal acording some, whats there behind the myth of the mmorpg? Is it possible for an small company to create its own and get rich in the process?
"Once upon a time: there was a small company called 'verant' a small startup company located in austin texas, verant had a simple goal: to create a graphical MUD. simplicity above all, verant created a very, very simple but addictive 3d MUD interface.
Realizing the posibilities Sony offered financial help, and the tiny MUD grew and grew until it became a giant
among giants. The company is now one of the weatlhiest game developing companies in the world (right along with ID software) and they have launched only 1 hit game series, a tiny MUD called "Everquest" and they lived
happily ever after"
"The game developer brothers saw the everquest craze and though 'easy money' was at hand, using simple tools
they started to build their own everquests. Most of them were lost half of the way, a few survived and were released, only to spectacularly fail at launch time (ww2 online and anarchy online to quote the most known) only very, very few of them make it to the last line and probably only one of them actually did as good as expected. (Dark age of camelot) 1 out of dozens survived"
"But what happened? they were in most cases, more experienced, they used better engines, they had better gameplay, why this "wannabes" didnt made it? when a tinier, simpler version did? that my friends is a mystery... or at least it was."
Such is the tale of "everquest" the starting point of the "MMORPG craze" that hit on the 90's and that Burningrose was part of =)
If you read the history once more, you will see a detail that sticks out out of it, that tiny detail is called "sony" (the second detail is simplicity.
but we will discuss that later) everquest passed from being an "unknown" to a pretty well "known" game. it passed from using a tiny home server to using a server farm. And it also passed from being free or with a minimum charge to paying 10 bucks a month. Whats does this have to do with anything? lots.
What exactly is an MMORPG for that matter? mmorpg stands for Massive Multiplayer Online RPG (which is exactly what a mud is if you were wondering, the only difference is that a MUD uses text instead of graphics) in a mmorpg
you play in a persistent online world filled with enemies and friends which are players just like you. To be honest the future of gaming lies somewhere within this new technology.
From a coding point a mmorpg is relatively easy to make.
you make a server which controls a "zone" in the game launch it and then let anyone with a client log into it, the server takes care of the gameplay any info on stats that changes is saved to a dbase.
The client checks all info on the server and displays it as graphical info (3d,2d or text) and thats about it.
(Of course there is the difficulty to avoid lag and also adding security to the server/client scheme but in its most simple state thats what an mmorpg does.)
The rest is up to designing good looking content, music, graphics and UI that have several functions, like trading, customizing your character etc. Sounds deceptively simple isnt?
So how come we dont have hundreds of mmorpgs out there?
I think this is easier to explain by example. Lets supose you already have all set for your mmorpg, lets supose your server has 20 zones, capable of hosting
up to 64 users each. (which is very small) do your math that means you have 1280 users poking around in your game at the same time!
Now.. of each of this 20 servers (which may fail
at any given minute) This people who are trying to have fun on you world 50% dont have an idea of what they are supposed to do 20% will hack around aimlessly (and probably brake something on the process) 25% will try to brake the game on purpose and just a mere 5% will know is way around and play fairly. (Im making up the numbers but you would be surprised by their accuracy)
unless you are using VERY efficient and ROBUST code, your game will be breaking and logging off at least 64 users simultaneously at least 10 times a day, 25% of your users wont return after the first crash, and 75% wont return if they loss their data in the process.
In less than 24 hours of service you will realize that you need a 24/7 backup of every server in the game.
Now you must remember that each server or at least each backup must work on different workstations, ($1200
or more per pc.) consuming enough bandwidth to host 5 webservers each. and they will need to have apropiate maintenence.
In addition Each of this users has different PC, different connections, different speeds, different styles of playing and even different beliefs than those on the design team. (oh yeah and they will each find a new bug or find a new feature missing or that needs changes everyday)
What about bandwidth? doesnt a webpage have millions
of users each month and they dont suffer so much?
yes and no, first hand I can tell you they DO suffer,
and second a game is not a webpage, in a webpage you download a html file, its contents, (graphics or so) and then read them, check them for a few minutes and go to another webpage, repeat cleanse, rinse.
In addition you usually dont send info back to the
server (unless you send a form or data through
java or xml) and most info, like images and even text maybe cached. In a game you constantly send back and forth info several times a second (and an snapshot each 2 seconds) most of this info cant be cached, imagine a webpage that reloads itself each half a second without caching. (of course game packets are smaller but still eats a lot of bandwidth)
So, taking all of this into account you dont only need a good team to make an mmorpg work, you also need infrastructure and support. Think about it, what made everquest so big? (besides an incredible ad campaign of course) the support and hardware that sony was able to provide. =)
And then theres the matter of simplicity, remember the less packages you send the less data you expend (less bandwidth) and the less time it takes (less lag) and less
features, also mean less bugs to track, In an mmorpg less is certainly more.
Since an mmorpg takes bandwidth and time to constantly take care of it sony figured out they will always need
to charge for this and have some profits at the end. Hence the 10 bucks a month. They merely cover the game expenses, and give a profit. But this is sony we are talking about, in some they build their own machines and are extremely unexpensive to them, profits being significantly bigger than for anyone else.
