The MMOG Landscape in the 2000s
MMORPG.com's Richard Aihoshi writes this article about the way that games have changed over the past decade and speaks to three distinguished developers who share their thoughts on the decade's most notable developments and happenings.
Interviews By Richard Aihoshi on February 08, 2010
Can it really be a decade already since we entered the new millennium? There are times when that doesn't seem possible, but when we look at how much the massively multiplayer landscape has grown and changed, it can feel like a tremendous amount has happened, far more than we might expect in only 10 years.
As we entered 2000, the dotcom explosion had already happened. In fact, the dotbomb period had hit. The first phase of the MMOG era had begun less than three years prior with the release of Ultima Online in 1997. EverQuest was a baby, in service for less than a year, and Asheron's Call was a mere newborn, less than a month old. Those were the only three prominent live titles.
advertisement Or so we thought. Out of sight to all but the most curious industry observers, Nexus: The Kingdom of the Winds had launched in Korea in 1996, followed by Lineage the year after. Little did we know what lay ahead in and from the other side of the world.
Of course, there was plenty more in the pipeline to keep our attention focused in this hemisphere. UO2, Middle Earth Online and the MMORTS Sovereign had all been revealed in 1999. Coincidentally, they would ultimately suffer the same fate, cancellation before going live. 2000 would bring quite a few more high-profile announcements such as Star Wars Galaxies, Final Fantasy Online (also fated to be canceled), Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online and the MMOFPS PlanetSide.
)
Now the Game Director on Funcom's Age of Conan, Craig Morrison recalls these titles and more as belonging to a different age. As evidence he cites the fact that when he began playing UO and EQ in college, no one else in his circle of friends even owned a modem. Likening the MMO category then to a toddler taking its first steps, and now to a confident, strutting teen, he doesn't hesitate to dole out credit for this progress.
"Many people ask how it feels to have to compete with the industry goliath that is World of Warcraft. The simple truth is that it's damn hard and costs a lot of money and time. What's also true, however, is that its runaway success and acceptance have introduced far, far more people to the genre, the subscription model and online gaming itself than probably would have been possible otherwise. So as a developer of MMOGs, I genuinely thank Blizzard for showing what's possible and demonstrating that the right idea, executed correctly at the right time, does not have to be bound by the perceived limitations of the genre."
Morrison does recognize that WoW didn't appear out of nowhere. "It was the culmination of much design that preceded it," he explains. "It wouldn't exist had the likes of UO, EQ, AC, DAoC and AO not come before. This past decade really has been a 'golden age' for the genre, with great games building many social bonds and even friendships that will last for years. There have been lots of excellent releases and worlds, and we have learned from each and every one."
Now heading up Zenimax Online, Matt Firor was a co-founder of Mythic Entertainment and the Producer on DAoC. Looking back, he agrees that the decade brought many notable developments, and cites examples including seamless world technology, cross-platform play and the increased adoption of broadband. At the same time, he seems more focused on relatively recent trends that are continuing to shape the MMOG space.
)
One of these is ease of entry. "The fact that MMOGs are becoming as easy to get into as console games has spelled success for the major players in this space. The overall progression of this trait goes back pretty far - when Dark Age of Camelot was released, we were all only focused on EverQuest customers and how we could appeal to their needs while expanding interest into our brand. At that time, the PvP component - Camelot's RvR system - was a great innovation, but we also were able to give people easier access to our product since the bar was still set quite low."
Firor also references WoW, suggesting Blizzard was the first company that didn't fear customers churning through all of a game's content. "The reason is because it gave everyone so much to do that players subscribed for long periods of time - and continue to do so. This was accomplished in many ways, but ease of entry into the product, coupled with low machine specs, significantly expanded what had been perceived as a niche market."
I certainly identify with this article. Thank you for bringing this to us. In particular, I like the portion of how World of Warcraft did not appear out of thin air, but was instead built upon the foundations of its predecessors. I would also like to note that WoW was built upon the RTS franchise that helped Blizzard define the world they were trying to create as an MMORPG; something I don't see many other companies doing.
