WoW Helping or Hurting the Industry?

alstor writes "The New York Times has an interesting story about the success of World of Warcraft, and whether it is hurting or helping the gaming industry; this goes along with an earlier post on an article from CNN. From the Times article: 'WoW is now the 800-pound gorilla in the room. I think it also applies to the single-player games. If some kid is paying $15 a month on top of the initial $50 investment and is devoting so many hours a week to it, are they really going to go out and buy the next Need for Speed or whatever? There is a real fear that this game, with its incredible time investment, will really cut into game-buying across the industry.' What is the Slashdot opinion on World of Warcraft's impact on the gaming industry?"

Comments

Huge market

[fembots]

I don't believe WoW is the 800-pound gorilla yet, because there are still ways to serve the market.

One request that has often been asked but hardly answered is the free-game-with-subscription model.

While almost all pay-$50-then-$15-monthly gamers may have been attracted to WoW, there must be even more gamers who are only willing to invest in a game which allows them to pay-as-they-play. Is any leading publisher willing to take a risk of no initial income and bank on the monthly subscription?

So I think WoW is in a way helping the industry to identify this subscription-based market, but if the rest of the industry is trying to do the same thing, they are likely to be a distanced also-run.

Re:Huge market

[w98]

Personally, I'd pay a monthly fee for a game that was free to download if it were decent enough.

I recently tried neocron 2 which was a free download, but after a month of play required you to pay, but I found the game too boring, and not as fun as some of the other fantasy-style genres I've been used to playing like EQ, EQ2, DAOC and WOW. I thought the cyberpunk genre would have interested me but it wasn't nearly as fun as I thought. Maybe it was just that game though.

But fembots has a point - I think if more game companies realized the HUGE monthly profit games like WOW or EQ/EQ2 are bringing in, I think we'd have cheaper games, I dunno. But fembots was also correct: it's a risk.

Re:Huge market

[CastrTroy]

From what I see, subscription is where the real money is. That's why I use Zip.ca (Canadian Netflix). It's a much better deal than Blockbuster. Blockbuster had trouble getting $25 a month off me. Call it a subscription for unlimited movies, and it was easy. Maybe it's not the same, because I get more from Zip.ca then I ever could from blockbuster. The easy returns make it worth it already. But i think that a lot of money could be made of multiplayer games like this. Even give a 2 week trial period. People will get hooked if it's free.

Re:Huge market

[dishpig]

Actually I could see a free-download/one month trial having more problems than it is worth. Distribution obviously, but more importantly, if they haven't invested their $50, how commited will they be to slugging it through to where they think it might get better? If I've invested $50 in a game, you can be damn sure I'm going to play it for a few months just to get my money's worth, regardless of how much I may be enjoying it. If I got it for free, I feel no such compulsion. I may decide it doesn't run as well as I hoped, or I've seen the cool stuff I wanted to, or 'some jerk ganked me and I hate this crap', or 'I don't have time right now' and end up never coming back to it because something newer and more shiny has come out. That $50 pays a good chunk of distribution and throws a nickel or two at development, but the most important thing it buys is commitment.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

One request that has often been asked but hardly answered is the free-game-with-subscription model.

Anarchy Online. Free to download the basic game, free to play until January of next year. The offer is supposed to stop then, but all the news coming out of Funcom hints at it becoming a permanent feature. You pay if you upgrade to the subscriptions (and there's enough incentive in the way of perks, equipment, and PVP), but otherwise, free. There is advertising on in-game billboards (there's an option to turn it off if you upgrade), but for the most part it's unintrusive. Graphics are outdated (supposedly to be fixed in the coming expansion), but decent. The only other real problem with the game is the balance issues every MMORPG has.

Re:Huge market

[Austerity Empowers]

I think the best available game will define "the industry", as it always seems to (thus WoW, or any great game, is helping the industry).

The question is what do you really want? Lump sum payments tend to be more "take it or leave it" in terms of content, resources will be driven to the next project once the current one is delivered, and network resources (the real $$$ behind monthly subscriptions) will be minimized as much as possible.

Monthly payments will encourage companies to make really long, drawn out level treadmills to keep victims coming back for more. They'll tend to force socialization to draw people in to other (cheap) aspects of the game, and try to do as little new development as they can to maintain the infrastructure.

In the end I think it's still more about the product than the business. People will pay a lot of money for something enjoyable, just look at the MMOG aftermarket. If someone makes a game that will cause the masses to kill their WoW subscription and move to the new game, how could they justify not charging any way they can?

The suit world will invariably ask the question, "Why give away something we could otherwise charge money for?" The only good answer is "to steal player base from the other game." Like many others, I discovered WoW in open beta, put down my EQ uberguilding nonsense and moved on. The free month hooked me for the box fee and the following subscription. I doubt anyone would change that model unless they knew their product was inferior and could not otherwise get some return on the development investment.

Re:Huge market

[lotrtrotk]

People will get hooked if it's "free".

I think I'd change this to read...
People will get hooked if it's "good"

But maybe that's the reason game companies wont make the switch. With a subscription system, the game has to actually be GOOD to get people to keep paying past the initial month. While with the traditional payment method, as long as it's marketed well, people will buy it. Once they've coughed up the cash, it doesn't make a difference whether they like it or not. The company has already made its money.

So for that reason, I'd love to see more games go with subscription payments. It would push the companies to make games actually BE more fun instead of making them LOOK more fun.

Re:Huge market

[CastrTroy]

With games, they could really ditch the whole distribution chain and give the game away as a download. Maybe $5 if people actually want a CD. Also, selling prepaid subscriptions with the game at a reduced price could bring in some initial dollars.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

They may as well have asked if Diablo 2 was bad for the games industry. I played that game exclusively for over two years, and aside from a very few other games, spent nothing on games during that time.

At least with WoW, it is generating income for Blizzard as a company. In case people didn't learn from the dotcom bust, "free" is not a sustainable business model.

Re:Huge market

[Phisbut]

While almost all pay-$50-then-$15-monthly gamers may have been attracted to WoW, there must be even more gamers who are only willing to invest in a game which allows them to pay-as-they-play.

Although it might not be the best option at first sight, last I checked, WoW had over 4 million subscribers... The difference between the free-download-then-$15-monthly and pay-$50-then-$15-monthly is $20 millions...

I don't think any publishers would pass on $20 millions.

They have a pretty good way to hook people though... every retail-box has a "friend pass" that you can give to a friend so he can get 10 days for free... that's how I got hooked... and they call that a "friend"... ...

Re:Huge market

[tater86]

If I've invested $50 in a game, you can be damn sure I'm going to play it for a few months just to get my money's worth, regardless of how much I may be enjoying it.

So do you sit there wasting your time playing a game you don't enjoy just for spite?

Re:Huge market

[AAeyers]

I for one will never pay a monthly subscription for a game. Its like those music services where you get unlimited songs, but only while you pay; you stop paying, you lose everything. It doesn't make much sense to me. At $15 dollars a month and $50 upfront cost, it costs almost 400 dollars to play for 2 years. Is WoW really worth that much?

Re:Huge market

[Fishead]

Somebody needs to give this guy a "friend" pass.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought SOCOM2 for the PS2 used for $12 and I've logged over 250 hours online in the last 13 months for $0/month. I have Xbox live as well and I think it is only ~$70/year. I know, we are talking about PC games but if anything, the online console games are hurting the PC gaming industry more then WOW is with those prices.

Re:Huge market

[badmammajamma]

I'd say it's an 800lb gorilla but only games lacking innovation. Lets face it, the game industry is fucking stale and everyone knows it. I don't need to see 20 versions of Battlefield 1942. MAKE SOMETHING THAT'S FUCKING NEW FOR ONCE!

The consolidation in the game industry and the lack of investors to take any risk has put one giant cock-block on gaming. Personally, I hope WoW puts all these copycat, zero vision gamin companies out of business.

Re:Huge market

[snookums]

One request that has often been asked but hardly answered is the free-game-with-subscription model.

How about the pay-game-no-subscription model? There's no way I'm going to fork out $50 for a game that requires me to pay a monthly tax to prevent it from becoming a shiny coaster.

I propose a game which comes with server software, a basic generic world, and specifications/tools for creating new mobs, zones, items, etc.* The pubisher can still set up "premium" servers, where you pay-to-play and get a great professionally-crafted experience just like WoW. However, you could also get a group of friends together, create your own world just the way you like it, and play for as long as you like without forking over ransom money to keep you character. There could even be clauses in the license that prevent you from taking any money from people -- even donations for server hosting -- just like Diku-based MUD codebases.

I have purchased exactly 1 new game in my life -- Quake III for Linux -- but if someone makes a good game with this model then I'll buy it for sure.

* Yes, I'm a MUD denizen.

Re:Huge market

[Tony Hoyle]

I'm the publishers dream...

I like WoW, bought it & subscribed..

then I haven't had chance to play it for more than a few hours in the last 3 months.

Unfortunately you can't suspend a subscripton that you're not currently using without losing your characters (it's taken me most of the year to get my character to level 10 and I'm damned if I'm giving it up...).

Ultimately I'll probably just cancel and forget it, as it'll annoy me enough that I won't want to keep paying.

Re:Huge market

[Babbster]

Not to be too pedantic, but the number is $200 million if 4 million people pay $50 per unit. But, not every customer pays the same price. For example, WoW is steeply discounted in China so that they can take business away from the software black market over there.

Re:Huge market

[xstonedogx]

I doubt it will work that way.

What I would do, regardless of whether my game was good or not, is charge a high price for a month-to-month subscriptions, and offer a 6-month- or year-long "contract" at a reduced rate. That way I would be recouping my costs the same way I would if I was selling the game, while giving those who want to invest further an incentive to do so.

Re:Huge market

[BHearsum]

That's not true at all. I have cancelled my WoW subscription twice and started it up again without losing any of my characters.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody continues to play the game because they already coughed up $50. They keep playing because they get ridiculously fucking addicted to it. Everquest was like crack. WoW is like some fucking super hyper death-crack from outer space.

Re:Huge market

[spir0]

I honestly think that once MMOGs are so common that they're effectively standard games (just as network playability was once a new thing, then became standard), people will start releasing some source code here and there, or the garage game coders will start coding their own games.

iD have released plenty of their older games' source code into the world, and eventually they, or a company like them, will release code for a MMOG.

Then we'll see people releasing servers/clients free of content.

It'll just take a few years.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

I said the same thing. I'm a casual gamer then my brother bought me WoW for Christmas. I played it almost non stop for 6 months. I got bored with it after that, but I still forked over 6 months worth of subscription fees.

Re:Huge market

[Wog]

Not true. Anyone who tells you that you'll lose your characters is an idiot.

I quit for four months, started again for two, and have quit again. Never lost a character.

Re:Huge market

[dubstar]

I know for at least Planetside that doesn't seem to have been the case for me. A while back they offered the game for free as a Win XP extra with 1 month or something of free play as well. Due to the easy access to the game I had 6 friends playing it before my free subscription time ran out, and all of us ended up paying for at least a few months as well.

Coincidentally, I also own WoW - but have grown extremely bored of it and cancelled my subscription months ago. I'm not playing any MMO games right now, but I've been looking at Planetside again. I would have to say if it was as simple to get into the game as it was when I first played it I would probably have had a subscription the second the urge hit.

Mind you, Planetside was a bit different from the MMORPG's as well - you didn't have as much of a commitment factor to whatever character you played, and it was very easy to sit and play it for 15 minutes OR hours on end and still have fun either way.

Re:Huge market

[Locky]

If it took you a year to get to level 10 then I expect you to be around level 48 when the Sun explodes.

Re:Huge market

[ToadMan8]

You know what would be a good idea?

The game was freely downloadable and playable until your character hit level five or so. After level five or level ten or whatever you had to pay for it. I think that would hook lots of people with little risk, then gain loyal customers.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

And how much money do you spend going to a movie theater every month? That is something you don't get to hold on to, are limited by what is immediately available (in the box office) and are required to enjoy on a set schedule.

If you are anything like many of the people I have discussed this with, you likely spend close to $10-$30 a month (single person) on tickets, a drink and a snack, depending on what is available (some months have multiple "must see" movies, while others are lacking).

So why is it such a bad thing to pay ~$15 a month on a subscription which you are able to enjoy on your own schedule, as often as you like. In the case of MMOs you get the added benifit of enjoying the company of new and old friends. In the case of music subscriptions (for $15) you get the benifit of taking your music with you to listen anywhere.

Honestly, in the case of music subscriptions, I own the music I feel are "must haves" and "rent" the music I happen to be in the mood for that month/day/hour/minute. As for playing MMOs, they're just fun. More fun than paying $50 for the latest game to hit the shelves every one or two months.
[for the record, I am not a WoW player]

At $15 dollars a month and $50 upfront cost, it costs almost 400 dollars to play for 2 years.

Any moderately serious gamer easily spends $100 a year (or in your quoted example, $200 every two years) on games they will likely play for at least that year, if not longer. Take Half-Life 2, and Battlefield 2--there's your $100 for the year. Tack on the miscellaneous other games that will get played for a month or two and you are well over $100 a year. Frankly, I think $100 a year is a reasonable price to pay for something that is always available (well, mostly) and has virtually infinite playability. Look at the original EQ players or DAoC, some of these people have found incredible amounts of leasure enjoyment for their $100 a year (and initial $50 investment with the occasional $20-30 add-on).

Ask any long time player of any MMO if they feel the value of their favorite MMO is worth the amount they pay monthly or yearly. I can guarantee every one will say "yes". Why? Because, otherwise they wouldn't have paid it for multiple years.

Percieved value will be different from person to person. The bottom line is, there are enough people, like myself, that find their own percieved value of these services are worth at least as much as the monetary requirements of each service, that these businesses not only exist, but do quite well.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

Gah, even with preview I didn't catch my typo until immediately hitting the / button. Change the amounts from $100 and $200 (per year and every other year) to $200 and $400. Incidentally, there are a good number of people who pay twice this amount (3x, 4x and even more) for multiple accounts solely for "botting". Please note, that is where I draw the line, although I have paid for multiple subscriptions for different games...

Re:Huge market

[AAeyers]

Good point. That is exactly why I have a home theater and wait for DVD releases.

And I don't play the latest games, I use a mac.

Re:Huge market

[PaganRitual]

So when IS the next version of Photoshop out anyway? ;)

Re:Huge market

[Boronx]

If I've invested $50 in a game, you can be damn sure I'm going to play it for a few months just to get my money's worth

Sadly I think this *is* insightful becaue so many think the way you do.

The game is a sunk cost. The price you've paid for it has no bearing on how much value you can get out of it.

There may be a game that is so bad that you'll never get $50 worth of entertainment no matter how much you play.

Then consider a merely horrible game where steady playing allows you to eke out $0.50 worth of entertainment a day.

After barely more than three months of playing every single day, congratualtions, you've made your money back, at a huge oppurtinity cost of not playing all the incredibly fun games out there.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you just described Neverwinter Nights. There are tons of player run servers, not only are the tools made available for creating custom content/classes/items/etc, but there are player-made packs of items ready for the "weekend GM" to use for creating their own quasi-custom worlds. Not only do you get the online, persistant world, you get a huge single player, offline game with tons of official and unofficial content. One thing you didn't mention, but is available in NWN is the ability for a GM to adjust, control and change things on the fly, a la P&P D&D. Well, not quite pencil and paper, but close enough to make things interesting.

Re:Huge market

[redKrane]

In short, yes imho.

Re:Huge market

[yasth]

But there is a lot of damage you can do with cheap/free lvl 5 chars, mostly in the form of spamming, and the like. Everone having to pay keeps it sane, since the publisher can lock out your cd key, and account, and let that be that. But with no cost of entry, well imagine hordes of zombie machines running WoW spaming "free Cialis message fdlkfjs@aol.com".

There are ways around it, but it is a side effect. Also, personally I like the begining parts a lot better then the middle levels where it is a grind. So no money fromm me and my ilk.

Re:Huge market

[stor]

Is any leading publisher willing to take a risk of no initial income and bank on the monthly subscription?

Eve is like that.

But don't go there man, I'm warnin' ya! I know people who've seriously lost their baseball playing that game. A friend of mine knows some dude with ~10 accounts and 10 computers online dedicated to Eve.

Cheers
Stor

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

Regarding distribution, look at Valve's online distribution, Steam.

About the initial $50 investment, I agree to a point, then my reasoning takes a different tack. Most games on initial release tend to suck, especially MMOs. If you are allowing free access for a month and everyone tries a game during its first month, almost nobody will be back to pay-to-play for half a year or so. I fairly agree with the rest of your points/examples. There are good chances that something else will be released taking eyes away from last month's offerings, reducing the number of people returning at that six month mark.

Again, it comes down to percieved value. If you get something for nothing your initial expected percieved value is quite low. If you pay $50 for it, that initial value is expected to be higher. The more value we percieve the more likely we are to continue paying a monthly fee.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

Good points as well. The only thing is, you are the exception, not the rule. The numbers in these industries back me up on this.

As I mentioned in my original post, the majority of the people I have spoke with regarding these issues are the basis for thinking. Not everyone I have spoken with match this template, nor did I mean to suggest that you, specifically, would match this template; rather, I suspect that a good number of people who will read that initial post will fall in the $10-$30/mo. movie watcher.

Re:Huge market

[syousef]

What you've never shelved an expensive piece of software out of frustration?

The advantage of the $50 initial payout is that basically Blizzard gets the $50 plus an initial $15 I assume, regardless of whether you like the game or not.

Re:Huge market

[Cylix]

That is sort of the trend eve online is taking. The initial fee is 20 and it gets you 30 days. I think it's 12.95 after that.

Very interesting game that can be played several different ways.

Bit too much of a time sink for me, but it doesn't have to be.

I do recommend it.

Re:Huge market

[blincoln]

Is WoW really worth that much?

It's not the price that puts me off, but what the monthly subscription model implies - no end to the game, and no way to play once it becomes unpopular and they turn off the servers.

I like games with a story arc. I like to buy them, play through the story, and have them be over. But that isn't really possible with a subscription model. People might play through 2 or 3 times if there are multiple paths, but they won't keep playing for 2-3 years.

I also like to replay the games I really like years down the road. When I was at university in 1999, I dug up my old copy of Wasteland and replayed it. That was awesome. Would I be able to do that in 2020 with World of Warcraft? I doubt it, even disregarding that it wouldn't have the same "story."

I was reading a gaming magazine today, and it had coverage of a bunch of XBox 360 games. Nearly all of them require Live to get the full experience, even for things that shouldn't - like collecting the high-end items in Oblivion. I guess I won't be playing that one, as much as I liked Morrowind.

All of this stuff looks shiny and neat, until it becomes unpopular and the back-end infrastructure gets turned off. The Steel Battalion fans just found that out for themselves - Capcom is shutting down the servers, which is going to break a good chunk of the OFFLINE single-player game.

Re:Huge market

[Jarnis]

Not really. You cannot 'black market' WoW. Each copy has an unique serial key used to create an unique account to access the game.

You cannot pirate WoW - well, you can, but the CDs are worthless without an account. At best you can use your 'pirate copy' to run an account you bought off ebay...

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

EverQuest (not the crap they're calling Everquest 2 that has nothing to do the with the original and plays like shit) pretty well does this, they sell the boxes for dirt cheap (you can get the big packs of like all 10 expansions for like $20) and then makes they're money off the people who have been playing for 6-7 years sort of thing and paying per/mo or per/annum etc. (I quit just before the 6 year anniversary)

In opposition to this, Guild Wars has a pay one time, upfront of about $60 CDN (when I bought it awhile ago) and then play online for free essentially forever, with next to nothing fees for any/all upcoming expansions none of which will be necessary to the game just lore addons and such. So it's hard to say companies aren't playing with the spectrum of profit methods when all this is occuring.

Personally I played EQ for 6 years before quitting to try EQ 2. Tragically, EQ 2 was garbage so I soon enough left it to join my friends in WoW. WoW held my attention for 2 months before I had a 60 hunter and a 60 warrior and absolutely nothing else to do in the game aside slaughter noobs, which is more satisfying in CounterStrike anyways, so I quit WoW with no desire to return. I went out and bought Guild Wars, 5 days later, I had multiple level 20 characters in a 1000 rank guild (basically top end of the game) with infusion armor and all the spells I'd ever want if I had played for years.

After all this the only thing I'm left with is a soft stinging desire to return to EverQuest (original) where pwning was hard to do and being a level above someone was worthy of awe (because it took a fucking long time to get anywhere). I honestly believe original EQ is the last bastion of difficult MMO's out there, for I've beaten every one since it in less than 2 months of buying whatever MMO.

To return to the original topic, is WoW ruining the games industry? Probably not, your going to lose a lot of young gamers who were not addicted to MMO's, but it's not a game that your willing to subject your basis of reality into (like I believe EverQuest was, though it too has taken a marked decrease over the past few years). People will tire of WoW, not all of them, some of them will take up many years residence in Teldrassil and Lordoraen, but it's not going to truly impact the industry. You have to put it all in perspective, a lot of the people playing WoW are gone, but they are still only a tiny portion of what is a $10 billion US dollar industry in the US alone (eclipsing the Movie Industry).

Re:Huge market

[Jarnis]

Considering the amount of dev power MMO developers sink in for day-to-day improvements, and how much running a huge server farm plus customer support costs, 15$/month is peanuts. The valid question is - how many games can fit into the market. People pay that 15$, but once they are paying that, it's a huge additional step to pay for *another* game. So the 'best' game out there gets a disproportionate amount of the market as everyone flocks to it.

Also as there are huge swings in subscriber counts, one game might have to invest $megabucks for new server hardware, only to find it mostly unused after a bungled patch that caused 50k subscribers to quit almost overnight and move to another subscription game.

Blizzard is making huge wads of money, but beyond them (their game is currently 'best' as far as stability and polish goes), many MMO devs are in dire straits - see the long list of cancelled products that took a long look, decided that their offering sucked compared to WoW, and gave up. Games like Imperator (not even released) and Asheron's Call 2.

Also, there's an old saying - the moment you (MMO customer) actually contact their customer support either ingame or via phone, you already costed the company the month's fee you paid.

Some companies have tried to skimp on this - either with seriously undermanned CS, or by outsourcing it to india (go EA!), neither really works as customers bail out rather fast if they somehow get hosed in the game, and cannot get hold of a company rep to fix the issue with their character/possessions/whatever.

Considering the behind-the-scenes costs (servers, bandwidth) and development work and customer support, 15$/month/player is not unreasonable. Nobody is forcing you to pay.

And if you want 'no subs fee' games, there are those too - Guild Wars comes to mind. I tried it, it's so filled by idiotic kids with two second attenttion spans that can't have a credit card, that it made me vomit. Subscription fee is also a nice barrier of entry for the worst idiots, and I'd pay a monthly fee just to be able to play a game that has more mature playerbase.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

If a game's good enough to keep you playing for 2 years, then of course it's worth that. How much did you spend on non-subscription titles in the last two years, looking for games you liked enough to play for more than a few days, I wonder? If you're anything like me, it was rather more than 400 dollars.

The only meaningful measures of cost to me are how much I spend overall, and how much quality play time I get for my money. The subscription model does very well on both. Paying 15 dollars a month to play a game you enjoy is equivalent to rationing yourself to only buying a new, non-subscription game about once every three months, no matter how good or bad that game proves to be once you get it home. And the game you're playing on the subscription model is a game you enjoy, or you wouldn't still be subscribing.

Turning the above on its head - if playing that subscription game reduces the number of games I buy in a three month period by just one, it's paying for itself. In practice, I find the effect is much stronger. Since starting to play WoW, I've spent far less on my computer gaming than for years, and got many more hours quality play for my money, because I've found a game I enjoy. The fact that most of my spend has been on one product, rather than spread over many, is utterly irrelevant.

Re:Huge market

[incubuz1980]

I only have 2 EVE accounts, but i haven't played anything else since July 2004.

It is highly addictive.

Re:Huge market

[deltagreen]

Blizzard have stated that they will keep everything on a closed account for at least 6 months. And after those 6 months they won't actually delete anything without a good reason, like storage or performance issues because of inactive accounts.

Re:Huge market

[Babbster]

I did get it slightly wrong. When reading this article, I misremembered that they were talking about two different games. To be specific, they released Warcraft 3 at a price "within an "arm's reach" of the pirate price" (pirated games going for about US$1 versus legal games at $15). They then released World of Warcraft at the regular price - which, of course, still means that Chinese gamers are paying less than half the price paid by US gamers.

Re:Huge market

[tehlinux]

I for one will never pay a monthly subscription for a game. Its like those music services where you get unlimited songs, but only while you pay; you stop paying, you lose everything. It doesn't make much sense to me. At $15 dollars a month and $50 upfront cost, it costs almost 400 dollars to play for 2 years. Is WoW really worth that much?

I spend more than that on beer every month.

Re:Huge market

[Jarnis]

It's cheaper in china - that is true - but that's just local pricing. It's not being dumped (near) free to 'foil pirates', because it can't be pirated.

Also of note - the chinese version is good for creating accounts only on the chinese servers. Same restriction is in place US vs European version.

Re:Huge market

[Mehtuus]

After barely more than three months of playing every single day, congratualtions, you've made your money back...

Then when you tack on the subscription fee, you are back in the hole again.

Re:Huge market

[realityfighter]

I'd like to see more games based on a micropayment model like Puzzle Pirates' Doubloon Oceans. Doubloons are basically quarters that you put into the "machine" of the game to buy things like swords and ships. The payments scale with how involved you want to be in the game, so there's a very low barrier of entry for those who just want to play casually.

If you want to be an island governor with a fleet of deadly black pearls, you pay more, but probably not as much as you would subscribing for all the time it took to build up your fleet. And if you want to log off for six months while you finish your doctoral thesis or write that symphony (okay, okay...or play that other MMO), you don't lose months of subscription fees. Also, the game client is free.

Re:Huge market

[EvilSmile]

Also I think it is a ridiculous question to ask (the mainpage post).

If a game is good and people are playing it instead of playing other games, it means the standard for good games is rising. *That* is always good for the customer. I do not think people would continue to keep paying for the subscription if it was not so good. If the game was good and I thought I'd rather play WoW instead of buying NFS 28, or FIFA 2020 that would be because I am *choosing* to spend my money on better games and am in no way being *forced* to play WoW.

Re:Huge market

[Babbster]

It's cheaper in china - that is true - but that's just local pricing. It's not being dumped (near) free to 'foil pirates', because it can't be pirated.

Yes, thank you. I thought my response was clarification enough. Let me know if that hammer starts to wear out and I'll hand you another with which to hit me over the head.

Re:Huge market

[mwvdlee]

I'd rather buy a $50 game, consider it a mistake, then throw it away, than keep playing through many boring hours just because I paid for it.
If a game sucks, it's NEVER going to be "worth it's money". No matter how much time you spend on it, the only thing a bad game will do is waste even more.
So if you've bought yourself a bad game; accept your mistake and move on.

Not saying WoW is bad (I'm not willing to risk $50 to find out), just that if you DO think it's bad; don't wast more on it than you already have.