This brings another problem, an MMORPG has to be good enough not only to pay for the box price, it also has to be good enough to pay 10-15 bucks a month for as long as you play it, for years to come. (thats a damn good game!)
Brothers on arms of the mmorpg tried to went the opposite way , building more features with less hardware less development time, and less resources and failed at the end.
So thats the history, is it impossible to create?
no,not really, is it difficult? oh yes,it is (expensive as well)
An mmorpg is not a task to be taken lightly it requires lots of effort and full time job to be taken care
and in addition needs a good server farm and servers to work with, good hardware lots of unpaid development time and lots of unpaid testing (which comes with unpaid maintenence and unpaid user service)Meaning LOTS of money and support.
At the end, if all goes well. It really should be worth it (and profitable) although this only happens 1 each 100 times.
-----------------------
German Cons Software Engineer.
MMORPG no more?
"The ultimate business model", for most, an unachievable goal acording some, whats there behind the myth of the mmorpg? Is it possible for an small company to create its own and get rich in the process?
"Once upon a time: there was a small company called 'verant' a small startup company located in austin texas, verant had a simple goal: to create a graphical MUD. simplicity above all, verant created a very, very simple but addictive 3d MUD interface.
Realizing the posibilities Sony offered financial help, and the tiny MUD grew and grew until it became a giant
among giants. The company is now one of the weatlhiest game developing companies in the world (right along with ID software) and they have launched only 1 hit game series, a tiny MUD called "Everquest" and they lived
happily ever after"
"The game developer brothers saw the everquest craze and though 'easy money' was at hand, using simple tools
they started to build their own everquests. Most of them were lost half of the way, a few survived and were released, only to spectacularly fail at launch time (ww2 online and anarchy online to quote the most known) only very, very few of them make it to the last line and probably only one of them actually did as good as expected. (Dark age of camelot) 1 out of dozens survived"
"But what happened? they were in most cases, more experienced, they used better engines, they had better gameplay, why this "wannabes" didnt made it? when a tinier, simpler version did? that my friends is a mystery... or at least it was."
Such is the tale of "everquest" the starting point of the "MMORPG craze" that hit on the 90's and that Burningrose was part of =)
If you read the history once more, you will see a detail that sticks out out of it, that tiny detail is called "sony" (the second detail is simplicity.
but we will discuss that later) everquest passed from being an "unknown" to a pretty well "known" game. it passed from using a tiny home server to using a server farm. And it also passed from being free or with a minimum charge to paying 10 bucks a month. Whats does this have to do with anything? lots.
What exactly is an MMORPG for that matter? mmorpg stands for Massive Multiplayer Online RPG (which is exactly what a mud is if you were wondering, the only difference is that a MUD uses text instead of graphics) in a mmorpg
you play in a persistent online world filled with enemies and friends which are players just like you. To be honest the future of gaming lies somewhere within this new technology.
From a coding point a mmorpg is relatively easy to make.
you make a server which controls a "zone" in the game launch it and then let anyone with a client log into it, the server takes care of the gameplay any info on stats that changes is saved to a dbase.
The client checks all info on the server and displays it as graphical info (3d,2d or text) and thats about it.
(Of course there is the difficulty to avoid lag and also adding security to the server/client scheme but in its most simple state thats what an mmorpg does.)
The rest is up to designing good looking content, music, graphics and UI that have several functions, like trading, customizing your character etc. Sounds deceptively simple isnt?
So how come we dont have hundreds of mmorpgs out there?
I think this is easier to explain by example. Lets supose you already have all set for your mmorpg, lets supose your server has 20 zones, capable of hosting
up to 64 users each. (which is very small) do your math that means you have 1280 users poking around in your game at the same time!
Now.. of each of this 20 servers (which may fail
at any given minute) This people who are trying to have fun on you world 50% dont have an idea of what they are supposed to do 20% will hack around aimlessly (and probably brake something on the process) 25% will try to brake the game on purpose and just a mere 5% will know is way around and play fairly. (Im making up the numbers but you would be surprised by their accuracy)
unless you are using VERY efficient and ROBUST code, your game will be breaking and logging off at least 64 users simultaneously at least 10 times a day, 25% of your users wont return after the first crash, and 75% wont return if they loss their data in the process.
In less than 24 hours of service you will realize that you need a 24/7 backup of every server in the game.
Now you must remember that each server or at least each backup must work on different workstations, ($1200
or more per pc.) consuming enough bandwidth to host 5 webservers each. and they will need to have apropiate maintenence.
In addition Each of this users has different PC, different connections, different speeds, different styles of playing and even different beliefs than those on the design team. (oh yeah and they will each find a new bug or find a new feature missing or that needs changes everyday)
What about bandwidth? doesnt a webpage have millions
of users each month and they dont suffer so much?
yes and no, first hand I can tell you they DO suffer,
and second a game is not a webpage, in a webpage you download a html file, its contents, (graphics or so) and then read them, check them for a few minutes and go to another webpage, repeat cleanse, rinse.
