In his latest (intentionally inflammatory) post, entitled “Paying to keep the casuals away“, Scrusi has trotted out one of the more annoying cultural tropes of hardcore MMO gamers:
Me, I would absolutely pay double the normal subscription price for an MMO if that would guarantee me that it is tailored to the needs of players like me and ignores the potential of raking in more players by improving accessibility or what have you. Doubling the income per player should allow a company to operate just as well as they do now with just half their player base which should allow them to simply show the finger to the masses on the official forums.
His argument, like all similar attempts to justify tailoring a particular video game to a small (yet self-styled “elite”) audience, is full of holes.
1. MMOs are expensive
More than any other type of video game, creating an MMO is an extremely expensive and time consuming endeavor if you want to do it right. These are not constrained experiences, and the complexity of MMOs is far higher than other niche games that have followed a similar pay-for-privilege model.
While Darkfall has proven that it is technically possible to create an MMO that caters to an exclusive crowd – and Mortal Online is following in their footsteps – frankly, the results are not pretty. Neither of these hardcore-centric games has high production value, and both feature a grinds a play mechanics that are more mind-numbing than your typical casual-friendly title. Regardless of what a hardcore player may state, graphics do matter, and if all your niche market budget can muster is a game engine that looks like it fell out of 2002 then you will be putting off potential customers on first impressions alone.
Darkfall is ugly
That all said, the proof of the business model Scrusi proposes will be in the subscription numbers: Darkfall had a measly (by MMO standards) 20,000 subscribers in December 2009. Even if each of those subscribers was willing to pay a $30/month subscriptions, that’s still only equivalent to 40,000 subscribers in a “typical” MMO, (and to be sure there would not be 100% retention if the price point was double the standard rate).
Experience has shown that even when maintaining a $15/month fee a niche game can survive, but even doubling monthly user fees will not magically make a tiny game capable of competing with a MMO with a real budget and, subsequently, an infinitely higher production value.
2. Cost is a barrier to entry
Hardcore players who are extremely caught up in their elitist fantasies often put on blinders when it comes to considering what another gamer is willing to put up with. Just because Scrusi is happy to double his MMO subscription costs does not mean that every hardcore player will be willing or able to do the same. Simply put: cost is the single largest barrier to entry when it comes to video gaming, and MMOs are not cheap to begin with. A year’s subscription to most titles costs $180, which works well for single-game players but is painful for people who like to indulge in multiple titles. Doubling that to $360/year (at a minimum) suddenly makes the cost of MMO gaming much less palatable.
Given that real world social status and disposable income are not key indicators of how hardcore or casual a player will be, ratcheting up the cost of a niche game has just as much of a chance of keeping elitist players away as it does of driving off the noobs that are apparently such a bane on Scrusi’s existence.
3.Players don’t start hardcore
What many hardcore players seem to forget is that they did not start out playing MMOs in the same manner that they now play them. The vast majority of MMO players come to the games after hearing about them from friends or gaming news sites, and start off their online careers as unwashed newbies incapable of min-maxing their way out of a wet paper bag. These new players often approach MMOs with a naive mix of curiosity and wonder which, in many cases, nurtures a budding passion.
Mortal Online is ugly too
With time many of these newbies learn the game and its systems, start to engage in PvP and raids, and eventually graduate to full blown hardcore players in their own right. Frequently these noobs-turned-hardcore are passionate about the game that brought them to MMOs in the first place – be it World of Warcraft, EVE Online, Darkfall, or some other title – and they will devote all of their energy towards wringing every ounce of fun and challenge from that first game before even contemplating moving on, a process that often takes years. If you intentionally try to dissuade these players from your hardcore game then you not only lost an excellent hardcore player, but you lost all of the cash that they could have brought to your game, including the new players that they will recruit with their enthusiasm.
A good MMO, no matter how hardcore, will be like a troll and have many layers that can be enjoyed by different types of players. As loathe as I am to admit it, World of Warcraft still comes closest to this goal: players can play extremely casual, however there is still a lot of room (less every patch) to dig deep and play the game hardcore. An ideal MMO will take this philosophy and perfect it, providing a slow and addictive progression from newbie to expert that encourages its players to excel and take pride in a combination of truly challenging personal and group feats.