Re:Huge market

[Soul-Burn666]

10-30$ on movies per month?! NO FUCKING WAY IN HELL.
If I ever go to movies it's at most once per month, when a good movie comes out.
Also, a game is much different than a movie.
For a movie, you pay the 10$ once, see the movie for 2-3hrs and are through with it.
If you pay 15$/month for a game you can play whenever you want, you will find yourself playing whenever you can, to get the best out of you monthly pay. You will always think "should I play this month? should I choose not to play this month because of my work?" and change the subscription.
If a game has a one time pay, you won't mind not playing some time, then coming back.
These points only apply to people who are short on cash, i.e teenagers/kids or unemployed people. People with real jobs won't really notice the 15$ payment.

Re:Huge market

[EsbenMoseHansen]

One request that has often been asked but hardly answered is the free-game-with-subscription model

You mean like A tale in the desert?

Free trial, free download, runs on 3 platforms (mac, linux-x32, win32) and very fun game. The graphics are unstunning, but good enough. The community is great, and there is some great game play. No sword, no axes and no violence, though.

Re:Huge market

[Soul-Burn666]

Evercrack made people drop out of college and into poverty.
WoW made people into psychopaths (audio plugin needed).

Re:Huge market

[CProgrammer98]

No, the game price includes first month subscription for free (or you can think of it as paying $35 for the cds and license key, $15.00 for first month)

All 3 of my teenage boys have WoW accounts so I'm REALLY in the hole!

Re:Huge market

[RealisticCanadian]

Ye boys are missing the point on that one; you can't pirate WoW (tho thats disputible), but, keeping prices low allows it to compete in a market where games are normally close to free, which *are* pirated.

Now you kiddies run along & play :D

Re:Huge market

[blahplusplus]

"With a subscription system, the game has to actually be GOOD..."

I really doubt this, there are many good games (even single player games) that are both good and commercial failures, many other games were good but no one liked the theme (Earth & beyond and other MMO's that shut down).

Most game developers right now are serving pretty much dumbed down shovel-ware crap, to people who have no twitch skills IMHO. The action element in most MMO's is totally missing, it appeals to gamers who like minimum of interactivity, to be able to chat with people. People pay and play it but the lack of interactivity kills it for me.

Re:Huge market

[Jaysyn]

Stardock has got it figured out as well

http://www.stardock.com/

Re:Huge market

[ocbwilg]

It's been a long time since I bought an MMOG, but back in the day when I started playing Ultima Online you got a couple months subscription free when you purchased the boxed game. That's not quite what you're asking about, but it's closer.

Come to think of it, I think that UO also allows you to download the client (not the latest version with all the bells and whistles) and just play with a subscription. You would still need to buy the box to get the features of the latest add-on.

Of course, there's the real point of the boxed games. EQ and UO came out with a new add-on every year to add new content and play areas. If you don't have 4 million subscribers you probably rely on those (relatively easy to create, compared to the initial game) add-ons to generate revenue.

Re:Huge market

[birder]

As well, that's 4 millions current subscribers. I know a lot of people, including myself, who cancelled their accounts. They made a *lot* of money off the box sales alone.

Re:Huge market

[geminidomino]

And if you want 'no subs fee' games, there are those too - Guild Wars comes to mind. I tried it, it's so filled by idiotic kids with two second attenttion spans that can't have a credit card, that it made me vomit. Subscription fee is also a nice barrier of entry for the worst idiots, and I'd pay a monthly fee just to be able to play a game that has more mature playerbase.

You must be joking... The WoW community follows Sturgeon's Law just as much as Guild Wars, IRC, and even AOL.

That's the big flaw in MMOG theory, I think. Static games counting on the "community" to give it playability, but then no screening whatsoever of who gets to ENTER said "community"

Re:Huge market

[hraefn]

Yes.

Re:Huge market

[Cranst0n]

Actually, I did not pay for City of Heroes. They have promotions where friends can invite people to play for a 14 day free trial. The software is free, and then you have your $15/month fee.

Re:Huge market

[C0rinthian]

Don't expect a free box + monthly fee on any new release MMO. The box sales are a major offset for all the money sunk into development. br>
Once box sales start to drop to the point where distribution is too much of a hassle, then they'll switch to an online model with free download. (Ex: Eve Online)

Besides, as long as players are willing to pay the $50 for the box, they will charge for it. And they'd be stupid not to.

Re:Huge market

[pezpunk]

The real reason Blizzard charges anything for the client software is because if they gave it away, then brick and mortar stores like EB, walmart, best buy, etc, would not give it any shelf space. these stores are where the vast majority of games are sold. blizzard doesn't want to risk going at it without that face-time and marketing that those stores provide.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Custard]

"Not saying WoW is bad (I'm not willing to risk $50 to find out)"

It's worth the risk, provided you can spare the time for all the playing you'll want to do once you try it :)

Re:Huge market

[snookums]

And they have a Linux and a Mac client so the Missus and I can both play. Maybe I can get her back into online gaming. She was a hard-core MUDder for a few months, but the griefers drove her away.

Thanks for the tip.

Re:Huge market

[shokk]

Don't forget Guild Wars, which is $43, but without a monthly fee. Produced by Ultima's Richard "Lord British" Garriott. If you've ever played Ultima Online or WoW, this game retains the same feel while getting rid of some of the annoying problems the older games had. They seem to have tons of servers for the same realms to avoid overcrowding, but its easy to quickly switch between servers in game play if you want to team up with friends.

Re:Huge market

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not just have a $50 cost for the game and then give you several months of access for free. In the end, you've only paid the monthly fee for the game but at the same time, the game company gets some upfront money and the customer is invested enough in the game to play it for a couple months, after that, if you haven't found something in the game that you want to continue doing, it's probably not the game for you.

Re:Huge market

[VolciMaster]

There's also the possibility of charging just a per month rate, with no free trial. Instead of $50 up-front and $15/month, why not have the game available from the company's website, and you can download it only after paying the $15 registration fee which activates your account, and then you have the game and can play as long as you want for the $X/month rate. Once I have an account, I can install the game onto as many machines as I want, but only use the account from one at a time, nuless I buy a multi-user option.

The company could still give away copies for reviewers and such, but it would be a much lower initial investment.

There's also the aspect of getting patches. If I move to a new computer, sell my copy of the game to somebody else, etc, all of the patches that have been released need to be redownlaoded. In my account-based, download scenario, moving to a new machine is a download of the entire game, which would presumably have all of the patches included. Anyone interested in playing such a beast would be on broadband, so the hour (or whatever) to download is not a big deal.

Anybody else think this might work?

Re:Huge market

[Jarnis]

Sorry, haven't tried US WoW so can't comment there - may be filled with idiots, don't know.

Euro WoW that I *have* tried is not *that* bad. It has it's share of cretins, but with careful server selection you can find bearable place to play in.

Generally I meant MMOs with bit more mature playerbase. Yes, every MMO has it's share of idiots, but they are in the minority. In Guild Wars they are in the majority...

Re:Huge market

[ultranova]

After barely more than three months of playing every single day, congratualtions, you've made your money back, at a huge oppurtinity cost of not playing all the incredibly fun games out there.

Moral of the story: don't pay for MMORPG's, just pirate single-player games ;). And if you aren't willing to pirate, then you won't be able to afford those other games anyway, and were out of luck the moment you picked this game.

Or just do what I did: I bought Black and White the day it came out, played it a while, decided that it sucked, and sold it onward to my lazy roommate who wanted it but hadn't yet gotten around to go to a game shop.

Re:Huge market

[Cais]

That audio is not actually from WoW, from what I've heard it's actually Ultima Online.

Re:Huge market

[fitten]

As others have said...

Folks who game a lot will easily spend $50/month on a new game every month, sometimes more, because most single-player/non-online games get boring fast. I used to do that.

Queue the release of EverQuest. I paid $50 up front and $15/month for five (yes, five) years. During that time, I bought almost no other games - BF is the only one I can think of. If I had only one account, you could argue that I actually "saved" $35/month over my normal purchasing habits so that's almost a $2000 "savings" over that time period. However, I actually had three accounts so my spending was the same (about $45/month for all three accounts).

Now I'm playing WoW and have been for about six months. My wife and I have an account each so that's $30/month subscription. Compare this to going to the movies where the ticket costs alone during matinee times are $14 and we spend about the same as going to two movies per month (4 hours of entertainment) vs. as much time each month that we want to play WoW for entertainment (usually at least 2 hours per night, so say at least 60 hours (really more like 80 hours or more) of entertainment per month for each of us.

When you put costs into perspective of typical entertainment budgets, MMORPGs actually tend to be much better cost/hour of entertainment that many other forms of entertainment. Putting MMORPGs into perspective of just computer gaming budgets, they still win because many gamers spend less money on computer games each month playing MMORPGs than playing the single player games of the past.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

" 10-30$ on movies per month?! NO FUCKING WAY IN HELL. If I ever go to movies it's at most once per month, when a good movie comes out."
...
"For a movie, you pay the 10$ once, ..."
So, where you live, going to the movies once a month at $10 a visit doesn't equate to being in the category of $10/mo? I'm sorry, I'm just a little bit confused. Don't get your panties in a ruffle, I know what you are saying--you don't go to the movies every month. My point is still valid though, the average of the people I have spoken to regarding this issue is typically 1-2 movies a month with snacks and drinks as additional charges, thus $10-$30 a month. I never said that everybody goes to the movies and spends $10-$30 a month doing so. You are obviously one of the "less thans". My girlfriend and I are one of the "more thans". Stop your sputtering prattle and read the content instead of looking for a spot to jump all over somebody.

Also, I would venture to say that the vast majority of people who are paying the $50 initial investment along with $15 a month are not stressing about whether or not they should play this month. Again, unbunch those panties, I'm saying the majority here. Most of the people that I know who play MMOs are more apt to say, "Man, I only got to play for a few nights last month." verses, "Man, I had to cancel my account for the month because of my deadline." or, "I have to play for 48 hours straight during the last weekend of this month to get any value out of my $15 because I haven't had time to play this month." Your point of people who are short on cash, teenagers/kids and unemployed people is, again, in my opinion, the exception, not the norm.

Re:Huge market

[l1_wulf]

Actually, if you get your hands on copies of the CD/DVDs, install the game and do a search for private WoW servers, not only can you join someone else's, you can easily find the code to run your own. So technically, yes, you can pirate WoW, and yes it has been. If you're bored, search for World of Warcraft torrents, I'm sure you'll get hits on any search engine of choice.

Re:Huge market

[nazrhyn]

For the record, Diablo 1 and StarCraft and AFAIK Warcraft 2 (bnet edition) are still playable online. Blizzard is not wont to turn off their services because of a decline in use.

Re:Huge market

[Phisbut]

Not to be too pedantic, but the number is $200 million if 4 million people pay $50 per unit.

Hey... I just got back from vacation now... brain isn't fully working yet... give me a break :-P

Re:Huge market

[aculeus]

Fear not my core gaming friend. Vanguard, is out there, waiting just for you.

Re:Huge market

[Jarnis]

Problem is, the game content is serverside. The 'private' emulated servers have little to no content in them.

If you call 'running around in the same gameworld' as 'playing WoW', then your assesment is correct. To me, however, the items, quests and other things controlled serverside *is* the game - not just the backdrop that is local to your client.

Re:Huge market

[Prophet of Nixon]

What magazine was that in? And what other unnecessary links to Live are they planning? It was nice as an option, but I'm gonna be a bit irked if everything suddenly requires it.

Re:Huge market

[thesandtiger]

Even more, that's *current* subscribers. Blizzard made that very clear: the 4 million figure does NOT include cancellations. How many people bought the game and then cancelled?

WoW is not a cash cow - it's a cash megafarm.

Re:Huge market

[geminidomino]

Yes, every MMO has it's share of idiots, but they are in the minority.

That's the part I take exception to. They are definitely in the majority, at least on Feathermoon, Gurubashi, and Lightning's Blade.

Big part of the reason I quit. I didn't feel like paying for the privilege of associating with these "winners."

Re:Huge market

[Taevin]

Make 'em get jobs so they can pay their own montly fees :) Only costs them a few hours of time to make the money for an entire month of play (depending on the pay of the job) and it saves you $540/yr.

Re:Huge market

[blincoln]

There is still a huge fan base of SC and Diablo players. Will those servers be online in five years? I think that's unlikely.

Anyway, it's beside the point because both of those games are still fully playable offline.

Re:Huge market

[blincoln]

What magazine was that in?

Official Xbox Magazine.

And what other unnecessary links to Live are they planning?

My theory after reading the Oblivion article (and others) is "as many as possible." I think MS is actively encouraging it.

The short-term reason is so they can make money every time you spend a dollar to get the fancy armour in Oblivion, or paint job in PGR3.

But the long-term reason is that they will be able to turn off the Live component of the games you bought when the sequel comes out, forcing you to upgrade.

Re:Huge market

[nahdude812]

To me, yes, it's worth that much, because it satisfies a gaming desire that would cost me a lot more than $400 over 2 years. I noticed this when I was into EQ, where I stopped buying other games since I already had a game that satisfied my gaming needs.

With games now costing $50 at a minimum, and $65 in many cases, it only takes 6-8 games to meet the $400 price of playing Warcraft for 2 years. That's only one new game every 3 months. While playing Warcraft, I feel no need to puchase other games, and in the long run, I would have spent more than $15/month on games anyhow.

Re:Huge market

[phxbadash]

You do realize that WoW is one of the most cookie-cutter/non-innovative MMO's out don't you?

I played the game for the first 3 months it was out, quit, came back for battlegrounds and have quit again...most likely permanently this time.

The first 20 levels of the game go by really quick and it sucks you in good, but after 20 the horrid grinding starts and boredom sets in. The PVP system is shit as well.

So, back to EVE-Online for me...been subscribed 2 years and counting and it's been worth every penny.

Re:Huge market

[badmammajamma]

You are correct. There is nothing new in WoW except for the artwork. What I was trying to say is that I hope, in spite of its lack of innovation, that it does kill all the other copycat games just so that the gaming companies get a fire up their ass to make something new again. I am aware of the irony.

I'd have to say...

[!ramirez]

...from my own experience, it would be a gold standard against which other games would be measured, for better or for worse.

Re:I'd have to say...

[HeLLFiRe1151]

I'm not going to feel sorry for EA games, anytime soon. Innovate or get out of the way.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Yocto Yotta]

Yeah, god damn them for putting out a quality game that people like. Jerks.

Re:I'd have to say...

[guaigean]

Innovate or get out of the way.

Thank you! It's not that WoW is monopolizing. They just happen to have made a good game, and the consumer is speaking with their dollar. If a game comes out that can draw attention from WoW, it deserves the money. I'm sorry that EA can't pump out another Madden and make endless cash, but its about damned time that the Free Market and Economic theory returned to the marketplace. There is no anti-competive work at play here, supply and demand. Low supply of quality games, and a high demand for it where WoW fulfills the need.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree.

I play shitloads of WoW, and I like it. The competition better catch up or I won't be buying any new titles for quite a while.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Dread_ed]

Innovate or get out of the way.

Oh, but it is so much more fun to watch them get run down in the street, and then lie there gushing blood and bodily fluids, screaming from the agonzing pain, twitching spasmotically in their remaining extremeties, and then finally muttering repeatedly in a broken and horse gurgling voice "I can't feel my legs...."

Figuratively speaking, of course.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Chasuk]

Time was when EA actualy produced innovative games. In fact, they were one of the most innovative game companies of all time, back when Bill Budge and Trip Hawkins were still household names. Now they are just re-packagers of other people's shit.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Same goes for the Open Source community.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been playing too long.. I thought you said "Innervate or "...

Re:I'd have to say...

[Thangodin]

Agreed. It's the 800 lb gorilla because it's good. It has a ton of content and supports single and group play, PvP, etc. It isn't the best at everything (City of Heroes wins the title for best group play, Dark Age of Camelot has the best PvP) but it is the best overall. And it runs on an average machine. Hell, the late EQ2 crawled on a top end machine.

I, for one, welcome our orcish overlords. :)

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to log on...

Re:I'd have to say...

[CloudsSpaz]

You have to realize though (and I know the WoW lovers are going to explode here, but it's true), WoW isn't really innovative at all.

For an MMORPG, WoW's pretty much the same basic stuff that's been around since [before] Everquest. It's not really new or innovative in any way.

It's polished certainly (what Blizzard game isn't), but truth be told, Blizzard pulled one of EA's biggest tricks out of the hat with WoW. That is, they applied an already hugely popular franchise (Warcraft) to a routine genre. And heck, even a lot of the main features of the game, such as spells and items, are heavily borrowed from Blizzard's previous games themselves (War III and Diablo II specifically).

That's not to say it's a bad game. It most certainly isn't, as the sales prove. But the only thing Blizzard is doing that differently from EA (and companies like that) is that they're taking time and care to actually polish their titles. But new and innovative? Not really.

Re:I'd have to say...

[techsoldaten]

'Innovate or get out of the way'

It's that kind of thinking that ended the hugely enjoyable Ancient Art of War series, not to mention the Sophwith Camel line of games. I am still bitter with all you innovators and really wish there was a 'stay the course' movement in software development. While some people may vote with their wallets, I vote with my 8088.

M

Re:I'd have to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Must've been written by a concerned investor......

The guy is worried about WoW taking away from other game companies??? This dude must have stock in another game company and feels that if Blizzard had stock, he'd be buying or selling right now. That's why he's probably raising the issue. Otherwise any logical person knows that good quality products are bought and bought, while lesser quality crap stuff is left and not bought.

Re:I'd have to say...

[Shakes268]

WoW is no innovation. Beta tested it and it was so much like the original Everquest it was laughable. Yep, there are differences but it's certainly nothing new.

Re:I'd have to say...

[mal3]

But the only thing Blizzard is doing that differently from EA (and companies like that) is that they're taking time and care to actually polish their titles.

Actually, that's the first time anyone has done that with a MMORPG.

If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Eyah....TIMMY]

The graphics in WOW are pretty intense and I know many people including myself who bought a new computer just to improve their WOW experience. Also, Blizzard is releasing new content every month or so that requires even more graphics power. So the trend will mostly likely be for subscribers to buy new hardware quite often.

The interesting thing is that WOW supports MAC very well. Granted the graphics I heard are not as good as on a PC (I don't see a difference). I saw people buy MACs because their main game now was on MAC and they didn't see a need anymore to stay on PC.
Playing WOW on a 30 inch Apple wide screen LCD is pretty nice :).

Elnino - Destromath.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[TiMac]

s/MAC/Mac/g

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[grasshoppa]

Also, Blizzard is releasing new content every month or so that requires even more graphics power. So the trend will mostly likely be for subscribers to buy new hardware quite often.

Whaaa?

Aside from BWL, what is this new content of which you speak?

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[k_187]

zul gurub, the new battle ground...

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

WoW has intense graphics? Guess you haven't tried other MMORPGs, especially EQ2. The only thing WoW requires is a lot of RAM, especially in areas like IF.

Other than that, WoW is one of the LEAST graphics intense MMORPG out today. And that's what Blizzard originally set out to do. Make it accessible to as many people as possible.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[nofx_3]

Well in the next patch alone it appears they will be releasing this huge area with 120 new items and tons of new quests in an all new area, and additionally they are releasing this new battleground
 
And as for the story, aside from Snood this is the only game I play, as it offers a continuing experiance and since I pay for it, and most other games are not nearly as fun/addictive why would I spend more money and time on another game. And just for reference I've only been playing for 4 month so it may get old eventually.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[shawnce]

This does a good job of outlining the new content.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[shawnce]

ok this :)

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

Granted the graphics I heard are not as good as on a PC (I don't see a difference)

That is because you are a Mac user. Steve Jobs could take a dump on your 30 inch LCD and you would thing it was fresh and innovative.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you are confused, visually WOW doesnt look so good because of it's amazing 'graphics' it looks good because of it's amazing art direction and style. There are a ton of technically more advanced games out there including EQ2, but they dont look as good because they dont have good art to back it up. I hope that WOW makes the industry realise that realism doesnt always mean better, there should be at least solid art direction.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[tonywong]

Sorry to be off topic, but
MAC == Media Access Control acronym
Mac = short name for Apple Computer's Macintosh

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/M/MAC_address.html

Mod me down, looser (sp.)!

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

That's art!

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it is an abbreviation, not an acronym. But, you're right.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[NanoGator]

"s/MAC/Mac/g"

AutoReply: Input
{
    if(Input == SpellingNazi)
        {
            a[1] = "s";
            a[2] = "t";
            a[3] = "f";
            a[4] = "u";

            for(b = 1; b = b.size(); b++) { Message = Message + strupper(a[b]); }
            return(Message);
        }
    return(nil);
}

Whaddya know, it compiles!

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[iphayd]

Games tend to not know anything about MAC, as this is taken care of in the network stack for them. I'm not sure what MAC has to do with the quality of graphics, as it is a number that is tied to your ethernet card.

Oh, you mean Mac?

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[mikemcc]

I agree completely! Using "MAC" to refer to Macintosh computers is a pet peeve of mine, too.

MAC = Media Access Control, i.e., ethernet.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

I played WoW after 6 months of FFXI and found WoW to be too easy, too predictable and too much money.. saying the graphics are "intense" or beautiful in WoW I am forced to beleive that nobody has seen Guild Wars or Final Fantasy XI. IMHO the graphics in WoW are good, however I would call them cartoonish at best.

That being said, the control and actual play of your character is great!

I stopped playing due to the monthly fee and how quickly I was able to do everything the game had to offer (I think if I would have never played FFXI I would not feel that way, but FFXI simply is endless and seems boundryless)

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Dobeln]

Still, it runs pretty nicely on my Mac Mini, which I found to be very surprising. :)

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Cederic]

I was playing WoW on a three year old PC and it was exceedingly playable - even PVP.

So I totally refute your suggestion that WoW drives hardware sales. Other FPS games are far more likely to - when I did upgrade my PC, although it was because I'd decided the old PC was too old and I just wanted a shiny new one, I did go out and buy BF2. That's a game that drives new hardware sales.

One of the joys of WoW is that it _is_ playable on older PCs, and that makes it accessible to a broader market, and that is partly responsible for its great success.

~Cederic

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[eclectic4]

"The interesting thing is that WOW supports MAC (You mean, Mac?) very well."

How is this interesting? There are tons of games that "support Macs". I'm a huge gamer and I do not own a Windows box, never have, so statements like that have always puzzled me. Not to mention, Blizzard has a long history of developing their games to be simultaneusly released with a Mac version on the same CDs. Nothing interesting about it at all.

"Granted the graphics I heard are not as good as on a PC"

Wha? The game looks beautiful on my Mac. "Granted", it's a dual 2.7 with a NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL. It being a "Mac" has little to do with it.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[shift3]

My "real" PC blew up. So, i was able to throw my video card in an old ass 800mhz Gateway Pentium III. My video card has 256 mb, the system only have 384. Know what? It ran just fine. Not with all the graphics maxed out, but it ran just fine with defaults. So, i dont wanna hear that WoW makes you upgrade your PC. >>Also, Blizzard is releasing new content every month or so that requires even more graphics power. 4 months ago - Honor system (Load of crap). 2 months ago Battlegrounds (pretty fun). 1 month ago BWL (cant even do MC, let alone BWL). SOON - ZG, and a 3rd BG. NONE of these push your pc any harder then the original content. Try loading EQ2 or L2 on your PC and see what you think about your hardware then.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

The sheer irony of some spelling nazi going after the "MAC" vs. "Mac," and then misspelling "loser" is just killing me.

It's sad that this passes for +4 Informative on /.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Anonymous Coward]

Ill just add to that saying one of the reasons I got a Mac (the g5 in the screen thingy) was just WoW. I think its the one reason that tipped the scales. Some other reasons was gettin *nix down below and the possibility of opening a terminal when all the icons drive me up the wall...

I never was the big gamer, or windows fan. But now Blizzard gave me a chance to have fun and live a easy computer life. Thanks Blizz!

Droii - Stormrage EU

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[C0rinthian]

How does the new content, using the same engine and same recycled models/textures, going to require better hardware?

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Nick of NSTime]

His misspelling of "loser" was intentional.

Re:If Anything it Helps the Hardware Industry

[Renegrade]

Are you sure it isn't a MAC from the Halo franchise? Magnetic Accelleration Cannon? Lol

Seriously

[Motie]

This too will pass.

Re:Seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah and one day Counter-Stike will pass... wait...

I'd say...

[MourningBlade]

But I'm too busy playing Capture the Flag in Warsong Gulch.

Death to the Horde!

[*] But a salute to the talented Horde on Cenaurion Circle from Art of Battle.

Re:I'd say...

[Mondoz]

For the Horde!!
/moo

Enough of this talk of 'other games'. It scares and confuses me.

Must go back to using computer as dedicated WoW terminal.

Re:I'd say...

[Carlos Laviola]

Strength and honor!

Creisson @ Shadow Council (RP)

Personally

[BigDork1001]

Yes, it probably is. Since I started WoWing I haven't been playing as many other games and definitely not buying any. It doesn't help that there haven't been many games that have been released lately that interest me. Eventually I'll grow tired of WoW and the next new big games that interests me will come along and I'll stop. But until then I won't be spending my money on other games.

Unfair

[buddha42]

We need an Equalization of Opportunity in Video Games Act.

Re:Unfair

[Tackhead]

> We need an Equalization of Opportunity in Video Games Act.

Naw, that's more like Atlas Swgged, not WoW.

At a time of dwindling production, shrinking markets and vanishing opportunities to make a living, it was unfair to let one player hoard several characters, while others had only one; it was destructive to let a few guilds corner all the resources, leaving others no chance; competition was essential to society, and it was society's duty to see that no competitor ever rose beyond the range of anybody who wanted to compete with him.

rear_hanky (ATLAS): FS, 100K bricks of Steel! HARVESTED BY HAND THIRD WEEK AFTER RELEASE, STILL THE UBEREST IN TEH GALAXY!1!!
Bastard_Spawn_of_Raph_Koster (SOE): Because of our complete inability to write content worth playing, we're going to use the fig leaf of the excessive use of credit and item duping and farming on every server. All players are hereby be awarded a 30K resource deed that can be transmuted to 30000 units of any resource of their choice.
0rr3n_b0yl3 (WH1N3): HA HA! PWN3D!
randy_ayn (ATLAS):: I'm unsubscribing!

Meh...

[MrR0p3r]

Can't post...must gain level!

Well

[PunkOfLinux]

There's always going to be the people NOT playing WoW, and those people are always going to number in the tens of millions. So, no, it's not really going to hurt the industry, unless they become like Hollywood and put out crap.

Re:Well

[RealityMogul]

Uh... too late. Although I hear Need for Nascar Extreme Underground Offroad Tycoon is going to be the bomb.

Low Postcount...

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazing, no comments, I guess everyone is logged onto WoW or something.

If the computer game were a car...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bad for the industry?

Fords and Chevys last longer because Hondas lasted longer first.