If it weren't for MUDs and eventually UO, I don't think I would have gotten into MMOs as early as I did. Though I don't play UO anymore, I still occasionally play a MUD here and there to think back on what got me into the genre in the first place. With the smaller player bases, I tend to see a great deal more quality socialization in those text-based worlds than I see in more recent MMOs. Who knows, maybe someone will go out of their way to make a Facebook MUD as an application and model it after 8bitMUSH. *laughs*
I dont think we will continue to see the narrowing mentioned; for example Pac Man was a hugly succesful game brought in tons of new players yet that didn't mean each followign game was going to conform to Pac Mans model why then would you expect the smaller catigory of MMOs to conform to WoW simply because it opened the door for so many new players. yes that introduced them to MMOs now they can more easily and readaly jump into more complex enviroments than say as if they had started out with EQ. I dont think of WoW as an image of the mainstream MMO future but as the door to it; if growth is to continue then the genre will have to diversify not simplify.
Hmmm, Final Fantasy Online wasn't canceled, it was released in 2002 (japan) as Final Fantasy XI. Maybe you are refering to True Fantasy Live Online? Which was a shame never got released.
Mr Morrison may be thankful for WoWs arrival, since it brought in alot more people to the genre and thus more opportunities for devs to make more money, but for us veteran MMO players that were here at the launch of UO and AC it has been devestating.
We have seen the genre, that had so much promise to creating a living, breathing, evolving world, to nothing but linear, instanced, themepark games with no evolvement and no world to speak of. Just one ride after the other without any world interaction.
WoW is to MMORPG genre as MacDonald is to gourmet restaurants. Except there are still people who invest time in creating gourmet restaurants but there are very few with resources to create an MMORPG with dynamic and evolving virtual world.
The old WoW=MacDonald's argument? How original.
The theme park is always a more attractive destination than the sand pit.
Also, it's not WoW you should pointing the figure at - EQ showed it was more popular / successful than both UO and AC. That's why it has been the dominant western MMO model to date.
There is one aspect of the article I don't quite agree with. Yes you see a lot of standardization in game mechanics from big games in the past 5 years but at the same time the market has become so big that it is now possible for smaller companies to make niche products and still be profitable.
What we are seeing right now is big a title after big a title failing because they really don't give people any reason to play them over what is already out there. At the same time we see small titles growing silently in popularity and it is from those we should look for the future.
“Likening the MMO category then to a toddler taking its first steps, and now to a confident, strutting teen, he doesn't hesitate to dole out credit for this progress.”
Maybe in another ten years MMO’s will actually grow up and stop posturing?
"The genre really has developed into one with a fairly narrow set of mechanics and systems," he states, "although one can very easily argue this is part of a maturation process where the definitions between games will be more in quality and aesthetics."
Crysis, COD and FO3 etc. use more varied mechanics and systems than todays top MMO’s. That is the proof that MMO’s are narrowing not maturing. Solo games have had longer to develop and they are still more diverse than current MMO’s.
To summerise the social gaming part of the article: emotional posers on Facebook will be your new guild mates. Fabulous.
Q. “the highly intriguing question of what the next 10 years are likely to bring...”
A. More of the same unfortuantly.
I think your outlook is too jaded. The first MMO I ever played was Neverwinter Nights on AOL, then Gemstone III (text based) and finally EQ. At no point while playing those games did I ever imagine what we have today. 10 years is both a short period of time and a yet long enough out that we will have no idea what will happen to the gaming industry and certainly not the MMO genre by then. And I was just kid when I played those games, so now I am old enough to know what was but young enough to believe there is still innovation, creativity and the ability to wow players still out there.
I think the comment on the narrowing of mechanics is the most telling here, have to say I agree. AC, EQ and UO were all very different games, yet only the mechanics adopted by EQ seem to have survived intact (albeit it in a thankfully much more player friendly manner, Blizzard did great there, despite what the hardcore purists will claim :p)
Makes me miss my AC days :(
I think there are some great things going for this genre right now, but I also think that many of the great things from the Pre-WoW days have been lost. The major things that stick out in my mind are rich-living worlds.
