Tobold's Blog
Friday, May 04, 2007
 
State of the MMORPG market

Somebody anonymously posted a question to me in a comment thread which didn't quite belong there (Hint: you can send me an e-mail). But as the question is interesting enough, I'll copy it to here: "I know this is a tad early, and you did mention you getting into it later on this year, but I was ondering what your initial impression with the sudden wave of MMO's coming out? I remember when if you had two MMO's coming out within a year of each other, it was considered flooding the market. But with a WoW expansion, WAR, LOTRO, another Guild Wars expansion and (the one I cannot wait for) Age of Conan, we are experiancing a veritable golden age of MMO's. We now have so many options within this once niche genre that the consumer is able to enjoy a more specific game type, able to cater to a specific audiance. Now, is this just an inflation we are experiancing for a short period of time, or will we be able to sustain multiple MMO's on the market at the same time because of an increase in the size of the consumers?"

My take on this is that what we are experiencing is a mix between viable new games that will survive due to the much increased market, and not-so-good me-too games and niche games, which will either fold or just survive near to the break even point. And I think it is safe to say that World of Warcraft is somewhat responsible for most of them, good and bad. I'm not saying that if WoW hadn't come out there wouldn't have been any new MMORPGs, but certainly a lot less.

The games industry works pretty much the same as any other industry. Take a typical example from another industry, lets say the car industry. A couple of years ago only few car companies offered SUVs. But then SUVs became more and more popular with urban buyers, and the companies making SUVs made huge profits. So the other car companies started offering SUVs too. For game companies the first MMORPG breakthrough was Everquest, which lead to a first wave of "second generation" MMORPGs, with different degrees of success. Personally I consider World of Warcraft to be last one of this second generation, Blizzard being a bit slower than the competition, as usual, but making more polished games. In any case WoW was the second breakthrough of the MMORPG genre, leading to the next generation, we can call it the "third", of games. This nicely coincides with a growth in broadband internet connections, making the growth of the market possible.

As I said, this is mostly a business phenomenon. World of Warcraft probably made more money than any previous PC game. An executive of any other game company would need to be blind and stupid to not even consider trying to reproduce that sort of success. And suddenly there are not only bosses in game companies, but also venture capital companies willing to finance this sort of game. If you were a game developer with a small independant company trying to develop a MMORPG you might have gotten a lot of doors slammed into your face before WoW, but after WoW suddenly your phone started ringing all day. So if you suddenly got investors in early 2005, and given the 2+ years it takes to develop a game, the "wave of MMO's coming out" in 2007 and 2008 isn't so surprising. That includes games that have been under development since before WoW, but got sudden injections of cash to speed them up or make them bigger. EA buying Mythic for Warhammer Online is a typical example of a game company giant wanting a piece of the pie, and buying in the expertise from a smaller company with a good track record.

In terms of gameplay and design, the "third generation" isn't as clearly defined. A game like Vanguard could as well have been part of the second generation in terms of design, having a distinctive "pre-WoW" feel. But games like LotRO obviously profited from the development of the genre by WoW, and apply the lessons learned from that game. And then there are other games which reacted to WoW by trying to differentiate themselves from it, for example by covering other genres than fantasy, while still trying to profit from WoW's success and growth of the market.

In all that Sturgeon's Law applies, 90% of everything is crud. But even if only 1 out of 10 MMORPGs is good, an influx of cash into the genre leading to more games being published is still increasing the total number of good games, even if they appear to be swamped by the much bigger number of bad games. And some of the 90% "crud" games aren't so much bad as niche, only being interesting to a much smaller audience. And that is a good thing too, we are better off if not all games are the same mass market style. The growth of the market allows smaller games to survive, even if they are far from reaching the success of World of Warcraft.

So whether you like WoW or not, I think over all it had a positive influence on the viability and growth of the genre. MMORPGs becoming "mainstream" certainly has some disadvantages as well as advantages, and not everyone will like it. But our chance to find a good game that we like, niche or mainstream, has certainly gone up this year. That can't be bad.
Comments:
I mostly agree: the financial success of WoW is a good thing. But another achievement of WoW (maybe part of the former), more interesting even, is bringing down the barriers of age and gender. WoW has showed the software companies that the target audience for MMORPGs is huge, and comprises a lot of different people.