You will leave NOTHING to your kids

[Anonymous Coward]

as everything you have in the future will be rented, paid on a monthly basis by direct bank transfers to the corporation

you will own nothing*

*offer only applicable to those earning less than 5 million dollars per year (offshore accounts only)

Perhaps

[novalogic]

I've been in game since November on the Bronzebeard server (Aramova). I've had times of burn-out in WoW, as many people have. They are now starting to turn out some good end-game content, but for a very long time there was really little to do but grind the same instances over and over.

Subscriber base is going to die off shortly, and pickup other games, around the Christmas season, but when WoW2 hits, we'll have this all over again, cause Blizzard has done MMO right, and everyone knows it.

WoW at this point is the iPod of MMORPG's, something really amazing is going to be needed to unseat it.

Re:Perhaps

[w98]

Like a patent on the gaming UI?

Sorry, couldn't be helped...

Re:Perhaps

[Guy LeDouche]

cause Blizzard has done MMO right, and everyone knows it

No, what Blizzard has done is what they always do, and that is churn out a simple-minded game with graphical polish. The Diablo series were horrible, simple-minded hack-and-slash games. Not that that genre is bad, but they made it in such a way as to appeal to the lowest common denominator, which unfortunately also makes up the majority of gamers--which is basically any fanbase, like music, movies, books. It was the same with StarCraft, and even Warcraft to a degree. World of Warcraft is just another simple-minded cookie cutter Blizzard title, dumbed down for the masses. WoW is RPG-lite. It's like a chatroom with level grinding. Hell, I'd rather play #IdleRPG on UnderNet.

If you want to see an MMO RPG done right, then play Ultima Online, or the first EverQuest. Hell, even Asheron's Call was deeper than World of Warcraft. Though the best experiences will always be had in MUDs, which are still around in full force, they simply don't get the attention that they deserve due to their lack of a graphical user interface. WoW has a familiar universe and Blizzard's name behind it, the gameplay itself lacks, and lacks a lot. Blizzard's support has been slow and poor as usual.

"But they added content like battlegrounds!"

Yeah, after how long? The game shipped highly unfinished, and now they're rushing to put the pieces together. Blizzard did a poor job, but as usual people lap it up.

Yes, before you ask, I have played World of Warcraft. I always go into new games with an unbiased view with regard to any past titles, and unfortunately this title fell flat. It's as shallow as a puddle in the Sahara--modern Sahara, not hundreds of years ago flourishing Sahara, the game has no real depth. I gave it three months of my life, that was enough.

not a problem, as long as the games improve

[krelyk]

Even though there have been seemingly thousands of 'Need for Speed (tm)' titles, I always find myself coming back for more. Somehow, they keep adding features and making great improvements to the game engine. Although I'm a car nut and may not 'fit the mold' of your typical WoW player - i myself stear clear of games that require hours of investment, as I have a girlfriend and she would be f*cking pissed... so no WoW for me :(

Not a new phenomenon: I did this with Starcraft...

[SauroNlord]

I remember looking so forward to the first Zelda 64 game, but could only stay in the living room for a couple of hours before I went back to my 12hour days of starcraft/broodwar play. I see how WOW's appeal to a wider audience may be behind this.

How many have quit

[ironwill96]

I don't think it is an issue because as thousands join, thousands of us quit.

WoW is a boring game when you get to the higher levels, and it is at it's heart just another game of "grind to spend time".

In the short term it might have an effect, but in the long-term it will just be a bump in the road.

Re:How many have quit

[deepcameo]

I agree with you, I play guildwars and although I don't pay additional dollars after the initial investment I am getting bored with the game now and will be more then ready for games like Oblivion to come out. Every game eventually dithers out, I mean look at counterstrike players. The content servers for the old releases of that game are even up still because people are still playing the old ones. As time goes on people have cut down and the dedicated servers have been dropping. There are no longer 12,000 servers to connect to. People will move on.

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

During the summer, my girlfriend went home to spend time with family. So me with my vast expanses of time and energy with nothing to do, bought WoW and sat down for a month. I found that even in the earlier levels you were stuck grinding for time, and I didn't a dime over that initial 50 bucks I slammed down. I think why people spend all that time and money on that game is that they spent that initial 50 bucks to get the game, and as I've heard people say, "If I spent this much on it, why not just stick with it for a while.." I'm quite glad that at least one MMO has broken through to the general public, but, like all things, I feel as if this is just "another bump in the road" to quote ironwill..

Re:How many have quit

[Night Goat]

I hear that. I've got a 49th level paladin who's been spending a LOT of time at the inn lately because I just don't want to kill that much time playing WoW. At this point, with all the grinding I'm doing, I might as well just play Diablo II. In fact, that is what I've been doing! Why split up the loot when I can keep it all for myself? Now if only they'd make a Diablo 3 with graphics as good as WoW.

Re:How many have quit

[ejito]

WoW appeals more to the noncompetitive gamer as time goes on. I had two level 60s before I quit, and it just wasn't as fun as it was frustrating.

More hardcore gamers crave PVP -- WoW PvP just doesn't cut it (balance issues, group issues, etc). It's obvious that individual skill isn't as important as time sinking, and WoW will never become a competitive game.

The game really does get boring. The game world becomes dull, and more of a drag to cross, rather than an adventure. Spending hours just to do high level instances just isn't fun. I'm just gonna use that gear to beat down other players, but even that part isn't fun.

Re:How many have quit

[secolactico]

and it is at it's heart just another game of "grind to spend time"

I love Warcraft and I wish what you said wasn't so, but as I approach "end game" levels, it becomes more and more of a grind. "Gotta do one more dungeon run to get xx piece of equipment to complete my set". And this dungeon run will be just like every other run except for the items that drop. And my item might not drop. And I'll have to compete with others for it... Same goes for the keys to Onyxia...

Re:How many have quit

[interiot]

Level 49? Grinding?? Ha! Wait until you get to level 60, and you find that the options open to you are:

• run LBRS/UBRS/Strat/Scholo/MC over and over and over (and over and over) until you get whatever item set interests you most
• play enough time to buy the materials to make your own purple equipment
• play enough time to buy an epic mount
• collect insane amounts of dark iron ore and other things, so that eventually one of your reputation bars can turn the color you want
• ... anything else people do at level 60. EVERYTHING at level 60 is significantly harder to get than anything at level 59, because Blizzard wants to give people something to do once experience is no longer worth anything

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. A lot of people play until they get bored enough to use hacks or bots and then Blizz gets out the ban stick and that's that.

Re:How many have quit

[markov_chain]

Some of us who misspent a big chunk of their time on MUDs knew exactly what the end game would look like, and said "no thanks" right away. I do wonder when a major fantasy MMOG will allow area creation... then the 3D MUD GUI will be complete at last.

Re:How many have quit

[interiot]

Isn't "competitive PVP" something of a drag on time anyway, insofar as the people most willing to grind and grind to get EQ will be the ones who win at PVP. It seems like something like online RTS's would be significantly less of a timesink, and much more of a skill-vs-skill kind of game.

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the big, not so, secret of WoW.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, including myself played the game for no more than a few months before quitting. I was able to get my WoW fill before my first free month was up. And I have absolutely no urge or desire to go back and play any more.

MMORPGs are like stars. You can burn slow and dim for a long time. Or you can burn fast and bright for a short time. But not both. WoW is burning very fast...

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell yeah. As soon as playing WoW became a job instead of a game I quit...

Re:How many have quit

[Superfarstucker]

Exactly, and I don't think it could be said in a more concise manner.

Re:How many have quit

[Jesse_132]

It is called SecondLife, check it out here - http://secondlife.com/

Re:How many have quit

[Night Goat]

I don't foresee myself going to 60. I think I'd have to kill off my character at that point and just start from scratch! Raids... lots of fun until the group disbands and you realize you wasted two hours that you could have used to do any of a number of more productive and fun things. I'm just hoping I have a "fun resurgence" that gets me back into the game.

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with the parent to a point: there is a large market segment that will grow bored with WoW. I played WoW until the higher levels, and grew bored myself. I don't have the time anymore to reroll a character in order to get replay value out of WoW, so it's game over.
After getting to the higher levels, WoW begins to feel like a huge granite mountain: very big, very beautiful, very majestic - but also always the same. I can't do anything to change WoW. I can't contribute to the story in any way. Nothing I do in the game leaves any lasting change. It is washed, rinsed, and repeated for the next player.
If I could become some sort of hero or something and create a legacy in the game, then I probably would stick around a little longer.
You leave no footprints in WoW. Not a single trace of your existance will remain after you leave. The story won't change in the slightest. You spend so much of your life playing a game that is impervious to your presence. Kind of depressing, actually.
When someone creates a MMORPG where the world is malleable to the players (in a way that works and makes sense), then I will be truly addicted.

Re:How many have quit

[oogoliegoogolie]

Yep. I have played WOW exclusively since late beta, but once I reached 60 (with two characters) the game gets immensely boring, and I finally realized I have better things to do with my time than run into BRD, MC, Strat, etc. dozens of times just to lose a roll on an item I want that has a 1 in 20 drop rate.

WOW was great, but like all things, good or bad, they come to an end and people eventually move on to other things. I actually played HL2 again recently and it was so refreshing knowing that it will be over in a few days instead of going on for months. Personally I dont see my self playing another MMORPG because of the huge time investment that is needed.

Re:How many have quit

[geekoid]

or the game is just not for you.

Actually it sounds like you may be changing what you think you should be doing for 2 hours.

I didn't find much grinding (level 56 Pally). I did do all the quest I could find on both contentent, and I ahve read every book I could in game. Some interesting story going on there.

I still have 18 quests to do, and that doesn't include my first scholo quest.

I'm in no rush, and mostly solo.

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

I see lots of 'I quit!' messages either in the game or on the realm forums for WoW.

Then I see those players back a few days later.

I've even "quit" myself, though I didn't feel the need to announce it to the world first. I went out and bought another game (GuildWars) and played it for a evening or two. Then I went back to WoW because after the short break I wasn't feeling frustrated and was ready to play again.

Lots of players I know have simply reduced their play time--from every day to a few hours a week. That's normal, but it still means 15 bucks a month for Blizzard. And $15 x 4 million == $60M. Pretty nice monthly check for Blizzard, so I think there is plenty of incentive for other companies to try to emulate WoW--a game that is fun for the 'casual' player but offers something to the student with lots of free time as well.

Bad for the industry? I've avoided buying some games because I thought that I would rather play WoW instead. But my usual monthly budget for games was smaller for $15 to begin with and I did plop down the cash for that now-unused copy of GuildWars. So in my case it has been a net increase. OTOH I cut back on my cable tv services so perhaps it isn't (just) game companies that are feeling the pressure.

Re:How many have quit

[hobbesmaster]

Take a look at eve online. It doesn't rely on skill grinding to advance your character. PvP can have a major effect on other players - more so than a little bit of damage and a respawn. Its pretty nifty.

Re:How many have quit

[stonedonkey]

I hear that. I've got a 49th level paladin who's been spending a LOT of time at the inn lately because I just don't want to kill that much time playing WoW.

Well, one of the problems with your situation is the blandness of being a pally. This is what it eventually devolves to:

--Approach enemy, open with Hammer of Justice
--Continue melee until your health is low
--Cast Divine Shield, Divine Favor, then heal
--Continue melee until mob is dead

And it's pretty much the same dynamic in PvP, except you're also hitting Blessing of Freedom and Cleanse. This gets old very fast.

I've been leveling up a shammy recently, and he has all kinds of ways to approach different character classes and mob types. It keeps things fresh. Plus, I'm no longer helpless against mages, who can just nuke-poly-nuke-poly a pally until my health goes to zero. I'm also not dependent on the inconsistent Retrib crits.

Re:How many have quit

[LearningHard]

I know what you mean. Between me and four friends that played at retail we achieved several lvl 60 characters. Once we realized that the endgame involved incredibly massive sinks of time we had to balance that against us going out and doing things, spending time with wife/gf/family etc. Ultimately we all ended up quitting because we did not have time for the endgame in our life. It is a fun game but the endgame is pretty much only for hardcore players. Now I still know a couple of people that play and the only time I see them is at class or work. The funny thing is they all describe themselves as "casual" gamers. Then follow it up by saying that they "only" spend 6-8 hours a day playing WoW.

Re:How many have quit

[Landazar]

Same deal as you guys, lvl 60 other misc levels, played a few months in the high end stuff, bored out of my mind. Went back to playing Warcraft 3/Starcraft. Much more enjoyable games with more 'game' involved and much less of a time sink. Also had a stack of games/movies/books I put off while playing WoW.

I'll probably go back when the expansion comes out just to see the new content, it was a great 1-59 game but after 200 hours you've seen it all. It's basically like Square console RPGs with some very rare multiplayer aspects, unless you're playing with real life friends/family.

If they could figure out a fun/playable end-game and figure out a way to have a more dynamic 'living' world overall somehow people would be hooked forever... Few more years...

Re:How many have quit

[qaz23]

I have played WoW and quit at level 30. It got really boring; every quest is just variations just kill X monsters or collect X items or deliver this & that to someone. Even when reaching a 'new' area it feels the same, just higher level monsters populated there, etc. The item and talent system is bad also, it's just like Diablo 2 all over again (nothing against D2 though). Hoping at least Vanguard can bring some more innovation to the MMORPG table...

Re:How many have quit

[Clomer]

I keep seeing predictions of an impending mass exodus from World of Warcraft, but I haven't seen it happen. Yes, this game will probably reach a peak and begin a decline, but all indications are it still hasn't reached that peak. And the decline, when it does come, will not be a huge crash when the bottom drops out, but will rather be a slow decline that will take years, if not decades. I fully expect to see this game still have active realms in 20 years. Probably not as many as are there now, but there will still be players.

If you don't like WoW, fine. Nobody is forcing you to play. But that's no reason for you to go off on those of us that do. I've been playing WoW since April, and while I admit that at times it has felt like a grind, I have by and large enjoyed the time I've spent in Azeroth.

As of this writing, the two characters I've spent the most time on are a 51 Mage on a PvP server and a 34 Paladin on an RP server. I've had a lot of fun with both. I look forward to doing Molten Core with the mage, as I'm (by my calculation) about a month from reaching 60 with her. And if, after doing a few MC runs I grow tired of it, then I can put her on hold while I level up other characters knowing I can pick her up again when hero classes come out. After all, I have yet to create a single Horde character, meaning that a significant portion of the game is yet awaiting me.

In other words, there is tons of material in that game to keep someone like me happy for a good long while. With the rate at which they are producing more material and the rate at which I go through it, it will be several years before I run out of stuff to do. That, I think, coupled with how easy it is to access that content, is the major reason why this game has been the most successful online game in history.

Re:How many have quit

[FeloniousPunk]

Some of us who misspent a big chunk of their time on MUDs knew exactly what the end game would look like, and said "no thanks" right away. I do wonder when a major fantasy MMOG will allow area creation... then the 3D MUD GUI will be complete at last.

That's too bad then. You cheated yourself out of a fine game for a silly reason. All games will get boring after a while, but you've got months of play (maybe less if you are one of those who plays 10 hours a day) until you hit the end game. Blizzard put tremendous effort in the game and the world there and the player is appropriately rewarded. I used to play MUDs too back in the day, and there came the day I got bored of them and moved on to other things. But I had a lot of fun along the way, so it was worth it.

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

Their WoW expansion isn't due until late 2006 and that's Blizzard's estimate, so you can be sure it will be longer. It will be interesting to see what their numbers are by then. As you say, there really isn't a lot you can do except make alts and toy around.

    I can understand people buying the game and playing for a few months. I did that too. I just can't see it holding these numbers for long.

Re:How many have quit

[phpWebber]

Don't take it personal. Many of us that quit felt the same way as you:
"There is so much I haven't done! This game is an endless fountain of entertainment!"

Then one day you log on and "meh"

If you are still having fun, great!

Re:How many have quit

[Anonymous Coward]

HEAL YOUR RAID.

If a paladin is trying to deal damage, horde ignore him because he takes 5 minutes to kill and does almost no damage. If a paladin is healing someone, they either have to keep dps'ing the target and hope they can out-dps the healing (difficult if the paladin is spec'ed right and knows how to play his class) or stop attacking the target (usually a high dps target like a mage/rogue/warrior, meaning the target can continue to dish out damage) and attack the paladin and take damage for 5 minutes.

And don't get me started on flag carriers and BoF.

There are basically two ways of looking at a paladin. Either as a warrior, which makes you laugh at them, or as a priest, which makes you insanely jealous. Paladins have the highest heals per mana in the game and the best buffs to help assist in that healing (making it even MORE efficient) as well as the most versatile buff set in the game. And they wear plate, which not only gives them access to every piece of armor in the game that isn't class specific, but also gives they ridiculous physical damage mitigation, and they have resist auras to help vs. mages (vs. easily destroyable totems that you have to be in range of and take up a "totem slot" [you can't drop more than one totem for each of the 4 elements, earth/wind/fire/water]).

Bleh, anyway, Paladins are very good for group pvp and ridiculously good for raid pve, and after they get their talents fixed (which are a horrible mess right now) they are going to own hard.

They only lack in soloing and 1v1 vs. certain classes.

Re:How many have quit

[fain0v]

I agree with you that WoW just doesn't have the end game that it needs for staying power. It is an exceptional game up until level 60.

I would like to remind you however that blizzard has an awsome track record for expansions. These have created far more balance in PvP(starcraft broodwar, frozen throne) than the originals had. The amount of end game content increase should be phenomenal also. http://www.blizzplanet.com/modules.php?action=Cont ent&pa=showpage&pid=144

Being a hardcore PvPer myself, I can only hope Blizzard meets my PvP expectations. I expect that until the new content is released, a lot of people will quit the game. World of Warcraft end game content seems like a place holder for the real game that will be released, and when it is, I expect most quitters will come back.

Based on Blizzard's track record, they take a long time to release games, but it is always worth the wait.

Helping

[Anonymous Coward]

If its taking customers from other games, it will challenge other game makers to top them.

Now, hopefully this $50.00 initial investment doesnt catch on w/other game manufacturers b/c Im not game for that.

best game ever

[redKrane]

As far as I'm concerned, WoW has taken away my urge to play most other games. I still play GTA if I wanna shoot some people, but generally all I play is WoW. Many of my friends are the same way. I'm sure eventually WoW will lose some of its appeal, but until then, you can find me in Azeroth.

bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[jeffybob]

last time i checked, video games were meant to entertain...am i right? so if WoW can draw people to commit time to their game, then someone at Blizzard must be doin a good job... WoW isnt the only "time consuming" game either...any one here seen the average playtime for Final Fantasy X? approx 70 hrs...for full completion that is..

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[Echnin]

70 hours? That's the average time to get from level 59 to level 60 in WoW. (just a guess though... but don't be surprised)

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is a 70 hour game time-consuming? Go to 200+ hours and I'll consider it time-consuming.

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[Squozen]

70? More like 10-20.

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[Anonymous Coward]

Only if you spend 60 of those hours chatting in Ironforge. Going from 59 to 60 can be done easily in 7 hours, and faster if you know all the tricks. Gaining levels isn't the time sink, dealing with other players and gaining equipment are huge time sinks.

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[geminidomino]

70 hours? You MIGHT see 70 hours in FFX if:

a) You do every sidequest/minigame
and
b) you suck at the minigames.

That said, before I cancelled very recently[0], I had burned over 10x that much time on WoW.

The biggest loss is that WoW was moddable. I'm gonna miss it. NWN's design is too limited and Morrowind's combat system sucks too hard to be worth it. Back to CRPGs and no more modding, I guess. =\

[0] The last month, Feathermoon has made Battle.net look stable. They couldn't keep that server up if the pumped it full of V1a6ra. Also got tired of my class of choice being the red-headded stepchild of the Devs.

Re:bah...Blizzard is doin fine...

[Echnin]

I guess I suck for spending 7 hours on level 41-42 then. of course, I play a Paladin: 1: find mob 2: attack, 3: judgement of the crusader 4: seal of command4 5: read slashdot comments for 30 seconds 6: goto 1

Industry's already hurting...

[Khyber]

The game industry is already hurting. There's so much lack of innovation in games due to stupid software patents (camera views, etc.)

As long as this doesn't become the next Evercrack, why should I really care whether or not it's hurting an industry that's hurting itself to begin with? If anything, I'd tend to think Electronic Arts is hurting the industry more because of their exclusive deal with the NFL.

Re:Industry's already hurting...

[Superfarstucker]

In terms of enraptured playerbase I believe Warcraft long ago surpassed evequest, in fact the only real contenders, now and in the past for playerbase are perhaps Lineage and its sequel. However, in North America, I do not believe any one MMO has ever captured such a large playerbase (1.5 million).

The scary part is the game isn't particularly good, or challenging, but that tends to be the standard rather than the exception in MMOs. At base the 'grind' to 60 (which people state is 'fun' but have you ever listened to them play through a VOIP conference? Most people are either a.) unsatisfied or b.) frustrated with the game and therein lies the addiction to it. All the time you invest getting to the 'maximum' level and the 'best' equipment is superfluous at base because it doesn't really teach you any skills you need to be successful (truth be told, there aren't any aside from some innate ones...). Most of the 'difficult' encounters in the game are a matter of organization and 'surprise' equipment, which leads back to the sole purpose of the game: to keep you playing longer.

And there are people who will continue playing until there are no new challenges to encounter and then contineu to play even beyond that as they are hooked by the feet to the mindless community they've spent the past year and a half with.

I think another reason for the popularity of the game is it doesn't take any talent to play the game (like nearly all rpgs, massive or not) and it takes little talent to play the game well (though you're likely to spend a long time attaining said talent as the game works to obfusicate the matters at hand from you).

Re:Industry's already hurting...

[Superfarstucker]

Sorry my post was kind of difficult to read... I cleaned it up a bit.

In terms of enraptured playerbase I believe Warcraft long ago surpassed evequest, in fact the only real contenders, now and in the past for playerbase are perhaps Lineage and its sequel. In North Americ I do not believe any one MMO has ever captured such a large playerbase (1.5 million).

The scary part is the game isn't particularly good, or challenging, but that tends to be the standard rather than the exception in MMOs. At base the 'grind' to 60 ,which people state is 'fun', exists solely to keep you playing the game longer. All of the content in the game could be played through in a mere fraction of the time it takes to just get to the 'maximum' level. <BR><BR>Have you ever listened to players through a VOIP conference? Most people are either a.) unsatisfied or b.) frustrated with the game and therein lies the addiction to it. All the time you invest getting to the 'maximum' level and the 'best' equipment is superfluous at base because it doesn't really teach you any skills you need to be successful (truth be told, there aren't any aside from some innate ones...). Most of the 'difficult' encounters in the game are a matter of organization and 'surprise' equipment, which leads back to the sole purpose of the game: to keep you playing longer.

And there are people who will continue playing until there are no new challenges to encounter and then contineu to play even beyond that as they are hooked by the feet to the mindless community they've spent the past year and a half with.

I think another reason for the popularity of the game is it doesn't take any talent to play the game (like nearly all rpgs, massive or not) and it takes little talent to play the game well (though you're likely to spend a long time attaining said talent as the game works to obfusicate the matters at hand from you).

Re:Industry's already hurting...

[Monkelectric]

The scary part is the game isn't particularly good, or challenging... And there are people who will continue playing until there are no new challenges to encounter and then contineu to play even beyond that

Case in point I have friends who play WoW 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. They sit and chat about how all the bugs piss them off, and how the game isn't much fun anymore. I've seen them screaming mad as some bug wiped out 16 hours worth of "work". But they don't stop playing.

Well...maybe

[grasshoppa]

Maybe, if the games industry would make games worth playing ( instead of the affore mentioned sequels and the like ), people would buy them.

Just a thought. However, name a game that has the same level of enjoyment as Sam and Max. Or Grim Fandago.

Or wing commander. Xcom.

Just to name a few. Everyone lately seems overly obsessed with graphics, completely ignoring the plot and gameplay in some cases.

Re:Well...maybe

[MrAnnoyanceToYou]

Freedom Force Pwnt. I haven't played the second one, but the first one was hilarious and had a pretty good (albeit not very hard or multiplayer-friendly) gameplay.

And as much as everyone hates SOE, I still love SWG.

Re:Well...maybe

[sqlrob]

Psychonauts (of course, that's by the guy that did Grim Fandango)

Re:Well...maybe

[QuantumG]

Really does sound like a no brainer doesn't it? WoW charges $50 + $15/month. You wanna complete with WoW? Offer a free download and $10/month for a game that is as good. Can't do that? Go home.

Re:Well...maybe

[gaurzilla]

Agreed mostly.

For instance, Half-Life got it right both times. Doom 3 didn't do such a good job (too repetitive, and full of cheap scares).

I don't know anyone who'd say that F22 Raptor (or its clone Chromium BSU), or even Super Mario, is a boring game. Are there any super-froody graphics there? Don't see any.

I'd rather play those old-timers that entertain me for a few good minutes so that I can relax / refresh myself and then get back to work. Life is too short to waste hours upon hours playing video games.

Keyword : Entertainment value.

Re:Well...maybe

[Illserve]

WoW is only hurting those companies that are making crappy games and can't compete.

WoW is only popular because Blizzard makes high quality games, good content, good graphics, good UI, good design, good everything. WoW is certainly no exception and has permanently raised the bar for all future MMOG's.

I won't be losing any sleep for the also-rans that now have to keep up to the new standard.

As gamers we should be grateful for all of the excellent features of WoW that make gaming more fun:

  Instance dungeons (I know they aren't the first, but they did it right and have proved the point)

Integrated PVP

convenient but not broken transportation

quests that have commensurate XP rewards and are fun

the list goes on....

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Privateer remake? Would that count as an open source game that's as fun as wing commander.... ?

Re:Well...maybe

[Blakey Rat]

This exact same post appears every time there's a discussion about games. It's not "interesting" any longer, I'm sorry... now it's inane.

Look, there is this phenomenon called "nostalgia." It's the tendency of people to remember the good games and forget the bad ones. You point out games like X-Com, Sam and Max, what do these games have in common? They're all top tier games. The top tier games right now, the ones that'll be remembered in ten years, are just as good, and there's just as many of them!

Look, when you think back to the movie season of 1998, do you think "The Avengers" or do you think "Saving Private Ryan?" The bad movies are forgotten, the good ones aren't. That's nostalgia. The quality of games hasn't changed, I can guarantee it.

Re:Well...maybe

[RingDev]

Quest for Glory 1-5!!!

Both 1 and 2 were amazing, even when they were re-written from their original 16 color graphics with type-command interface (Type: Climb Tree instead of clicking on the tree), to the 256 color prompted interface.

-Rick

Re:Well...maybe

[Janek Kozicki]

frontier, elite, elite2, F29 and adom of course :)

Re:Well...maybe

[alan_dershowitz]

I read your comment before I read the article, and my first thought was "of course, they mean if you are spending 15 dollars a month on an online game subscription, that's 15 dollars that you can't use to buy another game." But then I read the article, and just like you're saying, they are asking, "is WoW hurting the game industry because every 15 dollars a month spent on it is 15 dollars a month that's not spent on an inferior game."