In addition you usually dont send info back to the
server (unless you send a form or data through
java or xml) and most info, like images and even text maybe cached. In a game you constantly send back and forth info several times a second (and an snapshot each 2 seconds) most of this info cant be cached, imagine a webpage that reloads itself each half a second without caching. (of course game packets are smaller but still eats a lot of bandwidth)
So, taking all of this into account you dont only need a good team to make an mmorpg work, you also need infrastructure and support. Think about it, what made everquest so big? (besides an incredible ad campaign of course) the support and hardware that sony was able to provide. =)
And then theres the matter of simplicity, remember the less packages you send the less data you expend (less bandwidth) and the less time it takes (less lag) and less
features, also mean less bugs to track, In an mmorpg less is certainly more.
Since an mmorpg takes bandwidth and time to constantly take care of it sony figured out they will always need
to charge for this and have some profits at the end. Hence the 10 bucks a month. They merely cover the game expenses, and give a profit. But this is sony we are talking about, in some they build their own machines and are extremely unexpensive to them, profits being significantly bigger than for anyone else.
This brings another problem, an MMORPG has to be good enough not only to pay for the box price, it also has to be good enough to pay 10-15 bucks a month for as long as you play it, for years to come. (thats a damn good game!)
Brothers on arms of the mmorpg tried to went the opposite way , building more features with less hardware less development time, and less resources and failed at the end.
So thats the history, is it impossible to create?
no,not really, is it difficult? oh yes,it is (expensive as well)
An mmorpg is not a task to be taken lightly it requires lots of effort and full time job to be taken care
and in addition needs a good server farm and servers to work with, good hardware lots of unpaid development time and lots of unpaid testing (which comes with unpaid maintenence and unpaid user service)Meaning LOTS of money and support.
At the end, if all goes well. It really should be worth it (and profitable) although this only happens 1 each 100 times.
-----------------------
German Cons Software Engineer.
#2
These days, with some new MMO game being announced often, the biggest hurdle is just getting noticed by what I think is a relatively limited audience. I personally have never played EQ or AC; never liked the graphics enough to want to. I do play DAoC and AO and enjoy the social aspects of the game more than the tread-mill nature of most of the game mechanics. I don't think I'd play more than two of these at any given time, so a new game has to "woo" me away; if it's just more of the same, well, it's unlikely I'll switch to a new game. And I'm probably not that much different from other players in this respect.
In the next year, I expect AC2 and Star Wars Galaxies will be big. Real big (especially SWG; it'll probably attract a lot of new players to the genre as well). And I'll probably switch as well. My AO account will be closed, and possibly my DAoC account as well.
So, while the technical issues on the server-side are critical to success, success in the MMORPG space will, I think, come down to marketing, sex appeal, and game play. Small companies will likely be able to deal with many of the technical issues, and will be able to innovate on game play and sex appeal, and this may be enough to attract a large enough player base. But I wouldn't bet on it unless they team up, as Verant did, with a larger company; this is part of why I think AC2 (Microsoft) and SWG (Lucas, Sony) will be big successes.
Cheers
Oliver
03/21/2002 (11:24 am)
I'm not convinced that the quality of server-side components are as important to success as you've made out. Obviously the development approach for the server-side pieces is critical, and high quality and good architecture is a must; hiring good people with the right background is critical.These days, with some new MMO game being announced often, the biggest hurdle is just getting noticed by what I think is a relatively limited audience. I personally have never played EQ or AC; never liked the graphics enough to want to. I do play DAoC and AO and enjoy the social aspects of the game more than the tread-mill nature of most of the game mechanics. I don't think I'd play more than two of these at any given time, so a new game has to "woo" me away; if it's just more of the same, well, it's unlikely I'll switch to a new game. And I'm probably not that much different from other players in this respect.
In the next year, I expect AC2 and Star Wars Galaxies will be big. Real big (especially SWG; it'll probably attract a lot of new players to the genre as well). And I'll probably switch as well. My AO account will be closed, and possibly my DAoC account as well.
So, while the technical issues on the server-side are critical to success, success in the MMORPG space will, I think, come down to marketing, sex appeal, and game play. Small companies will likely be able to deal with many of the technical issues, and will be able to innovate on game play and sex appeal, and this may be enough to attract a large enough player base. But I wouldn't bet on it unless they team up, as Verant did, with a larger company; this is part of why I think AC2 (Microsoft) and SWG (Lucas, Sony) will be big successes.
Cheers
Oliver
#3
And UO wasn't even the first MMORPG. It was the first of the "new generation" ones ("new" being 1997). Meridian 59 was the first, I believe. It was a Sierra(?) game. There were others (Neverwinter Nights on AOL, long ago in a galaxy far far away), but I think M59 was the first "MMORPG" by today's definition of it. Just because UO had a bad start (bugs, lag, etc.) doesn't mean it was a bad game. Once they cleaned everything up, it turned out great. It was the first new gen MMORPG and still the best (IMO). Name one MMORPG that launched without a hitch...there weren't any.