One of the things that made EverQuest so magical for me was its strong lore and zone design. Most of the zones weren't very large, but they were packed with so many little details and things to check out. Trying to get from Erudin to Kelethin was an epic journey unto itself, and you couldn't do it alone. When you were away from your starting city, you felt like you were far from home and it all felt like it was worth your time to check out.
Conversely, when I ran around in Aion, I looked in awe at how beautiful the zones were, but quickly realized the areas in Eltnen weren't all that different from the ones in Verteron. WAR is another game that kind of reeked of this general artistic "fill-all" mentality. Imagine how much more fun it would have been to fight for a fortress in WAR if the castles actually had some kind of character to them, instead of feeling like a glorified cardboard-box. Rather than creating an entire massive landscape right off the bat, give us regular-sized areas worth exploring and then add to them as the game ages.
My hat's off to you Mr. Aihoshi.
Excellent article.
I am one of your biggest critics here as far as your Free Zone articles go but this was far and above anything I've seen you write, at least recently.
As another poster argued, I don't see the genre funneling down mechanics wise either. Quite the opposite, I see the genre diversifying as those that were introduced via WoW look to new experiences to challenge them. Of course there's still us jaded old school gamers that are hoping for some reincarnation of UO version 2.0, AC1 version 2.0, or EQ1 version 2.0, or at least something in the same vein rather than the WoW mentality that has dominated the market by and large the last 5 years.
People used to think EQ1 was the end all be all of MMOs, then came WoW. There will be something else that comes along down the line that will shake the genre up again and take it in another direction, just like UO, just like EQ, and just like WoW.(I'm talking mechanics wise, not subs as anything would be hard pressed to ever attain WoW-like numbers again IMO)
Games aren't different at all anymore. We say WoW is a great thing and in a way it is. It gave us new players, but they aren't MMORPG players. They are MMOG players. What's the difference. I prefer to distinguish between players who play to have fun, enjoy the rich world, interact and enjoy the journey (MMORPG) vs the people who are in for the action, the run to the end and enjoy the endgame, the destination players (MMOG).
I'm not saying they don't deserve a game, or that devs shouldn't make games for them, but those are the only games made. There aren't any MMORPG's left. EQ has turned to a quickfix to the end, WoW was always that. WAR, AOC, you name it, it's all the same. The only games that aren't really like that are Vanguard and Eve. Vanguard is no longer a game with a future, but is struggling to survive and Eve is still going strong. The game that amazed everyone, especially old school gamers and is proof that doing it another way works too.
But investors don't want to see a game under 10 million gamers. They want to see the next WoW killer and Eve just isn't anywhere near that. It's doing a great job where it is and the gamers need more games like that. Investors have to realise why these games are made. For them it's all about the money, but there can be good money in a game that isn't trying to be the next WoW killer. Make a game for the people who used to play EQ, DAoC, UO, AC, I bet you there will be 500-1m players ready to play it. The only thing they have to do is not fail and bring a buggy game out like Vanguard which drove all players away.
There is a market for the niche MMORPG games, someone just have to want to spend money for it.
While wow have it's up's and downs the game can be fun, but strangely the one game i keep coming back to is anarchy online, when i cancel other games that one i still play, and i just resubbed to everquest :) my wow account is cancelled but ao,aoc,eq1,eq2,swg and aion are still going, aion while pretty feels bit like meh more of the same, i do admit that i'm only lvl 3 but the early levels are what draws you in or not.
Look at age of conan the first 20 levels are really great but after that it changes, it is still a fun game but not as polished, now i don't have any max levels in age of conan mostly cause i can't stand playing a single char for longer periods of time, but this tend to mean i see a lot more of the games i play not just following the fastest route to max level.
I feel that many games today borrow to much from wow to stand out and well more of the same is not as fun, then again i guess economics play a large part in it, making a game like age of conan costs a lot so they like to get as much back as possible, can't afford to take risks making the game to different, would AO work today for instance?