So, if given a choice between a good game and a mediocre game, people will spend the money on the good game? NO FUCKING DUH. This being a characteristic of a _correctly_ functioning market, it's good simply because quality is being rewarded, which should weed out the bad development houses. In the long run, games should only improve. Why don't they do an article on EA using its market clout forcing shit down everyone's throats? _That's_ bad for the industry.

Re:Well...maybe

[brickballs]

Right-on, Xcom rocked! I still break that game out every now and then.

Re:Well...maybe

[HunterZ]

When did they do a remake of QfG2? I've never seen nor heard of one.

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

advance wars >> Xcom

wario ware - most fun game ever, assuming you have friends. Super Monkey Ball 2 is also a much better party game than anything from the last decade.

There are plenty of good games out there, you're just too lazy or caught up in nostalgia to find them.

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a fanmade version in production using AGS. It's by the same people who remade the first King's Quest games.

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Name the sales figures for those games...

Grim Fandango was a flop.

Psychonauts, Tim Schafer's follow up had it's publishing deal with Microsoft pulled after MS decided it wouldn't make money...It was released by Majesco to rave reviews...and had dismal sales.

These types of games aren't being made because they are expensive, high-risk, and very small market for them. (small market being you, me, our peers...but not the nascar loving middle america).

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I thought this same thing a week ago until I downloaded the demo of Gish. That game has completely restored my faith in game developers (althought I think it's an independently published game).

http://www.chroniclogic.com/index.htm?gish.htm

Re:Well...maybe

[RingDev]

And there are some people working on QfG 6, although I haven't heard much about it lately. -Rick

Re:Well...maybe

[DrCode]

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Re:Well...maybe

[paitre]

IMO, Instances are antethical to the entire idea of a persistent world (which -NOONE- has gotten right yet, IMO).

PVP is compeltely dependant upon the story of the world involved, however, WoW certainly has done it right, here (no lost exp on death, etc).

There are problems I have with the game (ie. that it can basically be soloed, for starters, although most of the instances cannot be) but I'm really not going to go into them (and besides, I'm biased having been a MUD developer and currently an FFXI player...which has a -truly- player driven and controlled economy, the big thing I look for in a game).

Re:Well...maybe

[ogreinside]

Grim Fandago

Oh, what a fabulous game.

if the games industry would make games worth playing

I agree. Now that the average gamer has the income to support the gaming habit, I don't think this "Gorilla" will hurt the industry.

In fact, I'm have been a VERY devoted FFXI fan since the US release. I have a 60+ character (much harder to level then WOW.) I maintained my account when WOW came out. I dealt with all of the server issues that WOW had at launch, but I stuck with it. I now have two max level characters (60 in WOW, but you can solo easily), but I'm bored. It is a very pretty game, but in the end it is shallow.

Sure, you can start new characters, try different allegiances. But I ended up going back to FFXI.

In the meantime, I've purchased EXCELLENT games such as Resident Evil 4, GTA:SA, Battlefield 2. All on different platforms, no monthly fee.

Afterall, I need a game to play while they perform maintenance.

Re:Well...maybe

[bxbaser]

Try this one
http://www.supremeruler2010.com/

Re:Well...maybe

[Osty]

Does anyone even make adventure games like Sam and Max anymore? The latest console games might be really good, but they're likely not going to appeal to a Monkey Island fan.

Sadly, nobody makes adventure games like Sam and Max any more. However, that's not to say that nobody makes adventure games anymore, or nobody makes games like Sam and Max. For the latter, you should certainly pick up Psychonauts for your favorite platform. It's not an adventure game, but it has some adventure elements to go along with its action.

For adventure games, there are still plenty (though sadly none in the style of LucasArts like S&M, MI, GF, MM, etc):

• Still Life
• Syberia and Syberia II
• The Longest Journey, which is supposed to have a sequel soon.
• Indigo Prophecy hasn't shipped yet, but it looks promising (played the demo on the latest Official Xbox Magazine)
• All of the CSI and Law and Order games, if you're into those.
• All of the Myst games

As you can tell, none of those are anywhere near the level of humor you'll find in an old LucasArts adventure. Luckily, LucasArts still sells their old games, and at least the more recent ones still run just fine (I've been playing through Escape from Monkey Island recently, and have Grim Fandango on order). And if any of the older games don't work, you may be able to use them with SCUMMVM instead (Grim Fandango and Escape from Monkey Island no longer use SCUMM, but are scripted with Lua instead).

Re:Well...maybe

[hobbesmaster]

I'm curious - whats your opinion of eve? Its not sharded (14,200 people on the same server yesterday) and has player set prices on most everything. PvP also has real impact on other players and politics and etc.

Re:Well...maybe

[Anonymous Coward]

That's awesome. So where's my excellent turn-based squad-level strategy games on PC?

Oh, wait. There aren't any. Shit.

(boots up X-Com... again)

Re:Well...maybe

[Miriku chan]

jagged alliance?

commandos?

that one justice league superhero game?

you're not even trying.

Re:Well...maybe

[GauteL]

The games have changed though. There seems to be less of the calm and quiet type of games such as the adventure games, Sam and Max and Grim Fandango.

The great new games have been more action oriented, like the Grand Theft Auto series, Half-Life.

I enjoyed Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas immensly even after having played the Vice City and GTA3 and consider them more of a other games in a genre, rather than sequels. I also enjoyed Half-Life 2, but I still wish for more of the calm wackiness of the old Lucasarts.

MMORPG doesn't appeal to me. I have plenty of social life and don't feel the need to socialise in a game. I played Ultima Online for a bit and quit because I found it either boring or too involving and ridden with assholes, depending on your angle. If the GTA-series goes MMORPG I will stop buying them as there would be too many assholes fucking up my gaming experience.

I enjoy multiplayer games sometimes, but nothing beats a good single player game for atmosphhere and immersion.

Re:Well...maybe

[SlimFastForYou]

I've played many games, and GTA: San Andreas is probably one of the best games I've played (and not because it has a sex scene if you mod it). I liked the other GTA games but not nearly as much as SA. The main characters acted like characters in a movie, not cheesy NPCs with artificial pathing. It felt like you were in a movie and in control. The characters also had a whole lot of gestures too - these weren't all characters that could only walk/stop with blank looks on their faces. At least in my book, that game stands with the classics.

Re:Well...maybe

[Shaper_pmp]

Yeah... nostalgia's just not what it used to be, is it?

Re:Well...maybe

[Robmonster]

You want to check out Laser Squad Nemesis. Made by the Gollops!

http://www.lasersquadnemesis.com/
http://www.boringbutgood.com/LSN.htm for more info and http://www.boringbutgood.com/blog for some game writeups

Re:Well...maybe

[MisterMurphy]

The games have changed though. There seems to be less of the calm and quiet type of games such as the adventure games, Sam and Max and Grim Fandango.

Sam and Max has any part that is calm and quiet? Is this before or after they toss the decapitated head-bomb of a mad scientist into a bus that may or may not have been full of people, which is okay, so long as it was no one they knew or cared about? Or after you shorted out a circuit box by shoving that irascable little urchin Max face first into it?

When I think of a quiet game, I think Myst. When I think "game that is poster child for surrealist art, plus possum performing Swan Lake" I think Sam and Max.

Re:Well...maybe

[justinkim]

One of the things I like about WoW is that I'm not forced to party up to do everything in the game. I don't have a problem partying up for a challenging instance, but most of the time I prefer to tool around myself.

Re:Well...maybe

[Rakarra]

IMO, Instances are antethical to the entire idea of a persistent world (which -NOONE- has gotten right yet, IMO).

I feel instances are almost perfect as they are. There are a few cases where the perfect persistent world is in conflict with enjoyable gameplay, and instance dungeons help to reduce this. I don't want to have to fight with other factions or other parties who want to kill the same dungeon boss my party does; that just makes the game less fun.

Dunno about WoW...

[Bogtha]

...but Blizzard are hurting the industry, by abusing the DMCA to shut down open-source competitors for the "crime" of being compatible with their software. Remember, kids, the interoperability exception of the DMCA doesn't exist if the copyright holder says so. That's a matter of law now.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[E-Rock]

When your interoperability disables the copy protection technique, you are breaking the law. I'd like to see the DMCA go away, but as written the outcome was obvious.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow! (and I don't mean the game) Thanks for the link!

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you trying to claim that the makers of BnetD did not break both the EULA and the TOS. Or perhaps you think that they did not break the DCMA.

I think either you lack an understanding of the DCMA and relevent laws, or you disagree with the DCMA and as such, pretend like it says something different.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[greymond]

You have go tot be kidding me.... BnetD violated Blizzard's EULA and TOU for the Diablo/Starcraft games and Bnet. Yeah the DMCA is annoying, yes it was definately one of many tools used by Blizzards Lawyers to get their way in court. But BnetD was doing something they knew was blatantly not allowed by Blizzard.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Ravatar]

There is still a matter of fair use. Is Blizzard allowed to tell me how I'm going to use my software, especially when my use does not interfere with them earning money?

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[guaigean]

The problem is though that it did interfere. By allowing illegal copies to play, they were decreasing the profits by allowing people to avoid purchasing their product.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. There is a licience that you agree to in order to load and use the game. Than there is an additional agreement you make to get an account. Both of these contracts contain restrictions of what you may do with the game. Additionally, the copy protection provides thier content with additional rights.

But BnetD was also an issue of publishing how to circumvent a copy protection mechanism which itself is a different violation of the DCMA and is indepentent of your property ownership.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Peaker]

I never signed a EULA of any game I used.
Nobody signed a EULA. Some people clicked "I Agree" buttons. "I Agree" click-through buttons are not recognizable consent of a legal agreement.

Since I am not making copies of Blizzard's games, only running it (constitutes fair use), I do not need their permission to do anything, and I can safely ignore their EULA.

I don't see why people think the EULA is a legal document at all.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Night Goat]

Since when is EULA law? Blizzard's got no right to tell me what to do with software that I bought, sorry. I can see if they ban cheaters from Battle.net as they own that server and have authority over it. But Bnetd users aren't interfering with anyone else. They bypass the copy protection that Blizzard puts in place, but in the America I grew up in, it was the actions that made the crime. Stealing the game is the crime, not refusing to phone home to Blizzard.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[KefabiMe]

...but Blizzard are hurting the industry, by abusing the DMCA to shut down open-source competitors for the "crime" of being compatible with their software.

This is a question I've had for some time. Can anyone provide an answer? (Perhaps with some links for reference?)

I know that Blizzard is now owned by Vivendi. Vivendi is a pretty evil company. Blizzard I feel is not so evil. (This opinion my be influenced by the many hours of entertainment Blizzard has provided me.)

Is Blizzard or Vivendi the source of evil??? I've been wondering for a while...

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll start off by reminding you that you agree to contracts on a nearly daily basis without signing anything. For example, buying a movie ticket subjects you to the legally binding contract on the reverse of the ticket. These sorts of contracts are held to be enforcable.

As to EULA's, there is precedent for being both enforcable and unenforcable. It depends on the Fedral Circuit the case is tried in. (And from there, some states have additional consumer protections, but for now we can ignore that issue).

The 8th Circuit (where the Blizzard v. BnetD case is currently being tried) subscribes to the ProCD v. Zeidenberg decision finding that the software licience is valid. So in this jurisdiction, EULA are indeed enforcable.

But the TOS would for sure be enforcable in any jurisdiction as there is concideration for that contract.

So your incorrect.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Hythlodaeus]

BnetD was doing something they knew was blatantly not allowed by Blizzard.

However, there was good reason to believe that it was allowed by THE LAW.
If you do something not allowed by Blizzard, you get banned from Battle.net.
If you do something not allowed by the law, you get fines or a jail sentence. Big difference.
However, at least when it comes to Bnet, the courts have effectively decided that Blizzard IS the law.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[marco0009]

Since when is the EULA law? Since a court ruled in its favor.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Fnkmaster]

When you agree to a legally binding contract on the reverse of a ticket, you are agreeing to a contract of adhesion, not a signed contract. The parameters for what sort of terms are enforceable in a contract of adhesion are much more narrow. Basically any terms that a normal person would not reasonably ever expect to find in such a contract are unenforceable. If the back of the ticket says "by purchasing this ticket for our professional soccer game, you hereby agree never to play pickup soccer again", you can safely bet that term is unenforceable and illegal.

These same standards are unfortunately not being held to EULAs, click through or otherwise. It throws away centuries of common law practice and jurisprudence in the interest of pandering to special interests (the packaged, mass-market software industry).

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Peaker]

What contract of the "ticket" am I signing exactly?

Also, on what law is the EULA's legal power based?

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[forand]

Isn't that what the parent said? But the problem with this is that reverse engineering has been a keystone of computer development since it's dawn. By making it possible for an EULA, a contract that cannot be changed or discussed by one of the parties, to make a basic exception to the DMCA no longer available.

To see how stupid this is just look what would happen now if someone creates the latest and greatest secure document format and distributes the program by which you make and read these documents as a binary with a EULA that says reverse engineering is not allowed. This would make it illegal to attempt to make a viewer for another OS or a different view if the one provided did not meet your needs. Seems ludicous to me.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, the illustrative example of the movie ticket is a contract of adhesion (signed contracts can also be contracts of adhesion). You are also correct that contracts of adhesion are held to a higher standard, and there are consumer protections that go with them.

However, your last claim that EULAs are not being held to the same standard is baseless. Obviously the protections vary from state to state (for example, NY and CA have broader consumer protections).

And finally in this case, I see requiring the use of the product with the service it was designed for to be a reasonable contractual term when you are purchasing an online game.

So you agree that when reasonable contracts of adhesion are enforcable. You agree that EULAs are acceptable if held to this standard. So which terms do you think are unenforcable and why?

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

A pop quiz.

1. You are not signing any contract on the ticket. Hence the point of the example. You are however bound to the terms on the reverse of the ticket. This point was merely to show that you are bound to contracts which you do not sign. In fact this contract is still explicit. You have the terms there and you actively consented to the by buying and using the ticket.

You can get even further from a negotiated signed contract. Reiterating an example on slashdot yesterday, when you visit a doctor, you have an implicit contract that you will pay for the services. If you get an appointment, then walk out and claim you never agreed to pay, well, you'll have no luck with that. To go even further, if you are unconcious, and you recieve treatment, you are still legally obligated under contract law to pay.

So your assertion that you need to have a signature to make a contract is incorrect.

2. EULA's power is based on contract law. It is a valid contract after all. Now in some places, consumer protections can erode the terms in the contract (or make it non-binding). But in states which do not have such protections, contract law provide the legal teeth.

I've already cited you a case where the courts say exactly the same thing I do (though with a bit more class and legal citations). If you don't believe the AC on slashdot, at least look at the case from the 8th Circuit to get the correct facts.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Ravatar]

On the contrary, the BNetD developers were more than willing to implement a key authentication system if Blizzard wanted one implemented.

And to get off-topic for a moment, what is up with people modding someone they don't agree with "Overrated?". Fair use is overrated?

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[KillShill]

did someone say ALLOWED?

people don't need blizzard's permission or any other software vendor's to do what they wish with their purchased software.

that some incompetent group of judges decided on the behalf of a 1600lb gorilla, is of no consequence in the overall scheme of things.

software is a product and so long it is a product it will HAVE to abide by the rules governing commercial transactions i.e. you buy something, then you can do with it whatever you want.

of course the software industry isn't going to let people do that. it's in the best interest of vendors to milk their supposed customers for every drop. you want ring tones? sure, 3 bucks a pop. you want to use the esc key during a cutscene? no prob, 50 cents per occurence.

no, seriously. once they have you at their mercy, they can and will do all sorts of shit. DRM and other types of encryption coupled with the DMCA and those bullshit "EULAs" will make them your masters over anyone who purchase^H^H rents one of their "products".

go ahead and check out STEAM for some of the sorts of things that are possible. when combined with Insidious Computing, it'll be far worse. for you and me that is. as far as i'm concerned, they've broken their side of the agreement in the commercial marketplace. if a customer cannot do what they wish with what they have PURCHASED and not rented, then it's not a completed transaction. the vendor still owers you a product. if you want to rent software, say so in VERY BIG BOLD LETTERS ON THE FRONT OF THE SOFTWARE BOX, otherwise one could convince a competent attorney general that vendors are commiting fraud. among other things.

please don't think of this and other situations like it as "just games". because it involves ALL software. eventually (nope not slippery slope, it's just coming along more slowly than anyone can observe while inside the model). this is what software merchants have been clamoring for, for decades. those crippled floppies and other failed copy-prevention schemes of the 80's and 90's were the maximum amount of control they could assert. if they had the kind of DRM Insidious Computing will provide, not only would they wet themselves, but then afterwards they would impose through well-thought out technical means, restriction after restriction. hardware hacking is a far far more difficult (not impossible) thing to counter than purely software.

the point is, this is what they have been after since software was written for commercial purposes. it's just a logical progression, like 2 comes after 1 and 3 after 2. it's natural for them to want the protections offered by copyright law but to deny full rights to customers of their products. it's natural but it's also pure bullshit. it angers their clued-in customers and thoroughly annoys the ones who don't know the score.

think of it this way... you paid 50 bucks for WoW, then you pay 15 bucks a month for service... if you can buy WoW then play on free or community servers, you have THAT RIGHT. you paid for a copy of the software. they can intice you to pay 15 bucks a month to adventure with thousands of others and for extra benefits but it's not right morally or legally (hello competent judges/legislators) for blizzard to DENY your right to use that copy of WoW software wherever you please.

the potential exists for real theft and copyright infringement but you don't see lawn mowers with DRM and phone-home features to prevent lawful use? you don't see TVs with the above features (well they're coming) that require you to call the manufacturer to get permission to view? if you don't fight for your rights under property law, you are guaranteed that in the near future you will be more and more locked out of things for which you lawfully paid for.

you will get more products like blu-ray and the like that require you phone home, get permission, get denied permission and even have the ability to disable your player. effectively rendering it dead. and no, it won't be rejected by the public as much as we'd like

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Arker]

They didn't even 'bypass' Blizzard copy protection. That copy protection is on Blizzard servers, and there's nothing Bnetd did or even could have done to affect that in the least.

They asked Blizzard to work with them on implementing it on the bnetd servers as well, and Blizzard refused, so they had no way to implement it on their servers, but that was never the point, or even something they wanted, it only happened because they had no other choice.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Arker]

Bnetd violated what? A 'EULA' that fails so many tests for a valid contract it's absurd and terms of use for a service they were not using!

Blizzard and their bought-and-paid-for kangaroo court are the violaters here.

Not even making a Mac version on the same CD can make up for it. I don't give money to people that spend that money to rewrite the law and take away my rights. Period.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[geminidomino]

And to get off-topic for a moment, what is up with people modding someone they don't agree with "Overrated?". Fair use is overrated?

It's a "feature" of the moderation system. Underrated/Overrated moderations are not subject to Metamodding.

Simple cowardice.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Snaller]

Yes, but the whole point was, what right do they have to do that. And that EULA shouldn't be valid in a just country (nobody reads them and nobody agrees to them).

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Arker]

You don't need a license to use something you've bought.

You need a license to copy, modify, and distribute it outside of fair-use.

Bnetd's use of the programs was clearly use, they were NOT copying and distributing the copyrighted material (which isn't even available or released) they were simply running the binaries they bought, determining how to interoperate with them, and building THEIR OWN server software to interoperate with those binaries.

So they had no need of a license, and the terms of any license that might have been offered to them doesn't matter, they didn't need any license to do this.

The TOS you refer to are the Terms of Service for battlenet. Bnetd didn't use battlenet, so those terms don't matter either.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Geekbot]

I think the point is not if it was allowed by Blizzard. The question would be should Blizzard be allowed to deny it.

Tied in Blizzard's multiplaying software to the game to prevent competition...
Blocked users who had purchased a product from using the product as they wished. Not an issue of copying, but an issue of personal use of a product.

Definitely sounds like Blizzard is the bad guy here.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post is a red herring. They were not accused of copyright infingment as you tried to insinuate.

BnetD's clearly did use the programs. And clearly did agree to the EULA, a legaly binding contract (it does not matter if you think it should not be binding, the courts, i.e. the people who's opinions count, say that they are).

Further they used the program in violation of the EULA. (Now in some states, your argument is more valid. They say that a program is a good and the UCC applies. Others do not. In that case, you are purchasing the medium in which you recieve the game, but are merely liciening the game.) They reverse engineered the game and/or its network protocols in violation of the agreement.

Similarly, in order to monitor network protocols, the most likely loaded an active Battlenet account to listen to the network traffic. If they did so, that would be a violation of the TOS.

Both were contracts which were violated by the authors of the BnetD program.

Additionally, they violated access protection mechanism of WoW, which is a DCMA violation. It is a DCMA violation regardless of the liciences that applied or did not apply to them.

So your post is inaccurate.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[incabulos]

Thats a horrid precedent ; the only reason the DMCA was passed was due to the existance of the 'reverse engineering for interoperability' clause - without which the DMCA itself was clearly criminal and in contravention of hundreds of years of standard property law.

I look at this the same way I would look at a situation in which a EULA says "Click on this and you agree we can rape your daughter/steal your car/murder your family". Its not a right that can be given up, EULA or otherwise. No corporation can put themselves above the law by churning out some sleazy clause in some 100 page agreement, they simply have no legal authority to do so!

That being said, its Blizzard who is in violation of the DMCA. Its as much of a legal obligation on the IP creator as it is on the licensors of said IP. This is an obligation they are violating.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[NewStarRising]

" They were not accused of copyright infingment"

"It is a DCMA violation"

Hmmm ... not accused of copyright infringement, but accused of Digital Millenium COPYRIGHT Act infringemnt?
What is the DMCA for? To protect against copyright infringements?

I do not underdstand how one can infringe the DMCA without infringing copyright.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure we'd be up in arms if, say, RCA (who makes many many comsumer electronics for those of you in Rio Linda) put, in an EULA, language like this:
You agree, by opening the box to this VCR, that you will only use this VCR with an RCA TV. Using any other brand of TV with this will result in us contacting our lackey judges and suing your ass off
And the thing is, most software EULA's are allegedly agreed to WHEN THE PACKAGE IS OPENED (or bought in some cases). One of the previous posters is correct on that for it to be a legally binding contract it can't be ex post facto, among other things.
After all, what's it called when someone holds a gun to your head, hides the contract except for the signature line, and orders you to sign?
DURESS. And as any lawyer, or even clued-in lay(wo)man will know, a contract signed under duress is not enforceable!

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the DMCA eliminates or curtails fair use abilities that should not be copyright infrigment.
Specifically:
The ability to interoperate with another piece of software should never constitute a DMCA violation. It'd be like saying "Custom Bob's Muffler" is a violation of GM's muffler copyright because it happens to be compatible with GM cars. Compatability is not a copyright violation but apparently the DMCA makes it so.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[lazyl]

You don't need a license to use something you've bought.

What they bought _was_ a license. Nothing more. When you buy any software you're not buying a copy of the binaries to do with as you please. What you're buying is a license to use the software. And the only thing you're allowed to do with it is exacly what the license says. Period.

You need a license to copy, modify, and distribute it outside of fair-use.

That applies to music, movies, books, etc, but it does _not_ apply to software. Nobody really buys software. We just buy licenses. It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

What, you mean a Starfish is neither a Star nor a Fish....?

The DCMA has many provisions. One of which is allowing content owners to distribute thier content in a protected (access controlled) manner. The law provides this protection with legal weight. Breaking the copy protection on a copyrighted work is a violation of the DCMA.

This is distinct from violating copyright. An example might help. Lets say we have an MMPOG. It requires authentication from a server to load its protected content. Now lets say someone figures out how to load the content without the authentication (which would in theory allow the game to be pirated). This is a DCMA violation and not a copyright violation.

If they then copied the game, we fall in the relm of copyright violations. But circumvation is the part made illegal by the DCMA.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[J. T. MacLeod]

That applies to music, movies, books, etc, but it does _not_ apply to software. Nobody really buys software. We just buy licenses. It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be.

Why? Let's turn this around.

When you buy a book, you buy a "license to read". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be.

When you buy a movie, you buy a "license to watch". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be.

When you buy a listen, you buy a "license to listen". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be.

Those examples are ridiculous. As is the concept that software is considered differently.

It isn't.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[oblivion95]

When I buy software, I am purchasing a license? OK, if you look at software in terms of contract law, then you must realize that if I buy software and resell it to my friend Bob, then: 1) I have violated my contract, which is not illegal. I can be sued. 2) Bob has NOT violated any contract. He never agreed to one! To call my resale and Bob's use illegal, you must consider copyright, not just contract. Copyright is a monopoly granted by government in order to foster innovation, at the expense of individual liberty. As a society, we need to determine the balance between progress and liberty.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[lazyl]

Why? Let's turn this around. When you buy a book, you buy a "license to read". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be. When you buy a movie, you buy a "license to watch". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be. When you buy a listen, you buy a "license to listen". It's not like buying a toaster however much you may wish it to be. Those examples are ridiculous. As is the concept that software is considered differently.

You're talking about the way you think the industry should work. I'm talking about the way it actually works. The fact is, when you buy software, you're buying a license.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[J. T. MacLeod]

You're talking about the way you think the industry should work. I'm talking about the way it actually works. The fact is, when you buy software, you're buying a license.

The industry giants WANT it to be that way. In reality, it isn't (yet), although the DMCA and other poor laws allow them to act as though it is under certain circumstances.

The exception to that is when you sign (not click-through) a contract stating such.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[lazyl]

The industry giants WANT it to be that way. In reality, it isn't (yet), although the DMCA and other poor laws allow them to act as though it is under certain circumstances.

So has the validity of shrink wrap licenses been sucessfully challenged in some court case that I haven't heard about? I'd like to see a reference for that.

Personally, I don't have a problem with shrink wrap licenses. A publisher has the right to license thier software instead of sell it. The 'shrink wrap license' is just a convenient distribution system.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[J. T. MacLeod]

So has the validity of shrink wrap licenses been sucessfully challenged in some court case that I haven't heard about? I'd like to see a reference for that.

I don't know about being challenged, but it has yet to hold up anywhere, either.

Re:Dunno about WoW...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your both wrong. It has been upheld, as I said in previous posts, in the 7th and 8th circuits. It has been struck down in several others.

Currently, its safe to assume that the EULA is a valid contract, while at the same time, your state's consumer protection laws may invalidate the contract.

However, its also safe to say that in all jurisdictions, a TOS for a service you sign up for (like a WoW account) is a valid contract.

I think they worry overmuch

[HBI]

WOW has a limited lifespan - the next MMORPG that comes out will draw off significant numbers of users.

I already got bored with it, after only about 6 months. The endgame experience once you hit 60 is kind of repetitive with the same old, same old instances, reminds me a lot of Diablo 2 doing Act 5 runs constantly to get drops. After weeks or months of that - *yawn*.

They can release content as fast as they can write it, any kind of new game will trounce their ass in the short term.