03/21/2002 (11:41 am)
I noticed you skipped a huge chunk of time: Ultima Online. I don't know about anyone else, but I still feel that UO is the best MMORPG ever made. It touched on almost every aspect and covered so much ground that no other MMORPG to date has been able to touch. The vast player economy, trade skills, houses, large roleplaying communities, etc. etc. No other MMORPG has come close to it. EverQuest was a fluke, I still don't understand how it became so popular. It's terrible...it's all about fighting monsters and leveling your character. UO was way more than that.And UO wasn't even the first MMORPG. It was the first of the "new generation" ones ("new" being 1997). Meridian 59 was the first, I believe. It was a Sierra(?) game. There were others (Neverwinter Nights on AOL, long ago in a galaxy far far away), but I think M59 was the first "MMORPG" by today's definition of it. Just because UO had a bad start (bugs, lag, etc.) doesn't mean it was a bad game. Once they cleaned everything up, it turned out great. It was the first new gen MMORPG and still the best (IMO). Name one MMORPG that launched without a hitch...there weren't any.
#4
Was it because there wasn't anything to do and the customer support sucked? Well, Everquest has the same problems and keeps people coming back...
No. The problems came from crappy network code and servers. Just ask anyone, and you'll see that's why AO and WWII online got such a bad rap.
Advertising is the most important, but that's not something any of us really can worry about. We don't have the money to advertise, so we're better off focussing on things to make the actual game good.
I think the problem is that many of the people working on MMORPGs without any financial backing are thinking like the world is still acting like it's 1997. Companies aren't handing out millions to no-name people who have little experience and a neat idea. You're going to need to have a team of experts and some very well-organized design if you even want to be able to hope for any funding for a MMORPG. The genre is flooded in terms of development, so funding a project would be stupid unless it's guaranteed to be perfect.
03/21/2002 (12:27 pm)
Why did WWII online and AO get kick so hard in the head by the press?Was it because there wasn't anything to do and the customer support sucked? Well, Everquest has the same problems and keeps people coming back...
No. The problems came from crappy network code and servers. Just ask anyone, and you'll see that's why AO and WWII online got such a bad rap.
Advertising is the most important, but that's not something any of us really can worry about. We don't have the money to advertise, so we're better off focussing on things to make the actual game good.
I think the problem is that many of the people working on MMORPGs without any financial backing are thinking like the world is still acting like it's 1997. Companies aren't handing out millions to no-name people who have little experience and a neat idea. You're going to need to have a team of experts and some very well-organized design if you even want to be able to hope for any funding for a MMORPG. The genre is flooded in terms of development, so funding a project would be stupid unless it's guaranteed to be perfect.
#5
www.neocron.com
As for the idea of making a MMORPG, why not just make a normal story based RPG, they are 100% better, look at baldurs gate. I just think MMORPG are a bad game concept, they only really work in the US, seeing as cheap internet and broadband never really has spread as totally to Europe.
GOD DAMN I hate BT.
Anyway I'm waiting for Neocron, it promises alot, and anyone thinking of making a MMORPG should at least know what it is.
03/21/2002 (12:28 pm)
The future od MMORPG is here:www.neocron.com
As for the idea of making a MMORPG, why not just make a normal story based RPG, they are 100% better, look at baldurs gate. I just think MMORPG are a bad game concept, they only really work in the US, seeing as cheap internet and broadband never really has spread as totally to Europe.
GOD DAMN I hate BT.
Anyway I'm waiting for Neocron, it promises alot, and anyone thinking of making a MMORPG should at least know what it is.
#6
Just a reccomendation. Never believe the hype of something. Even if it is good, it probably won't live up to the standard you set for it.
I haven't heard much good of Neocron, but I guess a real-time aspect would be interesting to see.
I've sworn off pay-to-play games until one really proves it's fun to play. I don't need the social aspect of games, I want to find one that actually is fun to play.
03/21/2002 (12:51 pm)
All MMORPGs promise a lot.Just a reccomendation. Never believe the hype of something. Even if it is good, it probably won't live up to the standard you set for it.
I haven't heard much good of Neocron, but I guess a real-time aspect would be interesting to see.
I've sworn off pay-to-play games until one really proves it's fun to play. I don't need the social aspect of games, I want to find one that actually is fun to play.
#7
This article is just a voice of warning to all developers (like us) that making an mmorpg (even a simple one) is incredible expensive in money, time and resources. AND without apropiate funding is very difficult or even impossible to finish and publish. (you just cant set it up in your pc as a server and expect it to work) and to prove this, only a few (out of dozens) MMORPG were made and are still functioning.
I code MMORPGs (I did that since a few weeks ago) so Im just saying it looks deceiptevily simple (simpler than coding "black and white" per example).. but of course, is not.
And Finally yes, there are Alternatives, but thats for the final part of the article. (and I would love that you mentioned more)
I can mention one though www.graalonline.com this is (believe it or not ) a free mmorpg like adventure game made (at least in its first versions) in delphi.
