Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Planned Obsolescence and MMORPGs

Posted by simoniker on from the everquest-version-pi-point-seven dept.

Thanks to Stratics for their column discussing the concept of 'planned obsolescence' as it relates to MMORPG expansion packs. The author explains: "Planned obsolescence is, at its root, a strategy to get you to buy more... a design mechanism that would encourage additional purchases by creating the impression that a product had been improved over its early - though still perfectly functional - incarnation." He argues that expansions for MMO titles are controversial because "MMOs are service-based products [and] it is difficult to justify this double charging of the customer for development", and ends on a cautionary note: "While a full sequel... certainly merits an additional purchase, I fear that the practice of planning obsolescence into MMOs by subtly out-moding earlier releases of a given title will ultimately undermine the genre and, therefore, the industry."

4 of 43 comments (clear)

  1. because MMOGs are persistent by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting
    and MMOG programmers take a centralized approach to that persistence. They have lots and lots of centralized servers and for every player they have to add more resources. As such, the game gets suckier and suckier the more players are added. Not only because they need more servers minds you, but because each player need to be a certain distance from the other players in the game world. That distance costs money! The world has to get bigger and bigger or players will be standing on top of each other, and almost all MMOGs are filled with content made by artists and programmers.. that costs money.

    A good MMOG would use the machines of the players to distribute the load of persistence. They would also encourage user created content instead of artist and programmer created content. Building the world should be part of the game!

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  2. Re:Ok, lets look at the HBO example from the artic by UberGeeb · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Of course, there are other options. Rubies of Eventide is a MMORPG that distributes the game software for free. You pay $15/month (or $120 yearly, if you want) to play and get all updates, expansions, etc for free. Basically, they've applied the cable-tv business model to their game, and it works.

    I refused to play Evercrack and the like for exactly the reasons in the article (buying the game then paying $whatever a month for the priviledge of playing it). With Rubies, you're simply paying the monthly fee for server time. Heck, they even throw in a 10 day free trial.

    The gameplay and community are really good, too. It feels a lot like a MUD with a pretty graphics frontend. GM support is on-server 24/7 for the primary, and pretty much any player will pipe up with help if they know the answer.

    (Disclaimer: Yeah, this sounds like an ad. I'm just a player that's happy he's found a game that cares. But, if you decide to play, please put "Seeker" in the referral entry on the signup form. :)

  3. Rip off by JustNiz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even without expansion-packs they are already double-charging as they are service-based product. They should either: * sell the software and give away server time (Unreal Tournament etc.) OR * Give away the software but charge for connection time (AOL etc.) Until they do that, only hardcore enthusiasts will buy MMORPGs so through their over-greed they are bringing on their own failure. I am happy playing UT2003 for free. I'll never buy a MMORPG until they change theire marketing model.

  4. no expansions = no ongoing publicity by shepuk · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "A Tale in the Desert" is an MMORPG that charges people *just* the way I think it should be done. You don't pay for the client. You don't pay an initial connection charge. You don't even have to pony up any credit card details until you've finished your trial period... All you pay is a monthly subscription *after* you've made the decision to keep playing.

    Where other games put out "expansion packs", the developers add new content to the game on an ongoing basis - new stuff seems to appear every few days (and all client patching is done seamlessly while you're actually playing) ...which from the players point of view is great stuff...

    BUT...

    According to the developers, not releasing expansion packs is actually *hurting* their PR! The thing is, each time the likes of Anarchy Online brings out something like "Shadowlands", they suddenly get big spreads in glossy magazines, headlines on all the news sites, and a new boost of publicity. Expansions that are given away for free, on an ongoing drip-feed basis, just don't blip on the gaming press radar. It's actually becoming a problem for the ATITD people; they're adding new (and pretty revolutionary) content to the game all the time, but the gaming press won't touch them because they assume the game is the same thing it was back at launch, and therefore old news... Seems they're just not interested in revisiting games unless there's a new shrinkwrapped box on the shop shelves... and, of course, no publicity = no new customers.

    Sadly, it seems that this is one MMORPG company that's suffering by using a payment model that treats it's subscribers the "right" way :(