That's another key that can lead the market to the development of niche products, imho: a company can expect a good number of players for the not-so-mainstream MMORPG. If the game is "cheap" enough, that can mean good profit.

On the other side, I am absolutely sure that there are some executives out there thinking that a wow-clone with little to no innovation is a sure bet. After all, we've seen it a lot of times with other genres, in the past.
 
I have mixed feelings about this topic. First and foremost, yest Wow opened the market and no, that does not mean, that any new born MMO studio can survive in the market. If two years from now, we see patches for every MMO that is coming this year, i would be very suprised.

I strongly believe that most of the projects past-WoW, those VC-sponsored projects are shallow. WoW wasn't built to farm the market, but cause Blizzard liked EQ and thought they could improve it. Most of the stuff coming up now is not created to improve WoW, but to steal players from it. This will not work in the long run, i am sure.

Vanguard is the prime example of what will happen financially to many MMOs to come. Every MMO has only one shot. You can not base projects on the idea to get back investments over 2 or more years. Those things have big budgets, i doubt anything is cheaper than 20 million now and this number is really low, but even for this, you need EQish prime numbers (500k) for a very long time. It's hard. Even if you have a good product, earning back investments will struggle many MMOs to come.

What i hope is that the 1st generation of wow-clones will fail completely, that what we see with WoW now will go on. You can not feed 8 million players for years. Taste changes. When it launched everyone liked burgers. Nowadays some are vegeratian, some like sweet stuff, and some only prefer raw meat. Problem is Blizzard still can only server burgers.

WoW will be the big name of the market for a very long time. But we will see many more EVEs, very small and focused projects, without media presence. Media whored EVEs however will tank.
 
chrismue, what are these "WoW clones"? Apart from maybe LoTRO, I fail to see them. :)
 
Well, of course, but it's like television, in a way. The reason that most tv stinks is that there are fewer good writers to go around.

The same with the NBA, when the league expanded, and mistakenly thought that foreign born players could take up the slack.

I think developing a mmorpg is like starting over. How on Earth could any experience in developing first person shooters help you in developing a balanced crafting system that weaves smoothly into the pve system - it can't.

And all it takes is just one bug in your crafting system, and your server's economy is ruined - forever.

So yes, there's fresh capital (dot com bust all over again), but the next wave of mmorpgs are probably going to have major design and flaws, and a healthy share of game/server killing bugs.

Look at Funcom = no experience = AO stunk, but now they're taking their hard earned experience, and developing Age of Conan.

Same with Turbine. AC1 was just ok, and AC2 stunk, and D+DO is barely a success, but LOTRO is finally the hit they've been building towards for almost ten years. It just took them four titles to get it right )

So the next wave of new developers will have to survive their first flop, and somehow manage to get the capital necessary to try again; this time with more experience, and fewer mistakes.
 
An MMO surge can mean nothing but good things for us. More games equals more variety, more variety means players can choose an MMO that fits their personality and playstyle.

In another year or so we will have high end MMOs that require a super comp to play, low end games that will be enjoyed for many years by P4 users, space MMOs, cowboy westerns, automobile, sword and sorcery, PVP centric, PVE centric, FPS MMOS and many more. I couldn't be happier. Even a game that tanks financially could introduce a new idea that another company adopts and makes better. Its an exciting time for MMO players IMO.
 
"So the next wave of new developers will have to survive their first flop, and somehow manage to get the capital necessary to try again; this time with more experience, and fewer mistakes."

This isn't always true. Look at Vanguard. Brad worked on EQ (which is still a bigger hit than VG) EQ2, and neither one of those games helped them with Vanguard.
 

World of Warcraft probably made more money than any previous PC game


Oooh. . more than the Sims franchise? Tough call. Interestingly, despite The Sims earning more than some countries' GDP, it doesn't get much in the way of clones. There have been some minor, horrible efforts (Singles) but no serious attempts at making a run at that market. Weird.
 