4. Casuals flesh out the world
Casual players, despite the scorn heaped on them by self-styled hardcore players like Scusi, are vitally important for the success of online worlds; they form the constant buzz of activity that is the backbone of any good game. Sure, these casual players may not know how to grind efficiently from level one to the cap, they may not have mastered the combat system, and they may be dreadfully unreliable for guilds striving to constantly progress through the endgame, but they are more important than most players are willing to admit.
Casual players are crucial participants in a game’s economy. These are they men and women who will farm low level consumables while chatting with friends on their gazillionth alt, buy all manner of “useless” equipment in the auction house just because the stuff looks cool, are blissfully ignorant of how much of a loss they are taking when they sell their wares to you, and infuse the economy with millions of gold (isk, whatever) just by virtue of existing in the game world.
Not only that, causal players act to fill up a world, and make it seem massive. While hardcore players are often grinding as fast as possible and trying to maximize their playtime, casual players can be seen filling up the landscape – sometimes in areas that would be desolate if not for their ignorance of the “best” route to the end game. Towns are abuzz with casual players hanging out, chatting, and just generally filling up space. Battle grounds and PvP areas are populated by these noobs, most of which the hardcore take great pleasure pwning.
An MMO without a casual base would be much different beast from a game where all types of player is welcomed; casual-friendly games feel alive.
Conclusion
Throwing up artificial barriers to entry in an attempt to create an exclusive hardcore club is likely to lead to a failed, boring game devoid of its soul. While it is tempting to make the claim that hardcore players should be able to pay for the privilege of a game that caters only to their wants and desires, that game will lack the quality – both technically and socially – of more open games that aim to be inclusive.
As much as I mourn the continued trend towards dumbing down games, I will not throw my support behind any game that attempts to shut out one segment of the gaming population through disingenuous financial disincentives that are just as likely to turn away hardcore players as their casual brethren.
Instead, MMO players should be cambering for the industry to create titles that are more inclusive of both the super casual and the super hardcore. The next big game will be one that nurtures new players and gently shepherds them towards a play style that is more in line with what a core gamer enjoys. The next big MMO, like the World of Warcraft of old, will create hardcore gamers out of newbies. Unlike old school WoW, this theoretic successor will be a game where you can use training wheels if you want, but nothing will prevent you from taking those crutches off and riding like a big boy.
17 Responses to “Misplaced elitism and a future MMO”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Can you, for comparison, post a screenshot of a beautiful game? I thought the screenshots above looked pretty good but I don’t play games enough to have something to compare to (I had to play Batman at lowest graphics settings remember).
I like WoW’s look:
http://i11.tinypic.com/2vdpiqa.jpg
http://www.gamersglobal.com/files/imagecache/full_teaser/files/news_teaser/howling%20fjord.jpg
Warhammer Online is also slick:
http://forum.unity3d.com/files/warhammer_online_890.jpg
Or Age of Conan:
http://gry.o2.pl/upload/files/AOC_w_d_20.jpg
Although all MMOs pale in comparison to the beauty of modern non-MMO games.
[...] ~ Systemic Babble [...]
Excellent rebuttal.
A lot of gamers forget that this is, after all, a business. While the armchair developers like to call for what THEY would enjoy, the aim of a developer is to make money. It’s not greed, it’s business; we ALL want to make money at our jobs, and we all want to make as much money as we can if for nothing else then to put food on our table. That certainly doesn’t like these products have the best interest of the gamer in mind, but in reality, they don’t. That’s not why they’re in business. The fact that many developers DO seek to form a rapport with their communities is a testament to their staff, and is technically NOT required. We’re very fortunate that we can often times bend the ear of the development staff, and that many times they are receptive to our requests and criticism, but at the end of the day, they have to do what needs to be done to maximize the subscribership so they can stay in business.
[...] MMOs, a response. Syp at Biobreak quoted a Systematic Babble post here about why targeting an MMO to hardcore people wont work, even if they charged double the cost. [...]