03/21/2002 (3:19 pm)
Hehe, thank you for your comments, now this is the reason why I didnt posted this as a Resource first, I knew it had some problem. Yes I realize I didnt mentioned ultima online and perhaps I was too harsh on Anarchy Online (Im only comparing them on a sales point, please bare that on mind) but to be honest the reason that atracted many developer companies to the MMORPG was the spectacular monetary success of "everquest" (Im not sure about those problems mentioned, since me and the people I hang with had never had them, other than the lag and the lack of service)This article is just a voice of warning to all developers (like us) that making an mmorpg (even a simple one) is incredible expensive in money, time and resources. AND without apropiate funding is very difficult or even impossible to finish and publish. (you just cant set it up in your pc as a server and expect it to work) and to prove this, only a few (out of dozens) MMORPG were made and are still functioning.
I code MMORPGs (I did that since a few weeks ago) so Im just saying it looks deceiptevily simple (simpler than coding "black and white" per example).. but of course, is not.
And Finally yes, there are Alternatives, but thats for the final part of the article. (and I would love that you mentioned more)
I can mention one though www.graalonline.com this is (believe it or not ) a free mmorpg like adventure game made (at least in its first versions) in delphi.
#8
No one ever plays it to actually play the game... it's got so many bugs and "freedom" filled areas that the game just doesn't hold much appeal. I mean... a PAUSE button in a multiplayer game? haha.
PvP in Graal is very fun though. Especially in large town brawls. 15-20 people just tossing bombs casting spells and slashing away while riding on a horse.
Also Graal is a very simple game with minimal quests and a very simple engine. Graal isn't content driven, it's basically a skeleton of a game that only comes together when the people playing it interact with eachother. Just a graphical chat room with game elements.
Some neat ideas in it, but hardly an example of a MMORPG or a game that could turn a profit.
I dont' believe the companies are looking for success even near Everquest... all they see is input < output, and the longer they can effectively make a profit the more money the game will net them. Sony has unlimited budget, and it really annoys me to see how they basically charge for every new bit of content even though they could give it for free like Asheron's call or Ultima Online. Everquest is a money making scam with game elements.
03/21/2002 (4:14 pm)
Yeah, but graal is a joke.No one ever plays it to actually play the game... it's got so many bugs and "freedom" filled areas that the game just doesn't hold much appeal. I mean... a PAUSE button in a multiplayer game? haha.
PvP in Graal is very fun though. Especially in large town brawls. 15-20 people just tossing bombs casting spells and slashing away while riding on a horse.
Also Graal is a very simple game with minimal quests and a very simple engine. Graal isn't content driven, it's basically a skeleton of a game that only comes together when the people playing it interact with eachother. Just a graphical chat room with game elements.
Some neat ideas in it, but hardly an example of a MMORPG or a game that could turn a profit.
I dont' believe the companies are looking for success even near Everquest... all they see is input < output, and the longer they can effectively make a profit the more money the game will net them. Sony has unlimited budget, and it really annoys me to see how they basically charge for every new bit of content even though they could give it for free like Asheron's call or Ultima Online. Everquest is a money making scam with game elements.
#9
03/21/2002 (4:27 pm)
you also missed the most played mmorpg lineage
#10
One (of many already stated above) of EQ's reasons for success, is their design. And if you read deeply enough on their website, you'll notice they credit Sojourn, of which I was the lead programmer :) I almost shit when I tried their beta way back when, and saw tons of my ideas in play.
Our team was also working on a graphical offshoot long before Meridian 59 (crappy game) hit the market, but we gave it up for various other projects we had going.
03/21/2002 (4:52 pm)
A little horn tooting here...One (of many already stated above) of EQ's reasons for success, is their design. And if you read deeply enough on their website, you'll notice they credit Sojourn, of which I was the lead programmer :) I almost shit when I tried their beta way back when, and saw tons of my ideas in play.
Our team was also working on a graphical offshoot long before Meridian 59 (crappy game) hit the market, but we gave it up for various other projects we had going.
#11
It had crappy gameplay and promoted "uberism" which means the more you play the better you are... and if you're better than you control it.
Oh, and any game that you have to camp for more than 1 hour for an item is crap... but that's just my opinion. Thousands of people still play EQ and happily enjoy camping for 12 hours for some item.
03/21/2002 (5:04 pm)
EQs design was worthy of making money? hehe, no!It had crappy gameplay and promoted "uberism" which means the more you play the better you are... and if you're better than you control it.
Oh, and any game that you have to camp for more than 1 hour for an item is crap... but that's just my opinion. Thousands of people still play EQ and happily enjoy camping for 12 hours for some item.
#12
> requires lots of effort and full time job to be taken
> care and in addition needs a good server farm and
> servers to work with, good hardware lots of unpaid
> development time and lots of unpaid testing (which
> comes with unpaid maintenence and unpaid user service)
> Meaning LOTS of money and support.
I hate to break it to you, but a high-quality software project of any type takes a lot of work, tons of development and testing time. TANSTAAFL applies.
And frankly, MMORPG are like building a large-scale enterprise-wide application. Its not something to be taken lightly or really without the resources [both technical, financial and business] to tackle it. Just because someone can make a website, doesn't mean that they can make a enterprise-wide application. Same applies to MMORPG and even not so ambitious games, just because someone can put together a small mod or website or throw together a few models, does not mean that one can just plop out a game. It takes lots of hard work and resources to do so.