Re:I think they worry overmuch

[Anonymous Coward]

The endgame experience once you hit 60 is kind of repetitive with the same old, same old instances[...]

True and not true. I levelled a warrior to 60 (took a while, I'm not the "hardest of core"), played the endgame for a while, and got frustrated with the character and the game. Too hard to find groups, always hunting for healers, etc. So, I rolled a priest.

WOW. Just... wow. My priest is almost 60, and the difference is mind-boggling. The game is fun again, I have no trouble finding groups, and things feel quite different. Maybe it'll grow stale on the umpteenth Scholo run, or whatever, but I was dragging on the warrior in the 40s -- the 60s were just more so. Haven't had an unfun moment on the priest yet.

This points out to me that for those who like the game, the relative ease of levelling makes it practical to take the time to find the right class to play.

(Incidentally, I also varied the overall zone progression, which helped keep things fresh, too.)

What is it doing to child development?

[amichalo]

Speaking as a kid who grew up playing Nintendo (the original one you had to blow on to make the cartridges work) I say that the amount of time spent playing WoW and PS2 and watching DVDs and so on is going to have a serious impact on child development including aspects of:
- social interaction
- physical activity
- addiction
- valuing human or animal life
- respect for authority / oposite sex / themselves

Just like ice cream and candy, video games should not be something chilren should be allowed to binge their bodies and minds on.

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[physik23]

Oh, you mean like make some people who can actually kick my ass? Or make some more people for me to MPK? ~physik

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know... I'm 24 and basically learned to read on a vic20 because we could get cheap computers from hong kong. My other favorite toy was Legos, then I learned to use machining tools and to solder, now I'm a BSEE and program games for fun, and work with solar power.

Whatever happened to Legos or Meccano? I know they're still out there, but I get the idea that most kids don't cry for them: I go into someone's home for an installation and rarely see those toys (and my belief is that people who want solar power are smarter than the median population, certainly they DO have money at this stage of development so it's not a "i can't afford toys for my kids" thing).

Not saying it's a bad thing yet : just saying I don't understand it. Programming is fun, building something with your hands is just as fun but is also tangible....

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[cranesan]

Why is respect for authority important?

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Why is respect for authority important?

It depends on what your goals are. If your goals include spending a lot of time in jail, it's not important. If your goals include being one of the few elite geniuses who can have no respect for authority and still be effective, it's not important. If you don't fit into either one of the above categories, having respect for authority is pretty important.

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[bogado]

Respect the authoritys, don't question, don't think, just turn on your TV, game or access one of the hundreds of DMCA aproved DRMed sites and remember the big brother is watchig you.

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry but can I see your credentials on that one?
We don't know that this is the case.
Really, videogames at the moment are becoming more like sports. Look at the similarity between the interaction in a game of football (Aussie rules, American rules or even British rules (ie soccer)) and a raid within warcraft. Too many people say the games are destroying our youths (spelling?) but there is so little, non-biased, proof one way or the other and why should we impose our ideals on our children when we don't know that our society is actually a good one.
I've spent the majority of my life playing videogames, I'm a child of the C64 generation, and admittedly I may not meet up to your expectations of social interaction (but this doesn't mean i'm a bad person), physical activity (I'm more at home at a desk than a gym), addiction (I drink in moderation and do not smoke/take drugs), Value human/Animal life (I believe all humans/animals deserve to live a happy life), and well I respect the opposite sex, my own gender, and my self (I let authority prove itself to me before giving a decision).

If your afraid our children will turn into axe wielding maniacs then you have obviously fallen for the trap of old age, you've forgotten they are us. Every generation does this just look at anything which has been favoured by youth in the past, everytime it was going to turn our children into horrible misfits who'd kill you at a glance, and how it actually turned out.
Before making statements like this do what they always try to teach you in school, look to the past to make sure your not making the same mistake people made before.

God i'm a long winded ...

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[cranesan]

I can keep out of jail without being a genius and without respecting authority. I might have to get along with them and work with them to accomplish my goals, but I don't have to respect them. I don't think that because someone is in an authority position, they are automatically deserving of respect. I don't think we should look to video games to teach that to our children, or blame them if they don't pass that message along. It is not a correct message.

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have friends who have lost their job, lost their girlfriend etc etc all because of WOW and other MMORPG's. I played MMORPG's since Ultima ONline and have played games since othello on a DEC machine in the 1980's. I love games but MMORPG's are just too easy to get addicted to. You dont even notice that you are playing 6+ hours per day, in a half daze waiting to get that next item or level ( use all the specifics that you want it all comes down to those two things). Just like in real life, money and power, two things that most people will never have at the levels they can attain inside of an MMORPG. I myself was obsessed with these online games up until a year into SWG when I also lost my girlfriend and pretty much all of my friends due to this gaming situation. I just dropped using computers for constant gaming, vowed never to play an MMORPG and have been on the trail to returing many friends and leading a good life. Sitting indoors for many many hours playing a game that you think is actually getting you somewhere is pathetic and will never actually gain you anything in life. I hate to see other poeple including some people who are still friends, to leave normal life for this kind of game. It ruins people, its shouldn't be banned at all but I think people should start paying attention to real life and stop trying to get away from it by playing these games all the time.

Re:What is it doing to child development?

[xenoandroid]

The fact that it does that say something more negative about real life to me than the MMORPG. The fact that society fails it's members so terribly that they want to escape reflects baddly on all of us, not just the 'pathetic person playing games'. Also, playing MMORPGs can technically get you 'somewhere' For example, the reason MMORPGs are appealing to me is because of the social aspect which in fact does 'get you somewhere'. It's a great way to get to know different people around the globe, sometimes you make friends. Also the technically not allowed practice of selling game money does something. Also to point out, if your friends never tried to get you away from your gaming habits previously, they probably weren't very good friends to begin with. If you were that addicted that they couldn't pull you away, then you should be more sympathetic to those who overuse the game's potential for escapism.

Industry whiners

[Augusto]

It's very simple, if you can't imagine people paying an additional $15 to play your game, guess what, offer a cheaper and better alternative!

I for one am in the category of people who would like to play some of these games just a bit, and don't have the time to spend so many hours on this. However, if they would drop these montlhly payment schemes or charge a much lower fee, they would attract a lot of people.

Intead of doing that, we get an article saying how this game doesn't let other games compete in the market. Geez!

the next need for speed....

[Anonymous Coward]

i know it's a bit offtopic, but the enxt need for speed... i can't imagine anyone would buy it... since underground the series is completely fucked up... all it has is a big name and a lot of advertising....

whichh probably also leads to the answer, just advertise enough to make people think it's a good game and you'll sell a lot of copies, we all know that's how it works....

Can't post, playing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh.

Other Games...

[Ghostx13]

What are those? ;-)

Seriously though, I don't really play anything else anymore. I'd really like to buy a PSP, but I know I won't play it enough right now to justify the cost. So in that sense I'd say WoW is hurting the market, but damn, Blizzard has to be doing really nice right about now.

I have not bought

[Boap]

any single player games in the last three years but instead have bought a copy of almost every MMORPG game that has come out on the market looking for the next UO. For me the game is secondary to interacting with the people online and as such for me this type of game will always have a special place for me.

Re:I have not bought

[saranagati]

yah, i haven't even heard of any game that's anywhere near as good as UO was back in it's day. The great thing about ultima was that once you did get to a high level instead of it just getting mundane with no new more difficult creatures to hunt, you could go out and hunt other players. Not only were they the hardest thing to hunt (couldn't trap them behind a rock or do whatever that paticular monster required you to do to beat it), they also had the best loot. I still have fond memories of polymorphing into an orc in an orc fort, waiting for some n00b to attack, then killing him (or get killed by the 20 other n00b's who would attack you too). So in summary, someone needs to come out with a new game that is entertaining to play while gaining levels, then still fun once you're at a high levels by PK'ing and looting people (not by forming huge groups with 20 friends and going out to hunt the REALLY hard monsters). If someone came out with another one of these games, I would definitely cut way back on work and totally quit going to school so I could play this all day.

It has changed how I buy games

[drmike0099]

It has definitely chaned how I buy (or rather, don't buy) new games. Basically WoW is so good, and takes up all of my allotted game time, that whenever a new game comes out I have to really look at whether or not I think it's good enough to get me to play that rather than WoW. There haven't been many that I've purchased since WoW came out, and those have left me disappointed, so now I have an XBox and a PS2 sitting there, unused for months.

The social aspect is also a big draw, in that I have quite a few friends who are likewise addicted to WoW, so I can log in and chat with them as well. Single-players or XBox Live games just aren't as good at that aspect.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[JPriest]

You sound just like all the other people I know playing WoW but I still don't get what is so great about that game. It is multiplayer final fantacy or zelda from what I have seen of it.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[FreshFunk510]

That's the paradox behind all gaming, isn't it? My gaming friends always have a "queue" of games they need to get to but there's never enough time.

I'm not much of a gamer these days (I don't even bother with xbox of ps2 except on occassion) but even when I was playing Counterstrike back in the day, all i really needed was one good, addictive game to take up all my free time. I can't imagine having TWO good, addictive games.. there's just not enough time for that.

I think this existed somewhat before MMO games. MMO probably makes it more scary because of the long term commitment to it. But, like any other game, people will get bored and want something new. That's jsut part of the evolution of the gaming industry that's inherently due to changing hardware, software and technology.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[__int64]

Perhaps he is right in that a few very good games with > 1 month will actually increase the pressure on others to produce decent/(better marketed) titles if they truly want to compete.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you aren't using your PS2 can I have it?

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[WinterSolstice]

I also agree to this. I previously played about 15-30 hours a week of PS2 games, and a bit of Neverwinter Nights. I even bought both expansions as soon as the patches for Mac were available.

Now, I play about 3-5 hours of WoW a night, and I have no time at all for other games. I even have a few pre-ordered games sitting on my shelf in the shrinkwrap. I bought WoW accounts for my oldest son and my wife. We play together daily.

To top this off, I am considering a new machine based largely off gaming performance for the first time in 3 years.

I'd say it definately has an impact. A game would have to be truly amazing to pull me off WoW. I didn't even like Everquest this much.

-WS

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[paitre]

If you want multi-player Final Fantasy then -play- Multiplayer Final Fantasy:
Final Fantasy XI.

Neener :)

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[Rayonic]

To top this off, I am considering a new machine based largely off gaming performance for the first time in 3 years.

After three long years, getting a top-end (or near it) gaming machine will result in a more enjoyable non-gaming experience too. Even after telling yourself, "my computer does all I need it to do", you'll be surprised.

But if you're sticking with the Macintosh platform, you should wait until Apple releases the Intel-powered Macs. It'd be hard to justify getting a PowerPC-based Mac right now -- especially with all the positive feedback the developer Intel-Macs have been getting lately.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[Kris_J]

That's not a paradox. I have a growing pile of books to read and there isn't enough time to keep up with them. That doesn't mean that there's some sort of book reading paradox.

Many people subscribe to pay-TV and don't watch it 24/7. Heck, there will be people out there with Foxtel (or whatever) and a WoW subscription. It's not a paradox, it's just about whether or not you think you have enough time to get your money's worth out of the monthly payments.

Personally, I have difficulty finding enough time to play WoW to justify the ongoing subscription. If I was only debited one day for each day or part there of that I spent logged into the game, I'd keep a subscription going and just play on the weekends and holidays. Instead I play in 60-day bursts with anywhere from 2.5 weeks to 2.5 months between renewals.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[Vacindak]

Yeah, see, that's part of the problem.

I have so many friends who are addicted to WoW, that I had to buy WoW just to communicate. See, they don't answer their phones anymore. That'd mean they'd have to, you know, get up and walk to answer the phone. So they just let it ring. I gave up and now if I want to see if they want to go watch a movie or hang out or whatever, I have to '/msg WoWAddict Hey, want to go to Tinseltown tonight?' Of course, this is silly of me, because they're always just starting a Molten Core raid.

WoW isn't killing the games industry. It's killing Real Life.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[cakesy]

Does this worry you at all, that so much of your families time is taken up gaming? It seems like quite a lot, if you son and wife are playing for 3-5 hours a night.

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[WinterSolstice]

Actually, my kid only gets to play after homework and before bed.

And nope. When a kid's math and reading are well above grade level, his grades are good, and he reads at least a book or two a week I couldn't care less. He could be playing card games, board games, sports, whatever. That's the whole point of "free time". If he choses to use the money he earns from chores on WoW (and the occasional comic book), I see that as entirely reasonable.

-WS

Re:It has changed how I buy games

[FreshFunk510]

True, there are certainly differences. I guess I was just saying that generally if people find a good game people get wrapped up in them so much that it detracts them from other games.

Not that big of a problem across the industry...

[RUFFyamahaRYDER]

I will never play WoW let alone buy it. No, not because I don't like the game or because I don't think it would be fun. It's because I don't have the time to invest in a game of this type. I like playing games where I can start up, play, have fun for a little while, then quit.

I'm sure there are a ton of people out there like me, which means other games still have a good chance.

Zero Cost Game on subscription

[Sufood]

The Zero cost game on subscription model suffers from a distribution problem for boxes. The distribution model would have to be by online download only.

But how cool would that be? Make an entertaining Flash Ad with a built in link to sign up right away.

It's not like these games don't require hours of downloads when you first connect anyway.

I'd reply in greater length...

[TiMac]

....but I'm about to run to Scholomance. Sorry!

This is news?

[Thunderstruck]

Last time I checked, my favorite MUD character had logged almost 2 months of time online over the years. That is months total, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

This investment had no impact on how many games I bought. Is there some difference between my MUD experience and that of WoW?

Re:This is news?

[kwerle]

Last time I checked, my favorite MUD character had logged almost 2 months of time online over the years. That is months total, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

This investment had no impact on how many games I bought. Is there some difference between my MUD experience and that of WoW?

There are 2 important factors to consider when answering that question:

1. Are there more players of WoW than MUDs. [hint: yeah, a few]
2. Is 60 days /played "over the years" a large, average, or small number? [hard to say, since "over the years" is pretty vague, but I'm guessing that serious gamers who "also" play WoW are logging more hours/month than you did on the MUD - which leaves them with fewer hours to play other games].

And point #3 is that WoW players are blowing $15/month on "games" without buying another game. I'm guessing that the MUD you played didn't cost that.

Re:This is news?

[Thunderstruck]

Aha! good point, I forgot about the continuing cost. (I'm still thinking of games like StarCraft which provide online play without an additional fee to suck up the gamer's future income.)

On a side note, that 60 days/1400 hours of play is spread out over at least 10 years. Will people still be playing WoW in 10 years?

Re:This is news?

[kwerle]

On a side note, that 60 days/1400 hours of play is spread out over at least 10 years.

60 days /played in 10 years is LOW for WoW. Like... really really low. Which means people have a LOT less time to play other games than you did while they are "also" playing WoW.

Will people still be playing WoW in 10 years?

That's a toughie, and depends on a lotta factors. Will people continue to pay for subscription games? Will Bliz continue to charge as much as they do? How much new content will they add? Do you consider WoW2 (or whatever they call it) a new game, or still WoW?

Diablo came out in 1996
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_(computer_game )
D2 came out in 2000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_2

D2 was still pretty popular wheen WoW came out (as these things go) - but it was also free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest
EverQuest is still going after 5ish years, and their peak population seems to have been around half a million - which is about 1/8th! WoW's current.

So I figure the fair guess is that folks will be playing in 10 years, unless something kinda big changes.

Re:This is news?

[bakawally]

Thats nothing. One of my friends logged over 365 played days in Everquest over 4 or 5 years.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Give it time

[jigjigga]

WoW is successful because it is a "blizzardized" mmorpg. I think many would agree that most people who play WOW wouldn't have played other MMORPGs, but because of the polishing ability that Blizzard has, they have opened it up to more people than even possible for MMORPGs before. Over time, these people will get tired of it as WoW is too simple to keep playing like EQ, EQ2, or even SWG. Given time, the people will grow tired of WoW, even with the expansion packs.

Monthly Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want nor need yet another monthly bill. I'll spend my 50 once, and enjoy the game I now OWN, and can play whenever and for however long I want.

In ten years, if I want to boot up and play WoW, I may be SOL, even though I made such a huge investment into the game and the hardware to run it. On the reverse, if I want to play a game like Dungeon Siege or Morrowind 10 years from now, I will be able to play it. (With a bit of luck and some old winXP emulators)

This is not the winning model, but I'm sure it seems nice for blizzard fans now...

Boredom

[Odin_Tiger]

People get bored and move on, at least most. A select few will stick to a single game like that and play for huge amounts of time each day every day for years, but for the most part people not only get totally bored and move on to a whole new game entirely after a while, but they get bored on a day-to-day basis and play other games just for variety. It may be an 800lb gorilla right now, but it will grow old and die, or more likely, be unceremoniously butchered by the -next- 800lb gorilla to come along. Aside from that, you also have to recognize that while MMORPGs are growing in popularity, the people that play them still are not such a huge target audience that a game company would go broke simply by failing to market to them altogether.

Who cares? Go outside!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who gives a rat's ass? Western society is entirely too addicted to cheap plastic crap and flashy distractions. Y'all need to get off your collective asses and do something worthwhile.

WoW FTW

[freakout]

I play WoW about 15 hours a week, Deathwing server FTW. But I still find time to play alot of other XBOX and PC games.

Re:WoW FTW

[Agret]

lol ovbiously, then again you probarbly don't spend over 30 hours on your computer on weekend playing CS like me :P

Just another time sink with little to no value

[Anonymous Coward]

More or less you've played one MMORPG then you have played them all. All they are are a time and money sink. This is what cuts into the industry, Not enought cool stuff in any game out at the moment, and nor with there be I guessing anytime soon.

While WOW was the best offering out there at the moment, after you've played it to 60 in a month, and then turned around and played all the new addon's they blizzard created, it's just the same ole boring game that will continue to suck time and money away from people who like to "grind".

I just let me subscription run out (6 months) and won't be going back anytime soon. The battlegrounds were a nice added feature but with the same "maps" each time it gets utterly boring quick, and still results in a mob running around killing things to get points, until one side can't take it any more and thus loses. The capture the flag battleground are too stale and boring to play any more than a handfull of times so while interesting it's still not any fun for more than an additional month, and the new dungeons or regular dungeons are just sad. You go back and back and back just to grind for the ultra weapons, then when youget em, there is nothing to do. Their professions are a joke and utterly useless.

what is needed are MMORPG's more like the pen and paper RPG's. Until a company creates something along those lines no MMORPG will be anything more than a money and time sink which will eventually "suck the industry" in upon itself

This always gets asked about.

[corrosive_nf]

It was asked about Ultima Online, it was asked about Everquest, it was asked about Everquest 2, it was aked about Star Wars Galaxies. There is always going to be a game that will have a large portion of the MMO player. Its just WOW that has captured it.

Social consequences

[cwernli]

Might not be the first time that there's a generation clash, but definitely an amusing one - check out postings #3 & #5 to get a good laugh: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=w ow-realm-cenarioncircle&t=145812&p=1&tmp=1#post145 812

Seriously: WoW is currently one of a kind for merging virtual and effective reality; no matter what, this is the stuff the future is made of.

Helping the gaming industry

[cranesan]

WoW is helping the gaming industry CONSUMERS. Blizzard is an awesome game company, their games consistently deliver on quality, originality, and run on Mac or PC. If you have one of the non-subscription games you can play for free forever on battlenet. If you have one of their subscription games, like WoW, they are honerable to do things like stop shipping the game when server issues appear, while the resolve them. Compare this to the MMORPGs chummed out by Sony, licensing pop-culture elements and deploying bug-riddled games at increasingly higher monthly fees. When a good company like Blizzard releases a good title and it is a commercial success, it tells the people of the gaming industry that good quality service and high-quality products are important to the consumer.

No time..

[destiney]

What is the Slashdot opinion on World of Warcraft's impact on the gaming industry?

I would write some stuff in response to this question but I don't have time.. my guild is grouping up for another Ragnaros raid attempt.

Comparing WoW players to need for speed players?

[Shtonkalot]

Personally I don't play WOW or any other MMORPGs. I have a hard time believing that the majority of my friends who are into racing games or even FPS games are going to jump ship to MMORPGs any time soon. I have no doubt there are people who will play WoW instead of other single player games. I doubt it will affect the many need for speed / colin mcrae rallyers ffrom purchasing the latest installment though. Perhaps the biggest problem is the decline in good quality single player games on PC that aren't just console ports that have been released on XBOX/PS2 6 months earlier that accounts for poor software sales for PC.

no time

[ktulus cry]

I never got into WoW because I'm cheap, but I got into Guild Wars... and I've passed on buying at least 3 games that I can think of off the top of my head. I'm a college student, and my gaming time availability is rationed carefully. I can only imagine that it's worse for everyone paying the monthly fee for WoW.

Re:no time

[Anonymous Coward]

guild wars ftw! but yeah, i have passed on 1 game since guild wars has come out even though it has no monthly fee. i bought the other game (jade empire) because i thought i would play it whenever i got tired of guild wars. i've played jade for a few hours, but i keep coming back to guild wars.

Where's the linux version

[graigsmith]

Someone needs to kick blizzard in the buns and get them to port this to linux.

Re:Where's the linux version

[DarkElven1]

If you want to run WoW in linux, it runs, with a very few small bugs, faster than it does on a windows box with Cedega from http://www.transgaming.com/. What I want to know, is when http://www.ventrilo.com/ will be putting out a linux client so it's worth using Cedega for MMO games. Let's get on them, guys!

Re:Where's the linux version

[graigsmith]

I'd love to buy cedega, but they only take like 2 forms of payment. they don't take discover card, and they don't take paypal.

Re:Where's the linux version

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a native Linux client hidden in the beta files, so obviously one had been built. It even worked, at one point. I'm not sure quite what happened, but I suspect that it was explored during alpha and beta, and shelved as crunch time hit. The fact that it was in the beta meant that it was at least tacitly supported at one point, but as launch approached, fear kicked in.

Pity, a title like WoW with a native Linux client would've been one hell of a shot in the arm for Linux gaming...

Re:Where's the linux version

[geminidomino]

And you can't just buy it. You need to subscribe for 3 months, min...

ripoff.

Re:Where's the linux version

[Hannah E. Davis]

You might want to check out Teamspeak if you want a free voice service with a Linux server and client available. My boyfriend used to use Ventrilo as well, but when we discovered Teamspeak, we and basically everyone else we wanted to talk to quickly switched over.

I do kind of wish that WoW would work without Cedega, though. The only semi-real game that I have on my laptop is Creatures Dockingstation, and that's more of a demo than anything... so it would be awfully nice if I could level my cow at school as well as at home. However, I'm not willing to shell out extra money to do it.

Re:Where's the linux version

[Rakarra]

You might want to check out Teamspeak if you want a free voice service with a Linux server and client available. My boyfriend used to use Ventrilo as well, but when we discovered Teamspeak, we and basically everyone else we wanted to talk to quickly switched over.

My guild is struggling over which voice chat client to use. Currently we're using Teamspeak but many people want to switch to Ventrillo since it has better voice quality and a Mac client.

Ventrillo: Windows & Macintosh.
Teamspeak: Windows & Linux.

Ventrillo's website says that a Linux client is "under development," though they don't list when it will be released. It would be nice to have a single client which supports all three platforms that you'll find in a large guild.

Re:Where's the linux version

[Rakarra]

Well, my mistake. Seems the Ventrilo client for the Mac is also under development. So Ventrilo is windows-only at the moment, though they have servers that run on Linux, FreeBSD, MacOSX, Solaris..

hmm

[hurfy]

True to some extent. But certainly not because of just WoW.

This has been true for me for five years now. Since i started Asherons Call (and Motor City online when it existed) i bought 75% fewer games. Just this last year has my purchasing starting going back up somewhat.

But there are still fewer subscription-based MMORPG gamers than not i would think thus limiting the effect a lot. Not to mention it not affecting some genres at all.

Reality

[Rac3r5]

The reality of this is, there are so many other ppl out there who are not playing WoW.

I for one am not playing WoW because I would need to upgrade my comp and then invest a lot of time etc.
So I buy other games that will take me less time to relieve stress.

Just because a bunch of ppl subscribe to X paper, doesn't mean some other ppl don't buy Y paper.

WoW is a massive timesink

[Azureflare]

I was playing the high end game in WoW and I really got tired of it. I was spending like 2-3 hours a day during the week and 10-12 hours on weekends (something like 20 hours a week?). Even that was considered light gaming. It was very, very hard to get anything done with a fulltime job. I stopped playing a month ago, and I haven't been back.

Now I'm in school fulltime with a lot going on, and I just can't bring myself to log on. My guild is probably pissed at me, but doing high end instances which take 4 hours a pop is just too much for me.

Am I the only one that got tired of WoW because it started to feel like a job that you didn't get paid for, but were paying for?

I want a game where I can play a few hours a week, and still get something out of it. Things just take too long in the high level game in WoW!

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Guysmiley777]

MMORPGs are time sinks? In other news today: The sky is blue.

Seriously, the POINT of a game is to waste time. But if you're not having fun, it's time to move on.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Barlo_Mung_42]

"I want a game where I can play a few hours a week, and still get something out of it. Things just take too long in the high level game in WoW!"

Try Counter Strike. It also can be a time sink but it is easier for it not to be. With each round resetting every 3-5 min it's easy to hop in for half hour or so and have a lot of fun.
Not like WoW where you can spend that much time just trying to get to where the action is. Run run run. Get to the port. No boat. Dang, just missed it. Wait 5 min. Fish. Dang, fishing without beer is boring. Ride the boat, run run run. Hop on griffon. fly fly fly. run some more. Now the fun can start 20 min later. Boring.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Swift(void)]

Now I'm in school fulltime with a lot going on, and I just can't bring myself to log on. My guild is probably pissed at me, but doing high end instances which take 4 hours a pop is just too much for me. Am I the only one that got tired of WoW because it started to feel like a job that you didn't get paid for, but were paying for?

No your not, and i totally agree with your point. I got alot of quests in my log with (Dungeon) next to them, and i really cant bring myself to do them, because i know they are going to take me 5+ hours to complete, with no guarentee you will actually complete it.

Blizzard have really done a great job with WoW, and managed to hook alot of more casual players into it, but after level 40, there is either alot of grinding, or alot of instance runs. I would be a much happier WoW player if there were more instances that only took an hour or two to run, but were still tough. Im honestly not at all excited hearing about how long MC/Scholo/BRD runs take.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Anonymous Coward]

A few years ago I tried to get into Counter Strike. I gave up, for 2 reasons that combined made it an entirely unfun experience:

1. I wasn't any good at it and I didn't seem to be getting any better no matter how much I played.
2. When you tend to die towards the start of each round, you may spend more than half of your game time not even playing. That SUCKS! It also means you get that much less practice in.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[llevity]

I partially agree with you. I think one of WoW's biggest appeals was how it catered to your gaming style for levels 1-59. Things like the lack of dealth penalty and rested XP bonus allowed those who couldn't play 12 hours a day to make progress. The quests are set up so you can complete one, or at least make a dent in one, in any block of time you have.