I like WoW’s look as well; however, Aion is certainly the best looking MMO I even played (read: tried):
http://na.aiononline.com/board/screenshots/view?articleID=11
Oh man – how could I forget about Aion – I played in the beta, and the graphics were one of its best features. Loved ‘em.
“Instead, MMO players should be cambering for the industry to create titles that are more inclusive ”
No, no, no.
I don’t want to see increasingly accessible bland titles aimed at mildly entertaining everyone. I want to see an explosion of different types of game within the MMO sphere.
Take TOR for example. Most hardcore MMOs are pretty clear that to them personal story beats delivered story. “I fell off Weathertop” is more interesting than “the orcs attack the village”.
TOR says screw them, we’re going to deliver you a story, sit back, relax and enjoy. It’s much more passive than gamers are accustomed to.
It invites another game to come in heavy on the personal story side. At the moment the only MMOs that do that are heavy on pvp (eve and darkfall) which is not to everyone’s taste.
In the 90s I had a vast selection of wildly different game experiences – Civ, Populous, The Sims, Diablo, Planescape. That is what I want from MMOs not a one-size-fits-all gaming placebo.
“I don’t want to see increasingly accessible bland titles aimed at mildly entertaining everyone. I want to see an explosion of different types of game within the MMO sphere.”
You seem to be talking apples and oranges here, Stabs. Asking for inclusive games that cater to multiple levels of skill/commitment is not the same thing as asking for games that are all generic in both setting and play mechanics.
TOR, which you cite, is a great example: the game will have a strong setting, and a focus on plot – i.e. something a little bit unique within the MMO landscape. That setting/mechanic combination will appeal to some players and turn off others, however it’s doing that as a matter of personal taste, not by trying to be uber difficult, or intentionally obtuse, or inexplicably expensive.
Another example (single player this time) is FFXIII – the game had a distinct flavour and set of play mechanics which determined the type of person that would be interested in the game. Once in the game, there was a very precise set of tutorials that brought potentially new players up to speed, and turned them from neophytes into masters. My wife was terrified of the game at first, but as we played through she became adept at the systems, and eventually felt that she could take on any enemy, no matter how tough.
This is the inclusiveness I’m talking about.
Inclusiveness is not just a matter of tutorials (about which I agree with the need for clarity). If someone can’t deal with the idea of losing their ship no amount of smoothing the learning curve will make Eve palatable. Over the next decade we are going to see games designers move away from the present system of always picking the development path that appeals to the greatest number. Expect things like very hardcore raids, permadeath, punitively hardcore crafting all to come back plus new things like romance/relationship games, people-watching games in the MMO space.
By 2020 I don’t think we will have a WoW, a single main game that most MMOers play. I think inclusiveness can only go so far before there’s a reaction against it and that particular elastic band is stretched pretty far.
“If someone can’t deal with the idea of losing their ship no amount of smoothing the learning curve will make Eve palatable. ”
I disagree! EVE’s tutorial is a convoluted mess, which is a huge part of why that game’s retention rate is low. That aside, don’t you think that if EVE intentionally killed new players as part of the tutorial – perhaps not too long after the part where they teach newbies about insurance – that it would smooth the path a bit? They could hammer home the fact that smart playing (i.e. buying insurance) mitigates the major damage of dying, while simultaneously showing players how to get back on their feet after being podded.
“Over the next decade we are going to see games designers move away from the present system of always picking the development path that appeals to the greatest number.”
It’s a compelling thought, but I really see no evidence in the industry to back this claim up. Most big publishers are going to continue trying to craft one-size-fits all MMOs, because that’s where the potential for the greatest profit is.
If you have information to the contrary, I’m willing to have my mind changed.
Might it also be worth noting that a more… diverse… set of games also suggests smaller budgets and more agile development? MMO development is still expensive, and has to cater widely to survive. (The increasing diversity in business models is also helping, but we have a way to go yet.)
I’m all for a more varied selection of MMOs, but that does mean lower budgets, and some rough edges. Maybe even *gasp* 2D, like my beloved Puzzle Pirates.