> At the end, if all goes well. It really should be
> worth it (and profitable) although this only happens
> 1 each 100 times.
Guess what? This isn't just MMORP games that this happens to. Many high quality games have done poorly in sales because of a variety of reasons. There is no guarentee for success.
03/21/2002 (5:25 pm)
> An mmorpg is not a task to be taken lightly it > requires lots of effort and full time job to be taken
> care and in addition needs a good server farm and
> servers to work with, good hardware lots of unpaid
> development time and lots of unpaid testing (which
> comes with unpaid maintenence and unpaid user service)
> Meaning LOTS of money and support.
I hate to break it to you, but a high-quality software project of any type takes a lot of work, tons of development and testing time. TANSTAAFL applies.
And frankly, MMORPG are like building a large-scale enterprise-wide application. Its not something to be taken lightly or really without the resources [both technical, financial and business] to tackle it. Just because someone can make a website, doesn't mean that they can make a enterprise-wide application. Same applies to MMORPG and even not so ambitious games, just because someone can put together a small mod or website or throw together a few models, does not mean that one can just plop out a game. It takes lots of hard work and resources to do so.
> At the end, if all goes well. It really should be
> worth it (and profitable) although this only happens
> 1 each 100 times.
Guess what? This isn't just MMORP games that this happens to. Many high quality games have done poorly in sales because of a variety of reasons. There is no guarentee for success.
#13
Battletech online
Anarchy online
DAOC
WW2 Online (defunct I think)
Everquest
JumpGate
Neocron
Eve Online
UO Lord Blackthorns revenge
World of Warcraft
Sims Online
StarWars Galaxies
Fighting Legends
These are just a few of the MMORPG's that are out or are coming out.
Shattered galaxy and jumpgate were created without major corporate funding. Jumpgate did have a publisher(3dO which released it back to it's developer), but now you can DL the game for free and pay 10 bucks a month for playing online. It is little known because of a lack of advertising. if you want to check it out the first two weeks are free. it's basically like a privateer persistant online world. www.jossh.com
As for the rest well, they are coming, or out there some with major publishers some not. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next year with the genre'
As for it being a failure, Go to Gamespot's beta sign up page, http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/flat/0,11963,2636409,00.html and you'll see how many are still in development. And those are just the ones that are known to the public.
03/21/2002 (6:09 pm)
Shattered GalaxyBattletech online
Anarchy online
DAOC
WW2 Online (defunct I think)
Everquest
JumpGate
Neocron
Eve Online
UO Lord Blackthorns revenge
World of Warcraft
Sims Online
StarWars Galaxies
Fighting Legends
These are just a few of the MMORPG's that are out or are coming out.
Shattered galaxy and jumpgate were created without major corporate funding. Jumpgate did have a publisher(3dO which released it back to it's developer), but now you can DL the game for free and pay 10 bucks a month for playing online. It is little known because of a lack of advertising. if you want to check it out the first two weeks are free. it's basically like a privateer persistant online world. www.jossh.com
As for the rest well, they are coming, or out there some with major publishers some not. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next year with the genre'
As for it being a failure, Go to Gamespot's beta sign up page, http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/flat/0,11963,2636409,00.html and you'll see how many are still in development. And those are just the ones that are known to the public.
#14
MMORPG is not a genre that more than a few games can survive in. Not saying they'll all have to file bankruptcy, but only a few can be real money makers at a time...
03/21/2002 (7:24 pm)
Sure, a few semi-indie mmorpgs might be around now, but once Star Wars Galaxies or World of Warcraft hit the press prostitution alone will crush them.MMORPG is not a genre that more than a few games can survive in. Not saying they'll all have to file bankruptcy, but only a few can be real money makers at a time...
#15
Just to clear something up- Shattered Galaxy had funding aplenty. It's backed / owned by Nexon Corporation, a big giant international company. How they qualified for the Independent Games Festival last year is beyond me... they even had a booth on the main showfloor at last year's GDC. Didn't quite fit the spirit of 'independent game development'. Regardless, funding is one thing they did not lack.
03/21/2002 (7:28 pm)
"Shattered galaxy and jumpgate were created without major corporate funding."Just to clear something up- Shattered Galaxy had funding aplenty. It's backed / owned by Nexon Corporation, a big giant international company. How they qualified for the Independent Games Festival last year is beyond me... they even had a booth on the main showfloor at last year's GDC. Didn't quite fit the spirit of 'independent game development'. Regardless, funding is one thing they did not lack.
#16
Dang, that is insulting to see that but it's in the flawed wording of the IGF's application.
You can't recieve funding by the folks on the list. Find a company that is either not a game developer or new to the field and you can get in.
Luckily, this year there isn't any of that BS. Dang... and I was thinking Shattered Galaxy truly was a major success coming from a non-existant budget and team of indie developers.
03/21/2002 (7:55 pm)
Cripes... you just burst my indie bubble.Dang, that is insulting to see that but it's in the flawed wording of the IGF's application.
You can't recieve funding by the folks on the list. Find a company that is either not a game developer or new to the field and you can get in.