At the same time, if you want to grind for 12 hours a day, you can do that too.

It's only as things reach the end game at 60 that more casual players get left out. If it were a game like Everquest, where only the hardcore players are ever going to hit the level cap anyway, it'd make sense to only cater to them.

But by now, even the most casual player who started at launch has hit 60, and there's not much to do on short blocks of time.

I would like to see some sort of solo instances, and group instances that save your progress. It could be as simple as turning off respawns. If they're worried about groups beating it through persistance rather than skill (dying, coming back again, dying, coming back again, until they get to the end) then implement something like if you die, respawns occur. If you just log out, nothing respawns and you can resume where you left off.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Azureflare]

I really like that idea. You're absolutely right. The lack of a space for casual gamers at the high end game makes it real hard to get any kind of instance going if you're not completely devoted to the game. I really like your suggestion for the no respawn feature.

Re:WoW is a massive timesink

[Anonymous Coward]

The trick to this is staying in the back of the pack. Not only do you live longer, you also get to see more strategies the top people use. (or that get the bad people killed). And best of all, by the time you're shooting at someone, you've picked up a better gun from someone in front, AND you're shooting at someone with half health.

It can be a bit lame, so don't go overboard with it. But quite frequently if you watch the top guy on a server, you'll see that he's sniping/camping/hiding for the first half of the match, then wiping out all the injured enemies for lots of kills.

When will games start rewarding based on damage caused instead of just for getting the 1 last damage that kills the guy? That's one thing I love about WOW with honorable kills. (yeah, I used to play CS all the time until Source split the CS community, killed the servers I liked, and then I started playing WOW)

Innovation is the key

[Darkn3ss]

The companies that make videogames will now be forced to make better games with a more intense storyline. Give me a good, single-player game any day of the week. MMORPGs aren't any fun, that's why the Nintendo fanboys like myself love the fun, single-player games that are overly original, as well as the 2-4 player games for playing with people you actually know IRL.

BUT!

[NickCatal]

How many of those accounts are gold farmers paid $0.05/hour? Or secondary accounts? There are families with 5 copies of the game. Blizzard needs to invest in endgame content QUICKLY before they loose all those subscribers. After you hit 60, the game just sucks. Plus, there is still too much grinding for me.

Good or bad

[Approaching.sanity]

It is keeping the really strange people inside.

WoW is probably hurting

[pyite69]

The hard core wow addicts I know have cut their video game spending considerably.

Now they are spending all their disposable income on Doomhammer gold from ebay.

well, they did help the industry in one way

[varkman]

they helped open up the market for businesses renting out games :) (if you mod this -1 troll, you're damn right ;) )

No WoW here

[nick-less]

I played Diablo and Diablo II, so I got enough of blizzard

fool me once....

Re:No WoW here

[hc00jw]

I played Diablo and Diablo II, so I got enough of blizzard

fool me once....

But that's two games you played, so surely you were fooled twice?

Re:No WoW here

[Anonymous Coward]

... can't be fooled again!

From the Inside

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think WoW is having an effect on the people buying games, you should see the effect it has on the people MAKING them. As a long-time game programmer, i can tell you that almost every single person i've worked with in the past year has been a WoW addict. Artists, coders, managers and testers... I'm convinced that World of Warcraft is nothing more than a conspiracy by Blizzard to destroy the productivity of every other game company on the planet, leading to their total world domination.
 
(And I, for one, welcome our frosty new overlords. ;-D )

My favorite quote

[circletimessquare]

From the NYT article (emphasis mine):

"I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month," said Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Morgan, a securities firm. "World of Warcraft is such an exception. I frankly think it's the buzz factor, and eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers."
"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

Um... do I ask 13 year old boys about hedge funds? Who is this guy and why is his laughably out of touch opinion anchoring this article? It's like some talking head in 1890 going "this whole electricity thing is a fad. A few electric lights here, an automatic phonograph there. It will fade after the novelty factor wears off."

Seriously, how out of touch can you be with the growth of online gaming? Someone should show this idiot his quote in 10 years.

Re:My favorite quote

[Anonymous Coward]

I was just about to post this same article. This ranks up there with one of the stupidest things I have ever heard.

Which is odd, because people tend to think that he (Pachter) is usually on the money (with regards to earnings projections, etc.)

But it's odd, in another interview he says:

"My gut tells me that 14-year-old boys are all the same, whether their parents make $50,000 or $500,000. And the $50,000 household with the dad who may not have a huge amount of disposable income and doesn't have a PS 2 yet, well, he's getting one this year, and he wants to play cool games. "

So, I suppose, that maybe Mr. Pachter thinks that WOW is not going to be "cool" long enough to retain the eyes and bucks of the 15 year olds.

I think he's wrong.

Re:My favorite quote

[fitten]

No kidding...

Probably one of the funniest things I've seen regarding ST:TNG was that the whole series was obviously illogical. Given what we know about humans (ourselves), the instant that the HoloDeck was created, all work and socializing would cease and the human race would be doomed to die off within a (very) few generations :)

WOW

[Turn-X Alphonse]

WOW is the latest fad, nothing more. People will get bored and relise they spent 3-4 times the money of one game on it and yet still have to pay to play it if they want to start up again.

Competitive Market (Test the Capitolism Theory)

[c_woolley]

Blizzard is an amazing company and there can be no doubt they have a great product. So, why should we WORRY about what other companies see as competition. This is the time for them to start creating better products. If they cannot compete, they will fail. That is the very basis of a society that is capitolistic. Only the best will survive. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel like ever paying monthly for an MMORPG. I'll stick to my Battlefield 2, which is free. And, although EA is hitting some hard times, I think this game is unbelievable. Why would I want to pay $15/month when I can go out and get a game to play for free? The answer to the problem with WoW is build a better game. If it is free monthly, all the better. If not, just make sure it is better. Force the industry to come out with games that are worth my $50.

Hmm....

[advb89]

One company overcharging and cheating people out of money causing other companies to lose profits and/or go out of business...

Hmm...

Where Have I seen that before????

Wow is not hurting the industry...

[Anonymous Coward]

it is giving the industry more time to polish and refine the turds they are intending to fob off on gamers as the next hit.

Don't know...

[The-Bus]

I positively hate when someone passes off anecdotal data as a definite trend, so I want to say right off the bat that I am only talking about my own experiences.

I played UO when it first came out eight years ago, and since then, I have not picked up any of the big MMORPGs. Every single one has raised my interest, and I always wish I could live in some alternate reality where I could spend 4 or 5 hours devoted to this game without it affecting my free time. If that could be done, sign me up.

However, it is an itch that needs to be scratched. The interaction, the big worlds, the sense of accomplishment you receive when you can slay previously tough creatures in two swoops... I simply need to have it. But there's no way I could be good at the game and play 10 hours per week on it. Even that is asking a lot.

So, what happens? I buy (or pick up again) Morrowind. Or I get into YoHoHo Puzzle Pirates for a couple of months. Now the itch is appearing again so I bought Champions of Norrath for the PS2. In a few days/weeks, I'll get tired of it, and I will have only spent under $20 and a couple of hours per week on it (save marathon 4 hour sessions when I can sneak them in). I never need to get the MMORPG because I can satisfy some or most of those needs through other games that don't require such a large investment of time and money.

Who knows if the net effect is good or bad. My guess is that it's good. If Doom/Quake wasn't so addictive, we wouldn't have such a proliferation of First Person Shooters now. For the most part, I think what is good for one game is good for gaming in general.

Man, what?

[mcc]

It isn't like MMOs didn't exist before this.

It also isn't like Blizzard hasn't ever made a game before that was so absorbing that people just stopped playing anything else.

I don't see any examples of World of Warcraft hurting "the market". What I see in this article is examples of poor game developers, being hurt by capitalism. If Need for Speed is bad enough that spending $12 on WoW makes Need for Speed not worth buying, then the problem here is that need for speed wasn't good enough to be worth $12 to that person. The reason why Matrix Online got "downsized from nine virtual "realms" to three" is because Matrix Online sucks. Notice in the article that NCSoft, who actually makes good games and is competent enough to compete in a fair market, doesn't seem at all worried?

There are a number of developments in video games lately that I would describe as bad for the health of the video game market. World of Warcraft is not one.

Re:Man, what?

[SoyFeo408]

I'm gonna take the bait and jump on the "Matrix Online sucks" bit.

Maybe I'm just the masochistic type or something, but I picked up Matrix Online on a whim the other day (I mean, it's $20 at Wal-Mart now, what is there to lose?) and I've been playing it for a little over a month now and LOVE IT. More than any other MMO I've played, in fact.

It seems to me like the game sucked right after beta, which was when all the sites were reviewing it. All the reviews said "this game sucks" so people stayed away in droves and nobody's come back to check on it since.

The article mentions that it just changed hands to Sony Online (as part of their deal with WB to get a DC Comics MMO going), but what they don't mention is that Sony didn't buy it just to throw it away. They just released a big patch that added upper level content and revamped one of the trees that needed some attention. They've only had the game for about a month now (most of which was transition time) and thus far they seem to be genuinely making an effort to make this game rock, and they seem to be succeeding. (And for those of you who have played other SOE games like Star Wars Galaxies... yeah... I don't understand either. SOE generally sucks. BIG TIME. But they just bought this thing, so they're going to spend some resources getting it up to spec, I guess.)

The big difference for me between MxO and WoW is storyline. MxO, I care where the storyline goes and it's interesting to me to participate in the live events (*gasp* live actors playing the main roles in an MMO instead of NPCs) that help develop that story line. I got burned out on Orc vs. Human dynamics in 8th grade.

In all the other MMOs I've played, once you've decided what kind of character you want to be and you've gotten relatively high-level in that class, if you want to switch classes you either can't or you have to spend a ton of time re-grinding that new class. In MxO, you can switch your abilities on the fly, which keeps it from getting boring when other MMOs turn into a grind. Sure, I may still be doing missions (every MMO boils down to this at some point), but at least I can toss it up... be sneaky and play spy instead of running in with a shotgun or going Karate or Kung Fu on people, etc.

I won't say it's the perfect game for everybody, because there *is* no perfect game for everybody (obviously, 'cuz I can't freaking STAND WoW) but those of you who haven't checked out Matrix Online since it first came out, go drop $20 on it and play it for a month. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Re:Man, what?

[Carewolf]

Capitalism was a pretty good game, but I don't think it had a big following though.

apples, oranges and tangerines

[Nastjud]

This is under the assumption that all gamers enjoy MMOs as well as FPS and RTS games. This is not the case. The opinion I give is my own as an MMO/FPS addict.

As of late, my obsession if Battlefield 2. I bought battlefield to pull me away from the redundancy of WoW. WoW is an incredibly fun game to play, but when you hit max level, which can be done in just a couple of weeks, you end up doing the same thing every day. My roommate raids Molten Core all day long and I don't know how he does it.

Simply put, WoW can't and isn't fulfilling all gamers' needs. It will need to look out for RFO (Rising Forces Online) in the near future which shows a lot of promise in gameplay and simplicity.

In all actuality, I reactivated both of my Lineage 2 accounts because (to me) WoW wasn't satisfying enough on the PvP side of the game.

For now, strap me in an F-35B and I'll dogfight with anyone in the sky.

A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Maul]

World of Warcraft is simply the most popular MMORPG right now. This same article could have been written about Everquest 1 a few years ago.

EQ arguably sucked even more time than WoW, and other PC games were still sold. There are many gamers who don't like the MMO thing and will continue to buy other games and consoles.

Eventually, someone will make a WoW-killer in the MMORPG arena. It may take a few years, but it'll happen.

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

These are not at all the same thing.

EQ is for greasy nerds and WoW is for normal people, even Dave Chapelle.

WoW has much much MUCH more appeal than EQ to non-geeks (who are much much more numerous than geeks).

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[koniosis]

Eventually, someone will make a WoW-killer in the MMORPG arena. It may take a few years, but it'll happen.

They call it GuildWars ;)

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[RogueOne]

I'm picking that NWN2 is the most likely candidate to kill WoW

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

How about an MMORPG which takes place in the world created by the company, Games Workshop, which Blizzard stole all of their Warcraft *and* Starcraft style from?

http://www.warhammeronline.com/

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was thinking the same thing.

If Dawn of War is any indication of how much impact TRUE originality has on the final product, then it would be fitting for a Warhammer MMORPG to finally stomp out this trite Warcraft fad once and for all.

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[DeadPrez]

They call it GuildWars ;)

No they don't. =(

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

No they don't. =(

Yes they do. =D

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Joel from Sydney]

Nope, sorry, been there done that, bought the t-shirt. I bought Guild Wars in the expectation that it would pull me away from WoW. Guess which one I'm still playing nightly, and which one sits in an un-used corner of my HDD?

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[FeloniousPunk]

World of Warcraft is simply the most popular MMORPG right now. This same article could have been written about Everquest 1 a few years ago. EQ arguably sucked even more time than WoW, and other PC games were still sold. There are many gamers who don't like the MMO thing and will continue to buy other games and consoles. Eventually, someone will make a WoW-killer in the MMORPG arena. It may take a few years, but it'll happen.

What's different about WoW now and EQ then is that quite a few quality games were available on the PC when EQ was in its heyday, but now PC gaming, with a few exceptions, is mostly ass, IMO. The titles are fewer and less interesting with each passing year, so WoW has less real competition.

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

Eventually, someone will make a WoW-killer in the MMORPG arena.
I hope that'll be World of Starcraft...

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd try it, but it doesn't run on my iMac. WoW does.

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[sethstorm]

Eventually, someone will make a WoW-killer in the MMORPG arena. It may take a few years, but it'll happen.

WoW Killer? Do you not know about the exclusion of existing games in some statistics? Or do you need a recent chart?

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[abashere]

Think about that time frame. "It may take a few years". How do they keep paying customers on the line for years? They did it by introducing sociopathic activities. Once you make level 60 the only sport left is to kill other players. Better than hunting mobs, they might even be a challenge.

Now the game becomes surviving the original game theme, and not being "Ganked-4-Gear" by other players. And there is no penalty for ganking new played just for fun. Or killing the same player over and over (corpse camping). This sounds an awfull like like re-enforcing the "bully" mentality.

Is this more violent than running over cyber pedestrians? Does it promote anti-social behavior? Does the company rake in 12 months subscription untill the next 'killer (in both senses)' game appears?

p.s. I am a level 56 Hunter and plan on quiting as soon as I make 60.

Re:A WoW killer will emerge eventually.

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me a break. Even the people who called Guild Wars the "WoW Killer" have already quit playing. The game sucks.

Let me put it this way: Everyone I know who quit WoW to play Guild Wars either went back to WoW or now plays neither of them.

WoW is great and all

[834r9394557r011]

But i would rather pop an imaginary cap in some tangos @ss, while running around like a madman with a few squadmembers, than have to spend hundreds of thousands of hours on one particular game. there are too many way to cool gamesout there to only spend time on one. I play WoW, but no nearly as much as I play BF2, and not nearly as much as i'll spend playing the good old Raven Shield. Just as others have stated, each genre has its following. I don't think there will ever be a shortage of people willing to invest their time in other genres than the MMORPGs. Just look at the BF2 servers out there.

Monthly fee? No thanks

[_Shorty-dammit]

I will never buy any game that requires me to pay a monthly fee on top of an initial purchase fee. I don't really know if I'll ever play a game that requires a monthly fee, period, even without an initial purchase fee. With no initial purchase fee I might be more persuaded, but it's still unlikely. I don't care how good your game supposedly is, you won't be seeing my money. I've spoken with friends about this in the past, and the vast majority of them feel the same way I do. A monthly fee is bad enough, but also asking for an initial purchase fee, that's just insanity. If I buy a game, I should be able to play it. If I buy a game and can't play it because I can't (say I don't have a CC) pay a monthly fee, wtf sense does that make? You got my $60 or whatever already, but it was for nothing because I can't play the game. Now, if I can pay a monthly fee (say I do have a CC) but I have no idea if the game's going to be any good, well, paying that monthly fee once to see how it is might be a good idea for me. It'll be cheap, and it'll let me decide whether or not I want to continue playing the game. But there's no way in hell I'm going to buy a game for $60 and then pay a $15 fee on top of that just to see if I want to keep paying $15/month. As far as I'm concerned, any company that wants a monthly fee from me to play a game shouldn't be charging me a single cent for the initial purchase. That should be free, since it's useless without paying the monthly fee. If your game is SO good then you should be glad to risk having some people only pay you one monthly fee in hopes of the majority of them sticking around to pay monthly fees on an on-going basis.

Re:Monthly fee? No thanks

[_Shorty-dammit]

er, but it will still likely be a cold day in hell before I play any game on an on-going basis with a monthly fee involved, even without that initial purchase price. Monthly fees suck.

Re:Monthly fee? No thanks

[ricewind]

The inital purchase of WoW comes with 1 month of access. You don't need to purchase a month of access on top of the game price to get you going.

You don't need a CC to continue to pay for continued gameplay. "The World of Warcraft Pre-Paid Game Card is a convenient payment option for those who prefer to pay cash for their World of Warcraft subscription and is available at most stores where computer games are sold"

These points probably won't get you to like the business model that WoW uses any more, I'd just like to correct some impressions you gave.

Re:Monthly fee? No thanks

[domukun367]

Please be realistic here - single player PC games only require your own hardware to run. Massive multiplayer games require vast amounts of server hardware, administration staff, network bandwidth, more initial development... none of this comes for free - that is why you pay by the month. If US$15 per month is too much for you, you should look seriously into your personal budgetting. Say you play WoW 30 hours a month (most people would play more...) that's still only US$0.50 per hour. Find me other forms of entertainment that cost this much.

Re:Monthly fee? No thanks

[_Shorty-dammit]

let's see, I paid $45 for Half-Life in 1998...yup, still getting roughly 5 hours a week of gameplay out of that purchase. I'm sure there were times where I was getting about 28 hours a week out of it. Even being conservative and taking the 5 hours a week figure...7 years, 364 weeks, 1820 hours, that's less than 2.5 cents an hour ;)

The gaming industry is not communist!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares about the "industry". It's survival of the fittest, and if they make a game that is so good that it takes away from all the other games, then it won, at least until the next big game comes around.

Good for them if they steal all the available money it means they are successful, and hopefully an extinction phase in the gaming industry will produce stronger, more focussed games instead of 1000 different FPS or RTS games.

I work for a video game retailer

[TekReggard]

From my experience in video game retail, I would say it isn't going to be a direct impact from games like World of Warcraft that adjust the buying habits of consumers. The biggest impact will be stores like GameStop, GameCrazy, EBGames, and some of the older stores from the past that have merged with GameStop over the years. Their Trade-In programs, while convenient, are slowly sapping the libraries from players and into retailers warehouses. For example, I recently shipped nearly sixty copies of GTA: III to a warehouse because of an abundant overstock. Considering the store I work in has only been open less than a year, I was quite surprised to see I had 60 copies of overstock for any game.

Now I know that I'm getting kind of off topic and trade-ins are a completely different tangent, but the trends in buying vs trade-ins are very relevent. Consumers are becoming less and less likely to purchase a NEW game over a Used Game, they are also becoming more and more prone to spending less money out of pocket to pay for something. So I believe we'll see a small impact from subscription games. I mean $15 a month, if someone buys 12 games a year, is only about 3 games per year. Though, as compared, the biggest impact will be from consumers running out of trade in values. It may sound a little far fetched, but I have been seeing a lot more people who are unwilling to pay more than thirty dollars out of their pocket when they have rising gas prices and costs of living to deal with as well. So when someone can trade in three games they already own to pay less than $10 for that spiffy new game they want, they'll do it. The question I pose, though, is what happens when they realize the trade ratio is about 3 to 1, and eventually they either wont have games to trade, or will be stuck paying 30+ dollars per game again.

Re:I work for a video game retailer

[Anonymous Coward]

well, the games they are trading in at one point probably cost them $30+ a game, and there are plenty of people who never trade in games and will always be there when a new game is released to buy it brand new. personally i never trade in games because i know it's not worth it. i will buy used games, but I don't sell used games. it doesn't make sense, at least not in the retail shops. most people, if dedicated, could make more on ebay or something. heh. so really, what you're dealing with is lazy people who would rather have the instant gratification that trading in games provides. :)

Re:I work for a video game retailer

[Generic Guy]

Consumers are becoming less and less likely to purchase a NEW game over a Used Game... what happens when they realize the trade ratio is about 3 to 1

The Gamestop near me is right near the local high school. Whenever I stop in, there is almost always at least one kid trading in lots of games. I guess the point it that kids don't value things the way adults would. But after thinking about it awhile and expanding on that, I have to say if somebody is done with a game and won't use it again it holds zero value -- and might as well be used as a trade in. Otherwise it has no use at all for that owner.
Speaking as someone who used to hoard his games, I finally realized my collection was doing nothing but taking up room in my house. These days my concern is more about when Gamestop either stops accepting or highly devalues trade-ins because they are choking on 60 copies of overstock on every title.

Back on topic a bit: I think huge hits like WoW will continue to fragment the market and drive many game-makers to the consoles. From what I have read PC game sales have been slipping for years, while consoles have been gaining. If I were a business, I have to think hard about wanting to compete with WoW and The Sims in a limited marketplace, when otherwise there are tens of millions of consoles. Its actually already happening.

Re:I work for a video game retailer

[danteecoli]

A lot of concerns/ideas mentioned in this thread are addressed by Steam. The makers of Sin are planning on releasing their game "episodic content" through Steam i.e. you pay twenty bucks for about six hours of single-player game, and then you pony up another twenty in a month or two for the next episode and so on. This seems pretty close to the free-download-monthly-fee suggestion. Since steam buyers won't be able to trade in their used games, to compete Steam releases will have to drop their prices. If I buy Half Life 2 for $40 and plan on trading it in for $20, to compete Steam will have to change me around $20 for the game in the first place. It also makes piracy more difficult, which should increase total game sales (although the 1-to-1 relationship claimed by RIAA types is ridiculous) and reduce prices. Of course Valve can keep doing what they're doing and charge $50 and make enormous profits, for a little while. Then more developers make their own Steam style distribution systems (as EA is considering) and make more games with bigger budgets, and competition gets fierce and games get better. I think what World of Warcraft has highlighted is that there is a segment of the video game market willing to pay $50 plus $12/mo to play a MMORPG. However, as many of us who have played one can attest to, there are very few willing to pay 50/12 twice. So, if your WOW, life is gravy. If you are any other game, even the number two game, trying to compete, you lose. Except for genre preferences (Star Wars Galaxies, City of Heroes) since we're only playing one, it is going to be the best. There can be only one.

Re:I work for a video game retailer

[llevity]

Well, for me and my wife, both WoW addicts, it isn't a budget issue. It's not that we can only afford x number of games a year, and have reduced that number of games by y, due to our $15 a month for WoW.
It's a time issue. I used to buy a game every two weeks, on average. I'd play it for a bit, get bored with it, or some new game would come out that was better, and I'd get it and start playing it instead.
Since I started playing WoW, however, I have bought a few games, but after always shelving them after a play or two, I have dramatically curbed my game buying. Not because I can't afford it, but because I don't have time for anything else, considering I enjoy playing WoW so much I just go right back to it when I have free time to game.
My wife and I can't be the only ones. So maybe it is hurting the industry somewhat as a whole, but it sure has been saving me money :)

Not really

[bearclaw]

Most of the people I know who play video games (myself included) rarely have the time needed to devote to RPGs. We work. We have social lives and sig-others to worry about. We are more likely to buy games that multiple people can play together on a Friday night before we head out to a bar. Mario Party is great, as is Burnout. Things like that.

Yup...

[WolfTattoo]

I can only speak from my own personal experience...I used to buy at least one game a month. Then I got into Dark Age of Camelot early on in its launch. I didn't buy another game for a year and half after that. I even convinced myself that being completely addicted to DAoC was a good thing--at only $12.95 a month, I was saving a bundle in not having to buy new games. -wolftattoo

I don't understand.

[KhaZ]

So, you're telling me that having quality in an industry undermines it?

I suppose it depends on who you're "helping" or "hurting".

Is WoW hurting other game developer's pocket book? I'm certain.

Is this a bad thing? I don't know: all I can say is the only person my heart bleeds for is the indie developer who's trying to break into this market. But for the EA's of the world? Heaven's no!

Lineage??

[FreshFunk510]

I'm not an MMO geek so if anybody out there has better stats on this feel free to chime in. The article said:

""For many years the gaming industry has been struggling to find a way to get Internet gaming into the mainstream," said Jeff Green, editor in chief of Computer Gaming World, one of the top computer game magazines.These kinds of games have had hundreds of thousands of players, which are not small numbers, but until World of Warcraft came along no one has been able to get the kind of mainstream numbers that everyone has wanted, which is millions of players."

And yet I checked on Wikipedia for Lineage (a game my friend raves about) and it says:

As of 2004, developers consider Lineage to be the most commercially successful MMORPG ever. NCsoft has reported that Lineage has more than four million subscribers, most of them in Korea. To compare, EverQuest (1999) has not even reached 500,000 subscriptions

Could it be that this person is a bit too much US centric? Actually the article did mention that WoW had over 1.5 million subscribers in China. Perhaps this is just an oversight they made.

Re:Lineage??

[FreshFunk510]

Correction. I just got to page 2 of the article. ;)

Doesn't Really Matter

[sehlat]

I got so turned off by the customer-hostile DRM in Half-Life2 I haven't bothered to look at a game since. So why should I care if WoW crashed the entire industry?

FWIW

[mrch0mp3rs]

I started WoW in January. Dropped in May, due to horrendous performance on the server I was on (Stormrage). There was just so much annoying lag when they released the PvP system with the Battlegrounds, and I was trapped in an area of the game and couldn't even stay logged in long enough to move my character to a less-crowded location in the world.

But... I jonesed for the game. Badly. And I signed back on about two weeks ago, much happier with the server performance, quickly leveling my main up another six levels in that time -- which is great for a casual gamer such as myself.

The game is addictive. It does require a solid time investment. If you're single, I can see where you can be a casual gamer on WoW and still have time for all sorts of games (as well as other activities).

But not if you want to rule in PvP. Certainly not if you want to hit level 60 and then experience all the end-game content, since the game DEMANDS that you collaborate with other real players and team to accomplish some nigh-impossible bosses.
And forget about any other game if you have a job, wife, kids, dog, off-line life.

My XBox gaming is non-existant. I bought a PSP, and so far because there's been no games released since Lumines, so the PSP has been nothing short of a waste -- a filler on airplanes while I wait to log-in at the hotel to play more WoW.

When there's a shinier object than WoW, I may divert my attention to it. Until then -- FOR THE HORDE!!!!!