The last stats that I saw suggested that the time it takes to make an MMO is 3-5 years. I would assume that scaling back on any aspect of the game (graphics, scope, systems) could cut the cost…. but developers need to closely weigh the (probable) reduced customer base with the savings in development costs.
Farmville scaled back on its development costs without doing too bad in terms of numbers. I believe they peaked at around 82 million players.
Farmville is not an MMO in any normal sense of the term. Players who flock to Farmville are by and large NOT gamers – a quick look at who plays Farmville obsessively on your Facebook friends list is proof enough of that.
@Stabs
I don’t think SWTOR will be that passive. If’ve you’ve played Mass Effect 1-2 or Dragon age origins you will basically get a feel for what kind of game they might be making. That is bringing back the “RPG” into MMORPG, which was never there to begin with. I could then agrue that the label “RPG” after “MMO” should not be attributed to games like WoW, AoC and WAR etc. But I won’t.
I also agree with Scopique’s assesment of how certain gaming companies, if not all, view the current MMO market.
@Author – Andrew
I enjoyed your article. Although I thought your stance was that of the observer at first I later came to the conclusion that your were severly biased. I’ll let the reader decide.
The positive things you mentioned in your article was that of the casual gamer. Viewed as the “soul” of gaming communities, you find it hard that casual gamers cannot be “hardcore” gamers at the same time. Blatantly attributing casuals to noobs and then implicitly stupid I saw where this was going. I could then analyze the word hardcore which in my opinion implicitly suggests fanatism or more casually if you will, elitism. This is all well and good as gaming companies try and please their whole player base, including the casuals (if we like to compartmentalize alot). Which you also touched on as the future for MMO’s.
My take on the neverending rant about casuals versus hardcore (I wonder which side started the debate..probably both lol:) is that games in general should be played casually but with a passion (add hardcore here if you like). But we are all different people with different lives, different backgrounds, nationalities, problems, goals, joys, hopes, agendas… and the list goes on and on. You get the picture. To ask game companies to tailor a game to YOU is just stupid. Tailor the trend maybe but not your archaic fantasies about being special. Although MMO’s in general are games for young adults and we all like to feel special from time to time.
The negative would be that fanatism should usher MMO’s into the future is not even worth commenting.
All in all a good article.
“Although I thought your stance was that of the observer at first I later came to the conclusion that your were severly biased. I’ll let the reader decide.”
We’re all severely biased – it’s just a matter of trying to make your mindspace clear. As a blogger I guess I build up my stance over a series of articles, and don’t make it explicit each time I write something new – so if you’re relatively new to this site, you won’t necessarily have that context (which is fine!)
My current position is one of an outsider to MMOs. I was a “casually hardcore” WoW player for three years; didn’t invest a gazillion hours, but played hard and played to win. WoW shifted away from what I wanted, and when I went looking for a new MMO I couldn’t find one I enjoyed enough to play for any length of time. I’m now waiting to see what the next crop of games is.
“Viewed as the “soul” of gaming communities, you find it hard that casual gamers cannot be “hardcore” gamers at the same time. Blatantly attributing casuals to noobs and then implicitly stupid I saw where this was going. I could then analyze the word hardcore which in my opinion implicitly suggests fanatism or more casually if you will, elitism.”
It’s the nature of the words hardcore & casual that make them difficult to use – but I was responding to an article that seemed to use them in this manner:
Hardcore = someone who learns a single game inside out, and plays it to win
Casual = someone who isn’t hardcore, as defined above
Now I don’t necessarily agree with these definitions, and they’re not used consistently like this online. Another completely valid way of looking at the hardcore/casual dichotomy is that a hardcore player invests a tonne of time in a single game, whereas a causal player invests less time.
And just as a note: I only attribute casuals to noobs and bad players because that is the context of the article I was responding to used. I had to speak his language to refute his post properly.
“My take on the neverending rant about casuals versus hardcore (I wonder which side started the debate..probably both lol:) is that games in general should be played casually but with a passion (add hardcore here if you like). ”
Both sides flame each other for sure. =)
And your summation of how games should be played is kind of how I strive to play them. “Casually”, meaning not too time intensive, and “with a passion” meaning learning the systems, and seeking to excel.
Thanks for the comment!