Luckily, this year there isn't any of that BS. Dang... and I was thinking Shattered Galaxy truly was a major success coming from a non-existant budget and team of indie developers.
#17
I think this is what is happening with MMORPGs. A lot of people are trying it because they think its cool or that they'll make a fortune off of the monthly fees and so they flood the market with a lot of games with little or no compelling difference between them.
What a lot of them don't realize is that a small indie company just doesn't have the support, money or advetising of one of the big companies like Sony. Almost any other game type has a better chance because they don't require the constant care and feeding of a MMORPG. Even if you create a game that succeeds you still have the maintenance to worry about. Wait till you get that first 90,000$ bandwidth overrun bill from your website provider and then see how profitable you think MMO gaming is. The only real way for a MMORPG to be successful is to acquire a huge sponsor with large advertising budgets and its own server network.
03/21/2002 (9:41 pm)
Does anyone remember the FPS craze after Doom, the 3rd person action/RPG stampede after Diablo, or the RTS rush after Warcraft and Command and Conquer? I hate to say it, but a lot of game designers seem to emulate lemmings as much as anything else. The minute something works there is a stampede of copies rushing in that imitate every aspect of the successful game. A lot of great games simply get buried under a flood of other, similar games.I think this is what is happening with MMORPGs. A lot of people are trying it because they think its cool or that they'll make a fortune off of the monthly fees and so they flood the market with a lot of games with little or no compelling difference between them.
What a lot of them don't realize is that a small indie company just doesn't have the support, money or advetising of one of the big companies like Sony. Almost any other game type has a better chance because they don't require the constant care and feeding of a MMORPG. Even if you create a game that succeeds you still have the maintenance to worry about. Wait till you get that first 90,000$ bandwidth overrun bill from your website provider and then see how profitable you think MMO gaming is. The only real way for a MMORPG to be successful is to acquire a huge sponsor with large advertising budgets and its own server network.
#18
IGF... how could you? How could you allow that? At least re-write the rules... that's just insulting to the true independant game developers.
What's next? Verant breaks into two companies, but since you only have one on the list it can enter and grab another $20k? Come on...
I really hope that one of the MMORPG teams go towards licensing their game to ISPs instead of running the servers theirselves. It'll save em cash, and really be easier for a small team to pull off.
03/21/2002 (9:50 pm)
Man, that revelation about Shattered Galaxies pisses me off.IGF... how could you? How could you allow that? At least re-write the rules... that's just insulting to the true independant game developers.
What's next? Verant breaks into two companies, but since you only have one on the list it can enter and grab another $20k? Come on...
I really hope that one of the MMORPG teams go towards licensing their game to ISPs instead of running the servers theirselves. It'll save em cash, and really be easier for a small team to pull off.
#19
How exactly would you go about this? I'm not sure if ISP's are really interested in hosting game servers. Why would they want to license something and run a server which will just cost them more bandwidth. Maybe I misunderstood you.
I once saw a thread here (a couple weeks back), about some ideas on how to run a MMORPG cost effectively. something like giving a share of the profits to each server admin. Maybe it was for just RPGs. I'm not sure. Is your ISP thing related to that?
03/21/2002 (10:02 pm)
Quote: I really hope that one of the MMORPG teams go towards licensing their game to ISPs instead of running the servers theirselves. It'll save em cash, and really be easier for a small team to pull off.
How exactly would you go about this? I'm not sure if ISP's are really interested in hosting game servers. Why would they want to license something and run a server which will just cost them more bandwidth. Maybe I misunderstood you.
I once saw a thread here (a couple weeks back), about some ideas on how to run a MMORPG cost effectively. something like giving a share of the profits to each server admin. Maybe it was for just RPGs. I'm not sure. Is your ISP thing related to that?
#20
Make a game, and provide with frequent (enough) updates. Even better would be to allow the licensees to have the tools themselves to add more stuff. Basically you create a game that could be free for the gamer to play, but the ISP or server operator makes the call. Some might have money to burn and wanna buy the license and operate their own server for free use by anyone. Some might want to charge $15 for sign up and $5 per month after that.
It basically allows people to create their own business buy purchasing the rights to operate a server for your game. It'll allow a more quaint feel like in most larger muds, but you'll make up for it by selling multiple licenses.
Developer - Sell/rent license to server operator. Provide updates and/or update packs (updates servers have to buy. Expansion packs)
Server Operator - Sell/rent/give away software and access to players.
Player - Plays the game!
This way you don't have to worry about customer support aside from dealing with your server license customers nor will you have to host servers! isn't that cool?
The least plausible aspect of indie MMORPG is operating customer support and servers... this takes that out. You'll be able to focus on the game aspect of MMORPG development instead of the business aspect.
03/21/2002 (10:46 pm)
Well, I guess ISP isn't the common term but it's what is used by most companies who follow the format.Make a game, and provide with frequent (enough) updates. Even better would be to allow the licensees to have the tools themselves to add more stuff. Basically you create a game that could be free for the gamer to play, but the ISP or server operator makes the call. Some might have money to burn and wanna buy the license and operate their own server for free use by anyone. Some might want to charge $15 for sign up and $5 per month after that.