(Grimloch, lvl 30, Stormrage)

Response Time

[The_DoubleU]

I heard bad stories about the response time of their tech support (in and out game). I never had to contact them myself so I always thought that this was an overreaction of the unlucky gamer.
Now I see the time it takes to answer a slashdot interview.
If Blizzard keeps doing this then people will switch over to the next big thing(TM).
I know I played years of CounterStrike without buying a new game, now it is WoW.
Anything new? no.

state of denial

[PMuse]

From TFA: "I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month," said Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Morgan, a securities firm. ". . . eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers." . . . "It may continue to grow in China,. . . but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

You gotta love a guy who, when smacked over the head with 4000000 subscribers worth of evidence, can still find it in himself to deny reality. This is a guy with a very healthy imagination.

Will it really hurt other game genre?

[Elros]

Granted that I've never played the game, but I don't see how it will seriously hurt other areas of the gaming industry. It may create a bit of a monopoly in the MMORPG field but it's not going to affect the guy who never plays MMORPGs. WoW isn't going to appeal to the guy who is big on the latest racing game or foot-ball game.

I still buy games because I can pay a one-time fee and I've got the game forever. Fifty bucks is fifty bucks whether you pay it once or over six months. I'm just pickey enough to borrow it from a friend before I buy it myself.

Itn't hurting me...

[gellenburg]

I still love Donkey Kong, PacMan, and Space Invaders.

Plus, why in the hell would I pay $15 just to pay a game that I've already bought?

I see another bubble about to burst here.

Re:Itn't hurting me...

[raarky]

"I see another bubble about to burst here."

Clearly you haven't read any of the comments let alone play the game.

Sure it costs $15 a month to play, but what sort of game do you play provides you with thousands of people in the same dynamic and ever expanding world to play with?
What sort of game can bring couples together so they play online at the same time? (there are more women playing this game than you can imagine)

I have for my entire life been an avid gamer. PacMan was one of my passions. I fired up pacman the other month and it sucked. Sure the retro feeling and simplicity is great but these days people expect more. And it turns out, LOTS of people expect more.

There is not bubble that is about to burst, only the sight of another bubble appearing that is larger and pushes the boundries even more.

Re:Itn't hurting me...

[geckofiend]

Why do you pay your cable company every month just to use your TV?

Bandwidth, servers and new content all cost money.

Re:Itn't hurting me...

[KillShill]

the software industry wants/says so.

never mind the fact that buying stuff entitles you to use them, that kind of logic is irrelevant in our brave new world.

the software industry almost makes the RIAA/MPAA seem less despicable.

almost.

Re:Itn't hurting me...

[gellenburg]

You're right. I haven't. I do have a PS2 which every once in a while I turn on.

I guess I just choose to use my free-time (what little there is) more wisely like reading a book, working on my novel, programming, sitting out on the back porch drinking a cold margarita and simply enjoying life and nature.

Another commenter mentions why I spend money each month for cable TV... that's kind of a necessity. TV brings me news and weather and I really don't need it to be honest.

Of course, the Internet is a luxury but with what I do, it really isn't.

WoW sounds more to me like a graphical version of Tradewars and last I played that game it was on a BBS back in 1995.

There are more important things in life than video games.

No wonder the world's population is progressively getting fatter. Everyone's sitting on their ass at their keyboards and to think that you have to actually pay more money after you bought the game to continue to play it? Why couldn't the developers implement some sort of P2P networking into the application?

Call me a nerd, and call me old fashioned, but this business model sounds like it's working because it's target demographics don't know any better.

Shift in the industry

[babtras]

I don't believe that WoW will harm the industry significantly. It is simply leading the migration to a different style of gaming. Single player games are dying off and MMORPGs are the new thing. Pretty soon every game maker will be making MMORPGs exclusively and the competition for players will stay just as intense as it always has been.

Absolutely

[Alpha27]

Gaming is like cycles. Many people are in a cycle with WoW. After WoW, they might go to another MMORPG, or consoles or regular PC games, a combination of it all or take a break.

In any case, what WoW is doing is nothing new, in terms of pricing. SWG, EQ, UO, and others have been doing it since the beginning. A game comes, it gets popular and it dwindles. This is a normal process. It would be good if the article stated the examples that I did. There's nothing really new here. The many thing that is changing is the number of people playing games online in general.

Who cares about the game industry . . .

[Cyberllama]

As long as I get one of those sexy new enchants from Zul Gurub . . .

Since Dave Chapelle likes it...

[munboy]

http://digg.com/gaming/Dave_Chapelle_Loves_World_o f_Warcraft It must be good!

Re:Since Dave Chapelle likes it...

[KillShill]

oh well, in that case...

Dave Chapelle confirms... WoW is good.

now who'll help me dunk him in a large vat of hot grits. no i'm not building a new meme, just trying to give him 3rd degree burns. Mr James would approve...

MMOGs

[TopSpin]

Canceled my EVE Online accounts this weekend. Both accounts represent hundreds of hours of... something. Not sure if its work or play, but its a hell of a lot of time. Past MMOG engagements include DAOC and PlanetSide. Both equally large time sinks, PlanetSide being the most fun until they ruined it.

I'm done with MMOG. I appear to have the ability to quit these things cold-turkey after sufficient suffering. I know others can't.

Downloaded Wolfenstein, Enemy Territory. The bugs apparent in the 1.x releases are gone. There are plenty of very active servers. No exp bar to watch; you're uber the instant you start playing. Log off and you're done. Only way it becomes a time sink is when you attempt to develop content.

There you go; living proof MMOGs won't ruin the non-MMOG market.

No, you can't have my stuff.

Re:MMOGs

[Alioth]

Try True Combat Elite, too - a conversion for Enemy Territory. See http://www.truecombat.com/intro.php

Re:MMOGs

[Winterblink]

The thing with EVE Online is that everyone assumes that flying a battleship or a dreadnought is the end-game and thus they strive for that. Yeah, if you fly a battleship and take part in PVP you're going to be slaving away for hours on end to keep it insured, equip it, and replace it when you lose it.

I find it much more enjoyable to play the game in a frigate or a cruiser. You can spend an hour and mine enough to build/buy and equip a frigate 5 times over, and you don't worry about losing it.

PVP is of course just one goal in EVE, there are literally limitless numbers of goals to the game because you the player make the goal. That's the game's advantage over others, and it's a shame people sink their time so much into the worst timesink goals of the game.

Timesinks are of course not a unique feature with EVE, all MMOs have them. No MMO is geared towards the casual gamer. Efforts to mitigate the timesinks still cannot help you compete against the powergamer who can afford a ton of their personal time to play. It's not really a PROBLEM with the genre, it's just that the entire genre has been designed from game #1 to be a system of reward based on time and effort.

Ummm

[Anonymous Coward]

1. I wish I had your free time. 2. You need new hobbies. 3. Go outside.

Yes, this shall pass

[miketo]

The gaming industry will continue to exist. What won't exist are the current software houses, not because of WoW but because it's the nature of the beast. Ten years ago Sierra, Dynamix, Interplay, and others were the kings of the gaming hill. Now, they're just fond memories.

In the online community Everquest is fading, DAoC is fading, even City of Heroes is fading. All the supposed "hot! hot!" games enjoy popularity for a while then fade away. WoW will do this too.

As for the original question, WoW has little or nothing to do with the revenue streams flowing into other game developers. The purported "fear" of WoW cutting into game-buying is the sound of marketers quaking (pun not intended) because they promised management and shareholders 15-20% revenue increases based on publication of such scintillating games as "50 Cent: Bulletproof", and the revenue flow is just not happening. WoW is a convenient scapegoat.

As others have said, good games, not good marketing, draws the dollars. The recording industry is learning a similar lesson, as is Hollywood. It just happens to be gaming's turn.

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[geekoid]

SOme of what you say is true, however to not regaurd WoW's influence is a mistake.
Wow take money to play, money that would otherwise go into a new game every quarter.
Also, it is a large time sink, and takes way from available time.

I know several people who have passed on games becasue they are playing WoW. granted that is a tiny sample, but I doubt it is unique.

Of course, when I tire of WoW, I'll be looking for those gamesin the discount bin.

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[Presence2]

I have to agree with miketo's post - WOW will pass. Paying 15 a month for the past year and half for LineageII has not stopped me at all from buying other games that have come out that interested me, or trying other MMOG's in their beta form. If anything, it makes me a bit more cautious before investing a lot of time in a MMOG if I don't feel it has the long term playability of my current addiction. That is GOOD for games because when I do switch, it will be to a superior product (RFonline?)as opposed to a flash in the pants (matrix).

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[PickyH3D]

As for the original question, WoW has little or nothing to do with the revenue streams flowing into other game developers.

Before WoW, I was buying a game every month, or at LEAST every other month. I have not bought a game since December, which is when I got WoW.

The game is not the best thing since sliced bread, but it is pretty good and paying $15 for a consistently good experience over the span of a month (with a lot of time invested) versus $50-60 for a few days of fun really interests me. I can afford the other games, but what is the point? Not to mention the time investment I put into WoW would get cut into by these games (and yes, I do take days off from playing). The only game I will be getting for the PC in the near future will be FEAR and I will be buying an Xbox 360 plus a few games.

The only thing about WoW is that sometimes it feels like it is getting old, but then after a short break I can come back and just change what I was doing. I know from a TON of experience that no other (non-MMO) game has done this.

The biggest problem I foresee for WoW is right now they are altering some classes and they are buffing them (all classes will eventually be effected), which will likely make the game partly unbalanced in my opinion. That's really what turns me off from MMOs because I do not mind the rest of the game, but class imbalance really gets to me.

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[shaitand]

i think the mistake your making is to assume that the money going into wow would be going into other games.

Your typical "gamer" makes up a rather small portion of the mmorpg gaming community. I'd venture that most FPS players do not play wow and that most wow players have never spent a significant amount of time playing a FPS.

For other mmog's perhaps, but wow is not just a mmog it is a mmorpg and the players are more rpg'ers than g'ers.

I know a huge number of AD&D players who have moved to mmorpg's drawn to the concept of a 3d game where they can have real group play without a script OR anyone having to give up play to DM.

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[guru42101]

Interplay is/was Blizzard ;)

Re:Yes, this shall pass

[Nitar]

As for the original question, WoW has little or nothing to do with the revenue streams flowing into other game developers. The purported "fear" of WoW cutting into game-buying is the sound of marketers quaking (pun not intended) because they promised management and shareholders 15-20% revenue increases based on publication of such scintillating games as "50 Cent: Bulletproof", and the revenue flow is just not happening. WoW is a convenient scapegoat.

Actually, you are incorrect. I for one have intentionally passed up on new games because of the fact that I'm playing WoW. It's not because the new games wouldn't be fun, it's just that WoW is MORE fun.

Granted, I am only 1 out of 4,000,000 players, but I also know that 2 of my RL friends have passed up on games they otherwise would have purchased if not for WoW.

WoW has actually saved me money. I spend less on games than I used to, because I'm not buying new ones all the time.

Now, it would be interesting if there was a reliable way to put some evidence to these claims. Because, I'd like to know if other people are passing up on games, because they are too busy with WoW.

I don't think many kids play WoW.

[Mustang Matt]

In some aspects I think WoW is targetted at the adult market because I would think most kids wouldn't be able to afford it and I doubt most parents are willing to shell out $15/month for a game unless they are playing it themselves.

As as former WoW player and a somewhat current Warcraft 3 player, I can say that the attitudes and chat on WoW is leaps and bounds more mature than WC3.

Re:I don't think many kids play WoW.

[Anonymous Coward]

Start a Horde character and tell me how you find the maturity level of Barrens chat. :)

Re:I don't think many kids play WoW.

[An ominous Cow art]

Eh? I'd guess that the average age on my server (Elune) is about 12, judging by the chat.

Re:I don't think many kids play WoW.

[fitten]

Different servers must be different population makeups, I guess. I've played both Horde and Alliance and it seems to me that the Alliance (which is something like 2x the Horde population overall) tends to have lots of kids playing. Kids play both sides, but Alliance just seems to be almost nothing but kids playing.

Re:I don't think many kids play WoW.

[ildon]

Funny, it's been almost impossible to get a WSG game started on my server since school began...

Answer:(IMO) Short Term, Yes; Long Term, No!

[MrBandersnatch]

As a veteran of MMORPGs (well...started playing Everquest 1 month after release so I feel that qualifies me) I felt the grip for MANY years with this form of game but EVENTUALLT bordom did set in and my buying habits returned to "normal". I bought MANY MMORPGS (EQ, AO, DAOC, UO, SB, CoH etc etc) in order to try and get the same sort of "rush" I did when I first discovered EQ (the same sort of rush Im sure many are finding with WoW) but in the end, the formuliac copies (of which WoW is just one of many...highly polished but still just a genre clone) just eventually stopped doing it for me....whereas I could still get a rush from moving on to other genres.

Personally now I dip into Guildwars, HL2 and the occassional demo (and have had a lot of satisfaction from my nacent Mamebox with an x-arcade stick ) but MMORPGs...seen it all before! And THAT is what will happen with all those millions of WoW subscribers down the line - they will try (hopefully) other games in the genre but eventually it just wont be fun anymore...

Anyways Im just hoping that this interest in RPGs means Oblivion gets some better sales - these days I cant wait to play games without ****** n00bs KSing from me ;)

The low end vs. the high end

[feardiagh]

The amazing thing that I have seen in WoW is the difference between the graphics on a low end machine (my gf has an old dell P3 800MHz) and the high end machines (I have a brand new machine I put together for BF2, complete with 2 gigs of ram and that nice 500 dollar graphics card I've always wanted). It looks good on her machine, and even runs well. On my machine it is one of the prettiest games I've ever seen. They don't go for realism, they go for effect. And they do it very successfully. The fact that it runs on both machines is great as well. And it even runs on my Mac (something which Blizzard has been smart enough to do for every release they've done).

Re:The low end vs. the high end

[Mondoz]

Indeed.
It's quite playable on lower end hardware, but scales very well when large piles of cash is thrown at it in the form of shiny video cards.
So pretty.

However, I have to sigh when I realize that I'm impressed that I can sit on a pier and fish at 40 FPS...
I guess when I used to be impressed with the water effects in Pitfall, this isn't quite so depressing to be impressed with.

Re:The low end vs. the high end

[Anonymous Coward]

And it even runs on my Mac (something which Blizzard has been smart enough to do for every release they've done)

Hey, I have yet to see Lost Vikings for the Mac unless you count emulation ;)

Re:The low end vs. the high end

[Cruciform]

What kind of Mac?
I picked up a Mini recently, and stuck a 1 gig stick in it. I was curious to see if it would run *well* on that.

Re:The low end vs. the high end

[Psykechan]

WoW runs OK on it. It's nothing great but it gets the job done. The bottleneck in the Mini is the R9200.

Actually I have a friend who comes over to play it on the Mini because it's much better than the "high end" intel integrated craphics adapter on her PC. I really hope that Apple doesn't start putting those things in their systems.

Re:The low end vs. the high end

[feardiagh]

I have it running on an eMac G4 1.25 and on a PowerMac G4 Tower (mirrored drive bay) Dual 867. The key is on the memory, and a gig will do you fine. I've actually found that the Mac version is less likely to hang or crash than the PC version, but this might just be my systems. Both my girlfriends and my computers (PCs) have a tendancy to hang on logging out or exiting the program

How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

A couple of thoughts ....

The folks at Sony (Raph, etc.) are responsible for their own problems with EQ2. They rushed to get that game out the door as close as they could to WoW, even though WoW was much farther along in testing. If they hadn't made hasty decisions in order to try to contain the "virtually" certain EQ exodus to WoW, and instead had invested that time on producing a truly innovative game, they could have won back mindshare from WoW when it hit its inevitable "fallout" with players: the (similarly rushed) launch of "battlegrounds".

Now I'm not saying WoW wasn't rushed too, .. solid PvP should have been there at day 1 ..., (hey it is Warcraft right?), ... but EQ2 was chucked out the door similar to Star Wars Galaxies. Sony is more worried about keeping the subscription teat lactating than producing something revolutionary and polished. (Of course, one need merely look to other genres like the movie and music biz to know that very few of the big names are doing more than churning out crap these days.)

Now, on the topic of WoW, I played it to the "uber" end of the game, as I did with EQ for many years, so I know what I'm saying when I say that WoW was a rather big disappointment for me. I've been playing MUDs since 1990, and writing them since 1992, so I feel I have a good idea with what has been done and what remains to be done in this repackaged world of distributed MUDs with 3d graphics and perty textures. In short, WoW was disappointing in its inability to deliver a good mechanism for player-created content.

So basically WoW delivers an experience of "EQ like it should have been" (gosh I thought that a lot playing the game), but it was hardly revolutionary. Once you've explored the content in these games, it is up to you to make the content, or simply to get used to doing the same thing again and again. Its not so easy to build games "on the game", and the games that are there just become a treadmill for the powerlevelers. (E.g. battlegrounds "flag cap" trading.)

Now, I realize that many people will never hit the top levels of these games, and they may enjoy the journey, never "see it all" or even come close, and certainly try the game from the shoes of multiple classes. More power to them. Personally, I think I'd find that boring after awhile too. After all, there is only so much variety the game can deliver with their quest and combat engines.

Now back to what remains to be done... I think that's clear to me. Way back in the days of Diku and LPMUD, when players got to a certain point in the game they became "gods" or "wizards" and contributed content. With LPMUD (or MudOS) and some other dynamic engines, players could actually contribute code! (And yes as a Java developer for the last 10 years I know damn well about the inherent security risks and how to mitigate them.)

I want a fantasy (or scifi, or spy, or whatever) MMORPG that lets me contribute content and code to a dynamic world. I guarantee you a game like that will be innovative because the players will make it that way. And there are ways to keep balance, manage exploits, etc.; if you don't think so, go and look at the text MUDs that have been dealing with this for 15+ years. This is not just another "oh gosh he wants dynamic content, its too hard to do!" post -- like I said, go look at the numerous text MUDs that have been working on these issues for a decade or more. (And yes, I am personally working on my own solutions to these problems, "for the good of open source" (tm). Links to sourceforge project in my profile when I put it there).

Now before anyone links "Second Life" and such, let me remind you that those "games" are hollow in not having the cool backstory and "out of the box" content that something like WoW delivers. You need both, really, and I think running around buying jet packs and clothes in second life sounds as exciting as playing Sims Online, and we've seen how that is going.

two kinds of gamers...

[jlapier]

(1) gamers that play one game
(2) gamers that play more than one game

Seriously, I knew some EQ players that only played EQ, and that was it. I know other people that play one game, and never buy new games because they have their one game.

For those of us that play more than one game, a game like WoW, no matter how good, is not going to keep us from buying other games, because we like to play all kinds of games, and aren't going to just want to play a good MMORPG, we want to pay some FPSes, some RTSes, maybe even some TBSes. Hell, sometimes we want to play on a PC and sometimes you can't beat sitting on the couch with a GC/PS2/xBox controller.

The game industry should quit worrying about the best way to milk gamers (up-front v. subscription) and worry instead about producing quality games.

If you want my money, forget about the subscriptions. Make a good game, and lower the cost of said game (or give me a raise).

While I don't speak for everyone

[Sycraft-fu]

I for one cannot remain entertained playing onyl one game. I do play WoW, and I do play it a lot (well by my standards at least) but it's not the only one by far.

Games are my primary entertainment, I do not find TV or movies as much entertainment/hr or entertainment/dollar. I do watch TV and movies sometimes, but not nearly as much as I game.

Well, I find that WoW only inrests me so much. After playing it for a few hours on one night, I'm not really that inclined to play it again the next night, I want something different. I do frequently replay old games I still have, but I like new stuff. Currently, I'm eyeing KOTOR 2, it looks fun and I reall could go for some single player RPG.

So my bet? WoW may have a slight negative impact, but not a huge one. Please don't forget that a minority of gamers play it. There are still tons of gamers that don't do the MMORPG thing. EVen those of us that do, many play other games as well.

EQ anyone?

[SpiritGod21]

Everquest didn't kill the gaming industry. Neither will WoW.

Fads change

[Anthony]

For instance, a lot of people used to watch Star Trek. Yoyos, pet rocks, WoW...

Whiners

[DoorFrame]

"Look, Matrix Online is good, but it's like being in the early 90's and trying to put a fighting game up against Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter; it's just not going to happen. There are a lot of other online games that are just sucking wind right now because so many people are playing WOW."

You know what, it was possible to put a fighter game against Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat, it was Ultima Fighter. But aside from that, Mortal Kombat was put up against Street Fighter and did just fine. It's not like you can't have more than one title out there... if one game is taking in all the bucks, it's because it's a better game. In the same way that we all laud Google for putting out a better product and swallowing up the market share, we should be lauding any game that does so well that it's competitors feel small and unloved.

That being said, a multi-player game is a different situation from an arcade game. With a multi-player game, it's not going to be fun if there's no-one else playing. I don't really see how the MMPORG's even get started, who wants to be the first one playing? Who even wants to be in the first thousand? I don't know.

So maybe online games are in a different position than real world games. I don't know.

There's no point to this post.

I'd agree...

[dstainer]

I haven't played online poker, xbox, or any other computer games since I picked up WoW 2 months ago...

taller than a niche, its a market

[PMuse]

From TFA: "I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month," said Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Morgan, a securities firm . . . ". . . eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers."

Yeah, it will drop to ~1 million. Should happen right about the time that the other 3 million subscribers start playing the Next Big Thing(tm).

Meanwhile, Blizzard is earning over $500M per year (never mind the article's math, which assumes subscription fees are equal in all countries).

My two cents

[TrickyTrinary]

Seriously, the same could be said for all the players who devoted a year or two of their lives to EQ1 (or who still play). As far as I've seen the game industry has not been hurt by them too badly.

Then again, WoW is a fresher exscuse as to why the game industry is hurting as blaming the pirates seems to be losing its momentum (see Hollywoods losing battle)

As an ex-player of both EQ1, EQ2, and WoW I believe that the competition that WoW adds to the MMORPG industry is extremely healthy and that those people who play this type of game genre do not typically fit the target audience that most single-player games tailor themselves to.

It will blow over.

[Quadfreak0]

What is the Slashdot opinion on World of Warcraft's impact on the gaming industry?

Its the current "hot shit" or flavor of the month, which means once the bulk of the players get through the game and get bored they'll quit. From what I've seen the Hardcore players are bored with PVE and the PVP.

Because it's blizzard and it's warcraft WoW got the attention of people who dont know/care about MMORPGs.

Will the rest of the industry suffer? YES, but hey the gaming industry is going the way of Hollywood. And its quite obvious that you can only make SOO many sequals.(although hollywood is limping on sequals)

The Solution is simple. Make Better(as in Fun to play) games. And dont be like EA

MMOG's of the future

[Jedi Binglebop]

WoW is still lacking in some areas. I've been playing it for a month. I have also played Saga of Ryzom for a few months, Anachy Online for two weeks, EVE for a month, and just had a few hours in Everquest II last night.

MMO games are going through a similar transformation that the internet went through back in the late 80s. There are a few MUD's I'm sure that would be fantastic and mature games if they simply had some cool glowing graphics effects and mouse clicky button things.

It's the success of WoW that will inspire a much higher standard in the genre in future. I'm personally interested to see what D&D Online will conduce. I have a feeling (it's in my right knee) that D&D Online and some other up and coming new releases will steal some of WoW's gamers away, but only if they "get it right".

I have another feeling the intial release date of some of the up and coming MMOG's will be set back to address the new issues that WoW has introduced.

MMORPGs are designed to take up huge splurges of time. A PC/Console game doesn't require an ongoing subscription so they don't have to slow everything down to make people continue to spend their dollars on something just to get their latest epic gear upgrade, etc.

Another advantage PC/Console games have is no lag, no server downtimes, no idiotic kiddies that attack your level 12 character with their level 60 just so they can laugh at you.

What it does mean though is a change in the thought process for games developers. I'm sure that this has already been happening for a little while, at least.

Are there any dev's who want to comment?

-JB

Scream more!

[vDiver]

What this really comes down to is that now that the media has found a great new target in computer/console games, and they've beaten down Grand Theft Auto (which I personally despise, but find the reaction to it in the mainstream silly), they need a new target!

World of Warcraft! OMG, they make billionz of bucks, they let you spend time playing a game, shoot - Blizzard will probably be accused of causing Katrina because the levy workers were busy playing it or something.

Every video game, EVERY ONE, is a fad. I happen to love WoW. That won't last. Nothing in the gaming industry does, nor should it.

Michael Pachter is an Idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out this quote in the last paragraph of page 2:

"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

What he's saying then, is that Chinese people have no sense of accomplishment, yet Americans and Europeans do? My my what a complete dolt. By that same token, can we also say the same about Americans and football?

This guy is pulling rabbits out of his ass. It'd be great if there were websites that tracked these industry "insiders" and their predictions, making them accountable for the trash that come out of their mouths.

WAAAAAHHHHH!

[Krater76]

I was going to play my violin for the games industry but it's so small I lost it. Oh well.

The next article will be: "School is back in and it is costing kids time to play games, up to 6 hours a day! And this doesn't even include other activities - like sports! Is that going to impact the sales of games?"

To be honest as a post-college working stiff, I like the fact that after 10 pm on weeknights the WoW servers are quiet and tolerable :)

WoW is to games what Windows is to OS

[NeedleSurfer]

WoW is good for the industry extremely good. Do you remember when Bill Gates explained that his software was half-working, not working as marketed and absolutely not stable because progamming an OS was hard, a huge job into which errors would be made (I really don't feel to go trough the web for a link to this story... sry)?

remember?

The fucking judge agreed so now its common practice to market stuff you just don't deliver, to ship non-working product, to sell extremely low quality product very expensively to consummers (in computing of course, where bad products are the norm). WoW is bringing that mentality to gaming. WoW is the single most despicable product to have hit my computer in years. Their servers are constantly down, the amount of bugs in the game is stagerring, dupe and exploit are used by wise-ass no-life players and Blizzard does nothing about it. This game is an EXTREMELY bad product. The game in itself is a load of fun, for real, leveling a character by making him run trough spots of creatures that look like they were painted on the landscape using a cloning tool, who aimlessly move about with no other purpose than being killed, is fun, experiencing great adventures trough a series of one paragraph text with multiple english errors which are fed to you each 15-20 creature killed is a blast, I'm sarcastic but this game truly is fun, for real, I especially like to PVP in the battleground, its just that you have to experience the rest of the game to fight in battleground, anyways, I challenge anyone here to spend 5 minute in the game without encountering at least one bug (creature placing themselves over you, they litteraly go trough you, you stand in the middle of them while the fight go on, so you have problem selecting yourself and it constantly tells you you are facing the wrong way, etc., telling you you are too far from a creature when you are hugging it, creatures dispearing after a stun just to see them reappear amidst their mob friend who will gladfully all jump on you... and so on and so forth), just that, 5 min.

Wow is a benediction to all game company, it is the new standard for whats acceptable as far as mediocrity goes in gaming, if hordes of morons can pay 15$ per month for that...

Re:WoW is to games what Windows is to OS

[Ou7k4st]

What game are you playing? Seriously! WoW has probably been my smoothest mmo experiance. Hint, try hitting F1 to select yourself, it works really well. I have never seen a mob warp either.