I have a few thoughts about the MMORPG market. First these games are so time intensive that consumers can really only play one at a time. Secondly the social nature of these games means that players will encourage their friends to play the same game they are playing. Taken together this strongly suggests a "winner takes all" market where the leading title will force out all others. In such circumstances going head to head with the market leader is an extraordinarily difficult task.

Lotro might just be able to pull it off by virtue of extremely fortuitous timing but if I was investing my money in a new MMORPG I would shy away from head to head competition with WOW and try to find a niche. The quiet success of Guild Wars is a good example or even the quirky success of web based games like Club Penguin.
 
To add to several good points already made about the entertainment market in general and the MMO market in particular...

It is likely that the MMO market segment will continue to follow the lead of the rest of the entertainment industry. It seems that entertainment is very much locked into what you might call a "name brand clone" market. So if there is a good superhero movie, then make sequels. Your competitors buy other well-known names and clone the idea.

The same thing is happening in the MMO market; EQ opened the market, and followed with a sequel. There is a "name game" with Star Wars, LOTR, Conan, etc.

WoW was not spawned in a vacuum. Diablo and it's online capability plus the successful Warcraft series laid the groundwork for the success of WoW. Like most huge hits Blizzard was in the right place at the right time with a good solid product that created its own franchise.

LOTRO is a success for two reasons: Name-branding and WoW-cloning.
All that Turbine has to do to get onboard the gravy train was to play it safe and not mess up badly; once they got good reviews with their Beta they had a profit in the bag.

And as already pointed out, there is big money to be made, so the cloning and the name-branding will continue, likely diluting the quality as the quantity increases.

Doeg
 
LOTRO is a success for two reasons: Name-branding and WoW-cloning.

All that Turbine has to do to get onboard the gravy train was to play it safe and not mess up badly; once they got good reviews with their Beta they had a profit in the bag.


I don't even think it's the brand. LOTRO is fairly smooth and polished, and has most of WoW's most popular features.

Turbine could have based this game off any IP, and it would be a hit.
 
Thank you for posting my comment, and I'll make sure that I reach you by a more appropriate means next time.
 
I don't think there's any more of a slew of pending MMOs than there have been previously. There are a few more high profile ones, but their profile is by virtue of branding. The real growth isn't in the two or three AAA subscription-based MMOs that launch each year though. It's the dozens of non-standard titles hitting markets often ignored by those who've been around since SOE ruled the land.

While these non-fantasy-themed/non-DIKUs are not being built with WoW budget and not collecting WoW revenue, they are much less risky investments with much higher potential profit margins.

- First there's the Korean-based stuff like Krazykart, Audition and Maplestory, coming to the NA through MTV/Viacom. All microtrans-based games for audiences that don't equate RMT with a form of profanity.
- Then there's the virtual lifestyle-y type experiences like Laguna Beach/Logos also coming from MTV, but from a different group for a different group.
- But even more importantly are the Flash-based browser-based MMOs, like Club Penguin, but coming from much bigger companies much older, so therefore with potentially much further reach, like Webkinz, Nicktropolis, Barbiegirls, Lego Online. Why would a huge and established company like Mattel make a relatively small Flash-based MMO when they clearly have the money to best WoW in spending? Because it's lower-risk for a more targeted group.

To me, that's the more important future to look at. There'll always be room for games like AoC and LoTRO which target the same consumer that WoW does that EQ1 does that CoX does. But while WoW radically grew that consumerbase, it's still the same TYPE of consumer (achievers who are sometimes social). This is merely one part of the genre though. This isn't UO "world" vs EQ "game" either. That comparison is made by the exact same group, and it's that group that has long proven which style of game they prefer in numbers. Rather, it's "social worlds" vs "directed play" experiences, where everything from target player to revenue model to business needs are completely different.

But that's just what's worth watching. I likes me my DIKU, and currently love LoTRO, look most forward to AoC (for it's unique control system), and continue beta'ing games that target, well, us :)
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

  Powered by Blogger   Free Page Rank Tool