It basically allows people to create their own business buy purchasing the rights to operate a server for your game. It'll allow a more quaint feel like in most larger muds, but you'll make up for it by selling multiple licenses.
Developer - Sell/rent license to server operator. Provide updates and/or update packs (updates servers have to buy. Expansion packs)
Server Operator - Sell/rent/give away software and access to players.
Player - Plays the game!
This way you don't have to worry about customer support aside from dealing with your server license customers nor will you have to host servers! isn't that cool?
The least plausible aspect of indie MMORPG is operating customer support and servers... this takes that out. You'll be able to focus on the game aspect of MMORPG development instead of the business aspect.
Torque Owner Matt W
Verant was the first company to sink MMORPGs down the level of money-making machine instead of a game. Charging people for ever expansion to the gameworld, crushing anyone who complains or gets hacked, downright criminal gameplay, and now a new system that actually allows people who want to pay 4x as much as normal monthly to "make history" by participating in events and helping shape the content others get later on (ripped from Anarchy Online)
As for the current state of MMORPGs, Dark Ages of Camelot is not the only survivor. It had a good launch, but just about everything else is lacking. Anarchy Online has won "MMORPG of the year" award from numerous publications, and overall it is a very bad game. Still, not quite as bad as DAOC. Don't get me wrong... I despise em both, but I despise that DAOC somehow is seem as the better of the two by most gamers who don't play either.
Verant has set the tone, and now companies are flocking to follow. Not the tone that making a gameworld where communities can thrive and customers can live vicariously through their online avatars, but the tone that they can release half-assed products and make millions from it.
It's almost disturbing that you didn't mention Ultima Online. UO was the originator of graphical MMORPGs, and to many it had things that have yet to even be touched upon in any game. UO began and started to grow as an ideal example of online gaming. Once the company behind it was sold, it went downhill.
What have we learned? Greedy companies who want larger profits will cut back on creating quality and go for mind-numbing quantity (in cost of time or repetition) in hopes of keeping their customers paying up.
Now onto the game design parts of this article...
"From a coding point a mmorpg is relatively easy to make."
Majority of coding in a MMORPG is fairly generic. Then again, so is it for every game in existence. The real challenge arises from the network structure of the game and integrating bug-free content.
Without a very solid client and server code you're going to have crashes. With crashes come item loss and angry customers... with angry customers comes Chapter 11. Go talk with the GarageGames guys and ask them how easy the netcode was with Torque... then ask them to do it a few times over.
As for content, the majority of the problems customers have arise from some problem with some event or interaction. Bring the flaming sword to the elf and you get a fatal error that erases the person's account. Sure, this will cause some people to lose stuff and probably make some customers walk away from your product but it will also be an area where other people try to cheat. Bugs, exploits, cheats, and hacks are the biggest problem once the game has actually launched.
Go tell the coders who are constantly working on Anarchy online or Dark ages of Camelot that their job is very easy.
As for the amount of MMORPGs on the market... there are only a few. Why? Because MMORPgs take a long time to make, and the EQ race is fairly recent. According to Gamespy there are over 70 MMORPGs in development... many backed by actual funding (not enough... but more than we have here)
Good luck to anyone that wants to make an MMORPG, but I think the closest alternative that is actually viable is the smaller-scale online rpg seen in the design of Realm Wars. Still, having 60 people in one server is a good chunk of people. Have them all pay $20 for a game, and $5 a month... that's plenty of cash for a server and constant updates with a decent profit.
The best (in terms of profit for developer) situation would be to follow what Vircom did (Canadian company, created The 4th Coming. Very simple, but very popular MORPG. About 40-120 people per server on at a time)
They created a game (The 4th Coming) that was based off of a combination of Ultima Online and Diablow. At the time, both were popular games (this game is a few years old) and it was my first online RPG. It was fun for me then, but looking back (I reinstalled it a few weeks ago) it is so mind-numbingly horrible even Everquest looks fun compared to it.
Anyway, licenses for the game were sold to servers (one time fee of $2000 or so and $1000 annually) and the company developed the game seperate of having to run servers or doing extensive support.
This format would accomidate online RPGs, but not require massively multiplayer engines (128+ = massively multiplayer) Indie developers could possibly pull this off (it still would be tough) because they wouldn't need to pay for servers or bandwidth or customer service... they would provide smaller companies with the game and fairly frequent updates of content and bug fixes and provide tools so that each server licensee can add quests and npcs and run events.
So those of you considering MMORPGs, you might want to reconsider your scope. Going for more players than the engine currently allows will definately mean server requirements will be almost unbearable, and really put a lot more work on your coders.
MMORPG genre will become like the FPS Deathmatch genre did in the mid Nineties, and many of the games will die out quickly. I think within 2 years we'll see a major restructuring of online gaming. Either the free games will be going pay to play and mmorpgs will still be full of boring gameplay and horrible customer support, or mmorpgs will have to finally step up and deliver what the customer wants to ensure quality to attract customers in order to warrant the $10-$30 a month cost.