I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Kjella]

...I bought it just recently, already at lvl 11 of 20 max. Hitting max isn't the goal. What I like about it is the co-op with my friends. You can't be a one man tank, I could easily be beaten up by a group of level 3-4 monsters. And for the strong monsters, you *need* the cooperation.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[darrylo]

And for the strong monsters, you *need* the cooperation.

Definitely. On the "Thunderhead Keep" mission, going solo (with NPC henchmen) is NOT an option. Near the end of this mission, you're in a fort with two open gates, and two sets of catapults. Several groups of monsters attack the fortress, and you've got to defend it (actually, your goal is to keep a certain NPC King alive, and kill a nasty monster boss, but it basically amounts to defending the fort). Two groups of players have got to defend the two gates, two other players must man the catapults (one for each gate), and two other (player) monks have got to heal the players at the gates (well, the monks aren't strictly necessary, but they make this difficult mission much easier). You just can't do this mission without close co-operation (whereas many/most missions can be done solely with NPCs).

Guild Wars rules! ;-)

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Anonymous Coward]

I play guild wars because it's a huge game and has no monthly fee. Looks purdy too.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Anonymous Coward]

As do I, I really enjoy the game, but for me... I really can't afford to keep shelling out $15us a month for a game I play at most an hour a day.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's also one huge advantage of Guild Wars over WoW.... no subscription fee. That, and the good reviews (both consumer and commercial), were what prompted me to go get it. Something about paying a monthly fee for a game makes me uneasy... I hate feeling obligated to play. Now I've got it, I really appreciate the teamwork too... getting good at this game takes a long time.

ps. I'm on my 4th PvE character now, 3 are ascended. And Mesmers rock.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Dracil]

I guess you didn't see the one mank M/W builds soloing the Underworld (lvl 24/28 monsters if you haven't been there) pre-patch, and still occurs to some extent today, that were also capable of tanking like 40 or so normal melee monsters.

But I guess that's also a plus in that it shows the developers do make sure things remain balanced.

And of course, the two new areas that's coming out in the patch tomorrow is nice as well (but Blizzard adds content as well, so it's not that special).

That said, I enjoyed WoW when I was still paying for it. Can't beat the general immersiveness and established lore of the Warcraft world.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[Amit J. Patel]

Part of what I like about Guild Wars is that I don't need the CD in the drive, there's no annoying splash screen before I get into the game, and the game works very nicely (no weird glitches, graphics issues, etc.). It makes the game really quick to startup, so I end up playing it more.

Re:I much prefer Guild Wars...

[FeloniousPunk]

What I like about it is the co-op with my friends. You can't be a one man tank, I could easily be beaten up by a group of level 3-4 monsters. And for the strong monsters, you *need* the cooperation.

Sounds like WoW to me. Can't imagine someone soloing Lord Kazzak, for instance.

Maybe other MMORPG's, not single

[Brundylop]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't stand MMORPG's after a certain period of time. Of course, all of them are fun at the beginning, but I've found that the fun degenerates over time. Every time. WoW is no exception.

However, I've been playing my GBA and DS games forever, and haven't gotten bored of them yet. I just feel that MMORPG get "too same" after a while. I'm sure the single player games get boring after a while too, but it's easy to switch. What's stopping me from putting in a new CD/Cartridge in?

Games like WoW are a little harder to quit for me because I've spent so much time building up a character, and quitting makes me feel like I've wasted a lot of time and money.

But then, I'm not a heavy gamer, either.

WoW vs. Software Piracy

[Kormac]

I think the real question is will the success of WoW affect the piracy rate of games? =)

There's no way to play on Blizzard's servers without paying the monthly fee, and I know quite a few WoW players where WoW was one of their few legitimate purchases in a LONG time... and since they've started, they haven't bothered downloading any other "gamez"

Kormac

Re:WoW vs. Software Piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh but you can play on a server emulator. There are a couple out there. They are not complete but functional. But I much prefer the complete version Blizzard is offering. Now if the would hurry up and fix the traditional BBC(Blizzards' Beginner Coder) Bugs. Every time they patch one bug another pops up. Leave it to Blizz.

Re:WoW vs. Software Piracy

[patio11]

The fact that MMORPGs are a whole new revenue model for developers is one of the major reasons everyone and their dog tried to build one after the success of UO and Everquest. a) You're effectively immune to piracy of the monthly fee, even in markets where piracy *is* the market (hello, China) and b) you don't have to share 95% of the $15 a month with the publisher and Wal-Mart.

Oh cmon!!

[nEoN nOoDlE]

Boo hoo! We can't make a game that's better than out competitors! Let's complain about it! This is absolutely ridiculous. It should be obvious to anyone - especially people making games - that going to a monthly pay model with masively multi-player games will decrease the amount of games purchased, since people only use 1 or 2 monthly services of the same type, be it phone, gas, electric, car insurance, and internet. Did they suddenly think people are going to subscribe to 30 different game services?

Evolve or Die

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't adapt from the old you die
Nuff Said'

missing the point

[igotmybfg]

What kids are missing out on isn't other games; what they're missing out on is stuff like physical exercise, sports, and face to face interpersonal communications (i.e. real playtime with real people). Humans, and especially kids, are NOT meant to sit in a chair and stare at a computer all day long.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Anonymous Coward]

as a Java developer for the last 10 years

aha, so that's where the mythical "10 years of experience of Java" developer they ask for in job postings is! Wasting his time on MUDs!

FALLOUT 3

[Michael_Munks]

Maybe they should make a fallout three... Because it wasn't broken, so don't fix it. *a hem: Tactics*

Re:Change of Business Models

[lactose99]

I would have to add the Fallout series to the list of single player games with replayability. Well, Fallout 1 and 2, Fallout Tactics has too narrow a storyline and becomes somewhat redundant during replay.

The thing is, once you get enough single player games its easy for them all to be replayable. With as many PC games as I've collected over the years, I have a rather large library that I can cycle through. I've managed to play largely-linear games like the Myst series over and over again simply by putting it down for a year or two and then revisiting later. Perhaps I'm alone in this though.

Odd question

[jeffs72]

WoW certainly isn't the 1st game to be a huge time sink or be popular. Yes, it has the most subscribers to date, but the next big MMORPG will have more, it's just a snowballing growth rate is all.

Did UO reduce sales of single player games or keep people from playing other online games? Didn't for me, I played UO, AC, EQ, DAoC, CoH, EQ2 and now WoW. I still buy the occasional strategy game that is worth a shit (few and far between in my opinion).

I can't see any truth to the idea that WoW is stifiling the gaming industry. WOTC didn't stifle the gaming market the way everyone said it would with Magic, in fact, the open gaming license helped a lot of small time publishers put out good product that people felt comfortable purchasing

Maybe that's a bad analogy, but I can't think a big player in the game hurts everyone else (I actually think Microsoft has done a lot of good to the PC industry buy making computers main stream.

Does windows suck? Yeah, parts of it do.

Are there some outstadning open source alternatives? Definately.

Why?

Because pc's are common enough that just about anyone can go download a distro or development kit and write their own shit if they don't like what they see out there.

amen.

Pretty silly

[xihr]

This is a pretty silly, vastly oversimplified analysis. Yes, World of Warcraft is very poular. And yes, MMOs create a certain mindset where some players feel like they're not getting their money's worth if they're not playing as often as possible. But that hardly means that other games will seriously suffer. As for the Need for Speed example, duh, yes people will consider playing Need for Speed over World or Warcraft, because they're totally different games!

Even people who like MMORPGs and have an investment in a particular one which they like very much will still want to play other kinds of games. Come on, guys, be serious.

My day thus far

[Tekgno]

I awoke at approx. 1630 local time.
Start work, security as 1830
Get home 0700
Play Wow
Realise I don't have enough rest XP built up :P
Logout and check /.
Ooooh, something about WoW :D

Where do you get the time to play?!!

[hattig]

Wish I had the time to spend all that time playing games.

But instead I have to go and earn money, socialise in the real world, keep the house 'girl friendly', sleep ... I'm lucky if I get a couple of hours of gaming time a week, and by that time all I want to play is something extremely violent and gory. If I get too engrossed in a game I risk not getting enough sleep or getting into work late, which isn't good. I hardly ever watch TV, or have the time to read either. I do spend too much time online though, that's my vice I suppose.

WOW isn't the problem...

[beheaderaswp]

As somone else may have pointed out, the problem in the game industry is internal. Game quality has fallen, and in the MMO frenzy things like AI have been pushed to the side. I'd figure that the MMO scene is the catalyst for the problems in the game publishing world. Though it is also just a harbinger of change. After all, why create a game that you sell once for $50.00 when you can get $50.00 and a monthly stipend to boot.

What the heck is Wedbush Morgan?

[pagen]

This quote from the Times article just killed me. "It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense." Is this guy clueless or is it just me? What does a multi-billion industy have to do to get a little respect?

What do movies and TV do for people again? In games, we get the story, some escape, and we get a sense of accomplishment too. So what is Mr. Pachter trying to say?

I say stay tuned, keep playing and ignore Wedbush Morgan. They have no imagination.

EXCUSE ME????

[Peaker]

Why do I need Blizzard's permission to implement a server of a protocol?

EQ?

[Mike Markley]

Yeah, I remember a few years ago when EverQuest killed the game industry because of the monthly cost and time investment. As a result, there have been no innovative games since and the industry is dying.

Can I take my tongue out of my cheek now?

Not zero-sum

[captaineo]

I don't see how a popular, engrossing game can harm the industry as a whole. It's like saying Star Wars harms the movie industry, because Star Wars fans spend so much time enjoying the films. While it is true some gamers might spend time on WoW that would otherwise be diverted to other games, you also have to consider that WoW will entice more people to become gamers, and to give up non-game activities to play WoW.

With regards to MMORPGS in particular, WoW's dominance is a natural consequence of the network effect. All else being equal, people will prefer an MMORPGS with more players to one with fewer players. It's the same as in the operating system industry - people lament the lack of innovative alternatives to Windows and OSX, but they aren't willing to deal with the consequences of using a "minority" OS (e.g. lack of drivers and software). Game designers might lament their inability to crack WoW's market share, but that's just how things are.

Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it legal

[Sycraft-fu]

Game companies like to pretend like an EULA is a legally binding contract but it's not, at least not yet, and we want to keep it that way. With a real contract, there's an exchange, and that exchange is agreed upon beforehand. Like my bank and I agreed that they'd give me money to buy a house, and I'd pay it back on a regular basis, with intrest. Also contracts are open to negotiation, since it's prior to the execution of the transation, the sides can bargain. The other side doesn't have to accept what you want, but they have to consider it. Finally, there's a signature, a real proof that that you agreed and (in theory) read and understand the terms.

EULAs are all ex post facto. You have already done the exchange, money for goods, you get home, open the box, and all of a sudden they try to hit you with a contract. No, wrong answer. Teh sale is completed, you don't get to dictate terms to me. I mean what if I don't agree? Espically given taht stores don't accept returns on unopened software.

I mean look at it this way, what if I put a blatantly silly term in there like "By buying this product you agree to pay me $1000 per month for a period of 10 years." Obviously that's stupid, however it's a clause that could be in a real enforcable contract. Nobody would say it should be enforcable for a peice of software who's box you happened to open, however.

There's also just some common sense to it. People should not be required to read and understand a 10 page dense legal text to buy a simple consumer good. A toaster maker doesn't expect you to read a 10 page EULA for a $50 toaster, why should a $50 video game be any different? I mean hell, the lease I signed at my previous apartment was, literally, shorter than a normal EULA, and easier to understand, and this was an important document about matters of thousands of dollars and the place I was living.

Just because it's written in an EULA doesn't make it legally enforcable and SHOULDN'T make it legally enforcable. We do not want a world where peopel can spring supprise contracts on you after you've already bought something.

WoW Indicative of Youth

[divisivemind]

As a WoW and FFXI player, WoW squarely targets the ADD-prone younger generation of gamers. Sure, it has a slick interface and interesting plot, but the average 'grind' for EXP is mindless, short, and forces the player to travel around. Seems blizzard expects their audience to have the attention span and patience of a monkey. To boot, it doesn't even require you be semi-competent to be successful. The quest log all but tells you exactly where to go and what to and crafting is laughable.

No wonder the game is wildly successful! Blizzard did their homework and discovered the younger MMORPG crowd is attention deficient. My subscription ends this month. Flame on...

Re:WoW Indicative of Youth

[NBarnes]

A novel attempt to turn FFXI's worse-than-EverQuest mind-numbing XP grinds into a positive point in the game's favor.

Re:WoW Indicative of Youth

[divisivemind]

You must have played BRD or shitty DRG =P

Re:WoW Indicative of Youth

[Rhys]

Wait, you mean I don't have to spend 5 bajillion hours leveling up in order to find out I don't like the way a class plays at higher levels? I can PvP in multiple different styles any time from 20+?

The quest log is the best thing about the game practically. When I quit playing the game for a week because I need to be doing (work, wedding planning, or whatever else) and come back, why look it's all conviently arranged and remembered for me.

As for your subscription: less lag for me. Don't let the door hit you & such.

too much money

[GrayFox777]

Let me see... If I bought WoW and played it for a year, I would have spent 230 dollars on it. That's way too much! I'd rather buy other games instead. A game that charges $15 a month is not a game I want to play.

Everyone's playing Nintendogs anyway

[WillAffleckUW]

Heck, it was even in the comic strip Foxtrot this morning.

Me, I'm busy playing Sims 2: University. Yeah, I work at a university and I play a game about being at a university.

Now that is strange.

One would be better off asking why the success of Nintendogs, WoW, and Sims and so on isn't causing the industry to question why it keeps cranking out money-losing FPS games .... those are getting really out of tune, IMHO.

all i can say is HAR HAR

[timmarhy]

EA not so long ago was consuming other companys in borg like style, pumping out stupid games and still making a killing. And now they want me to cry them a river when someone is handing their own ass to them? when will these retards learn you don't have any kind of RIGHT to make money, you have to EARN IT.

Crappy Games

[Anonymous Coward]

I am paying for WoW. And they are right, I don't feel inclined to buy the latest game out there. But the reason is not because of WoW. It's because the inudstry is crapping out a million shitty games. Need For Speed heh, If I had to play that game I'd be in need for speed too.
-MightyGiant

Do research analysts ever do more then research?

[Anonymous Coward]

From the article:

"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

I have a feeling this "research analyst for Wedbush Morgan" has never played a video game in his life.

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod Parent Up

If WOW isn't the problem... then should we peek?

[WillAffleckUW]

As somone else may have pointed out, the problem in the game industry is internal. Game quality has fallen, and in the MMO frenzy things like AI have been pushed to the side.

The other trend is to money-losing FPS MMO games. I'm not saying it's not a great recruiting tool for the Army (and I spent seven years doing it for real), but the falling game quality is highly correlated with that.

We need better stories and more balanced and progressive gameplay, not extra tech chrome.

Re:Not that big of a problem across the industry..

[maggoty]

Exactly my thoughts as well. I barely have enough time with my day to day life to find half an hour here or there to play a video game, and then I think i'd nearly rather do something else, although i do enjoy the occaisonal game now and then. I've found my g/f's Nintendo DS is perfect for this kind of thing. Pick up and play for 5 or 10 minutes at a time is my kinda thing. Plus I'd rather play a game that requires skill, rather than enormous amounts of time to get anywhere.

I've bought far less games since Eve-Online

[TheTiminator]

Personally, in the the year and half since I started playing Eve-Online (http://www.eve-online.com/ the only games that I've spent money on have been for PS2 or XBox. For PC gaming, Eve has satisfied all my gaming needs. I can jump for a quick half hour of missions or mining, or spend hours involved with team operations. The only other PC based games that I go to now and then is Flight Simulator or Empire Earth. And Eve is updated enough to keep it challenging and interesting.

Psychonauts seconded

[plagioclase]

I've been playing it recently, and I'm really impressed with just about every aspect of it. Apparently it isn't selling very well despite critical acclaim...very sad.

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[ScrewMaster]

Really should be called EUWEs ... End User Wallet Extractors.

doesn't affect the industry

[LinuxRulz]

Well congratulations on their success, but I don't believe it is really BAD for the industry. The thing is there are 2 kinds of gamers: those who are fan of mmorpg and the others. If you're like me, you've bought the game, played it some time and discovered it isn't your type of game, you're in the second category. The fact is a LOT of people don't like mmorpgs and get bored fast of them. The rest of the people are distributed amongst the mmorpg games. Sure there are a lot of people playing WoW. But there were also a lot of people playing Everquests and other mmo games. Except WoW is better(sorry for judging) and gained players from other rpgs (plus some new).

Even if there are a lot of wow players, people often play more than one game, so there is nothing to worry for game makers.

Don't play WoW, even though...

[DingoTango]

I am a D&D geek. The online MMORPGs simply never appealed to me. I am a computer gamer though, eagerly awaiting the fall release of Civilization IV. So, am I an anomaly or a member of the uncounted majority of non-MMORPG computer gamers?

Re:Don't play WoW, even though...

[Barlo_Mung_42]

"I am a D&D geek" ... "So, am I an anomaly or a member of the uncounted majority of non-MMORPG computer gamers?"

By definition, both.

Not a Problem for the Industry

[Jekler]

I strongly feel it's something the industry can ignore. WoW can only absorb players attention so long as it's the best alternative out there. Without regard to the time investment, the majority of players would immediately drop the game if something better came along that offered an experience more like what they're searching for.

Mind you, I'm not a WoW player, I was an EverQuest 2 player, but it's the same dynamic. As soon as Guild Wars came out, I dropped EverQuest 2 because Guild Wars appealed to me more. I think it's a mistake to talk about, and view it, in terms of an "investment". It's better viewed as "renting entertainment".

The simple fact is, as great and addictive as these games are, they've only scratched the surface of the possibilities. We don't play them because we're invested, we play them because there isn't a superior alternative. We play WoW for the same reason people played Pong; because that's all there was. But when Pac-Man came out, no one took a stand against it because they had invested too much time in Pong already.

To pro-actively handle a counter argument, that in MMOs you accumulate virtual goods which differs it from the Pong scenario, I disagree. Even with Pong you had accumulated something, actual experience in the game controls, but we were all willing to give it up to play the newer games.

English lesson: Blizzard is a single entity

[Anonymous Coward]

Blizzard is a single entity, and ought to be treated as such in standard American English.

e.g. "Blizzard is hurting the industry", not "Blizzard are hurting the industry".

You sound like a redneck hick.

IMHO the result will be positive

[kendoka]

WoW is a game that appeals to a lot of people who would not otherwise play computer games regularly, myself included. It gets people in the habit of gaming and interested in what else the gaming world might have to offer. Since I started playing WoW I've bought three other MMOs and one other computer role-playing game. In the end I still prefer to play WoW, but that is because it's a better game than City of Heroes or EQ2 (for me at least).

Any game that demonstrates the ability to draw people outside of the traditional gaming industry will inspire investors to start making games to interest those new groups.

Ultimately, the reason I don't play many other games is because they don't tend to hold my interest - that's the fault of the game designer, not WoW. Show me another game that can hold my interest with the broad choices of things to do, great graphics and music, and interaction with a large number of other players, and I'll go play that game too. (But I'd prefer that you wouldn't - my wife is peeved enough at me as it is =P)

Not for me

[Chris Snook]

I have ADD. I discovered gaming well after I developed ADD, which was in 2nd grade. I wish I'd discovered gaming earlier, as I strongly believe that watching television with commercial breaks 4 times every half hour had a profound impact on the development of my young brain. My parents thought video games would be bad for my development. When I discovered them by way of my exploration of computers, I found that I finally had a good excuse to concentrate on something for hours on end. Books couldn't do this, since the books in the elementary school library took me less than an hour to read each. I'd read 4 Boxcar Children books in a single night. Only video games could get me focused on something long enough to really block out distractions. This is often thought of as a bad thing, as a sign of addiction, but for someone with ADD, it's very therapeutic. I have no idea if it's therapeutic for the ADD itself, but it's a stress relief like none other, which is quite critical when you're the smartest kid in the class and you can't write more than two lines on your homework in 6 hours, and nobody knows why. (ADD without hyperactivity didn't exist in DSM-III, and DSM-IV wasn't out when they first tested me)

I was never addicted to gaming, but it was certainly my default. When in doubt, I played games. My parents thought it negatively impacted my schoolwork, because I was gaming while I was behind on my work. Of course, it wasn't really a choice between gaming and doing my homework, but rather a choice between gaming and sitting in front of the homework all night, maybe managing to write a few lines, if I was lucky. Of course, as I got older, I found other things to be doing with my time. Suddenly there were books long enough that I could only read one in a night. As I and my friends reached driving age, my well-meaning parents' ability to keep me at home when I was behind on my homework (which was pretty much all of the time) was sharply curtailed. There were friends to hang out with for hours learning about industrial music from. Girlfriends to spend hours on end with... ummm... talking... Having a default focus when I needed to settle down was no longer healthy.

Since then, I've never played a game for more than two weeks before putting it down for a long time or forever. A couple times a year I'll pick something up, usually something with a coherent single-player campaign, play it through, and then I'm done. As wonderful as gaming is to help me refocus, once I'm refocused, I want to do something else useful with that refreshed mental discipline, since it's so hard for me to come by, and there are so many things that need it.

I buy less games now

[Reapman]

I've stoped buying a lot of games, since games I buy now are a waste of money... I play an MMO (I don't play WoW, it's a good game, but invested too much time in FFXI) in my gaming time, so the only non MMO gaming I play now is stuff that I can pick up and play for 5-10 minutes here or there. But I don't think it will be the death of non MMO gaming... just like I'm sure FPS's like Doom took big chunks of profit from regular gaming, WoW and others will do the same, but just as we still have a lot of non FPS games, we will still have a lot of non MMO games.

It's definitely changed how I play

[RocketScientist]

I got WoW last November.

I haven't purchased another game since. I reinstalled and played HalfLife 2 for awhile, but that's about it. I've only played WoW. I have two characters (level 50 druid, level 60 warlock) with more time /played than I'd care to admit. It's saved me a lot of money. I've been cooking more and therefore eating better (eating out takes more time than cooking a good meal typically does) and spending less. All in all, WoW is saving me a lot of money.

Will I switch games? Probably not. I've got a time investement in WoW. I've got a social investment in my guild. Heck, I found out a guildie was local to me and appropriate for a job and got him hired for our helpdesk because I knew he was a straightforward easy to work with person based on my WoW experiences with him.

Will I play a single player game again? I've got a PSP for when I'm on the road. So, not bloody likely. I'm looking forward to an expansion, the next patch, and getting my hunter leveled up on a PvP server.

I'm playing WoW right now on my PC while I read this on my Mac Mini.

Am I typical? Dunno, hit the reply button and tell me.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[idesofmarch]

I do not know if you are typical, but I am really surprised you are playing past 60. Once I hit 60, I just had this epiphany about how pointless it all was and how I should be spending my time trying to get real life loot instead of that staff of omnipotence or whatnot.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[patio11]

Ditto, WoW has murdered my spending on computer games. I've been playing it since launch, which means I've made about three quarterly payments now, right? I haven't bought another real computer game since HL2 came out. I did resubscribe to Puzzle Pirates though, mainly to play Hearts. Haven't bought a new console game in months, either (although I did buy a DS for train rides and have half beaten Kirby and DS Wars). WoW isn't really a huge monetary commitment (I mean, the monthly subscription is cheaper than a night's entertainment doing almost anything -- heck, where I live I can scarcely get dinner and a soda for $13), but it has a way of sucking up your prime gaming hours. I see new RPGs at the shop as I'm biking by and do the mental calculation "Nope, I don't have 60 hours to spend on that, I only have about 6 hours a week of gaming nowadays and WoW gets at least 4 of those".

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, I found out a guildie was local to me and appropriate for a job and got him hired for our helpdesk because I knew he was a straightforward easy to work with person based on my WoW experiences with him.
NO FUCKING WAY- I hope your boss cans you when he finds out. That is the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[LincolnQ]

Really? I hit 60 a couple weeks ago and I like the game a lot more now. It's less, I dunno, 'stressful' (in that I don't feel forced to play and level up), and more fun, because I can hold my own against other level 60s (who used to gank me all the time) and beat them.

I can also play with my friends, who have been 60 for months, and do Dire Maul and pvp with them and stuff. I find that the game is a lot more chill now, and still very interesting.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[LincolnQ]

Hiring someone based on your experience with them in a game doesn't sound at all unreasonable to me. If you interview someone in real life, that's maybe half an hour of talking to them and trying to determine if they're suitable for the job.

When you play with them in a game, although you're not discussing the specific task in question, you are getting to know how well you work with them. In a 5man instance, over perhaps 2 hours, you are probably able to get to know them a hell of a lot better than in that 30 minute interview.

You can also observe how they work with others and how well they listen, and so forth. Do this several times over the course of a few months and you can get a pretty good picture of the person, which is a significant portion of what an interview helps to determine.

I would still interview them, however, because you really want to talk specifically about the job in question and make sure that they know what they're talking about. But in terms of getting to know them in terms of their personal qualities, I honestly can't imagine doing anything better than playing a cooperative game with them.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Kineel]

I played EQ from Day one, and as a result, I didn't buy any other games for over a year. It saved me a lot of money, considering that I'd spend $40/month pretty easily on games.

WoW hasn't held me as close as EQ did, but I still buy a lot fewer games. I find that I MUST see a lot of innovation in a new game before I will consider it. I no longer buy every piece of eye-candy that comes out.

Hopefully the rest of the market is getting smarter about buying.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[FeloniousPunk]

It's been my experience too. I haven't bought or played another game since getting into WoW.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[SinVulture]

Great, now I just need to find someone in my guild who's hiring nearby for a high paying job.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Anonymous Coward]

How old are you? Get real!

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[RocketScientist]

Yeah, we interviewed the heck out of him. I set up a real life meeting before I recommended him in, my boss interviewed him for 2 hours. Standard stuff. It's just a foot in the door is all, another social networking thing.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Landazar]

Don't worry, after you run through that Dire Maul 20 times, Strat 20 times, and every other instance in the game over 20 times you'll see how less interesting it becomes. (Usually takes about a month or two if you do a few a night) I was walking to Dire Maul on my last day with some friends when I realized I didn't want to do this crap anymore, the pulling, the single button attack/heal pressing, the status bar watching, the shard farming (I was a warlock with an alt priest) so I quit right then and there. Took about a month after hitting 60, ran the instances enough times to have 6/8 things of the set. (Probably around 80 hours after level 60) At that point you either cut down your time to eliminate staring/posting at a LFG channel and taking forever to find a group when you login, or wait around till new content comes out. (every two months) 1-60 = new spells, new places to see, new quests to do, new spells and abilities and crafts 60 = never ending quest for new clothes that, unless you're a plate or find a weapon, typically aren't *that* much better than your old clothes.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, you've got a thing for the unpopular classes, so I guess that makes you atypical right there. The two least-played classes in WoW are Druids and Warlocks, and you've got both.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[llevity]

I agree, the end game leaves something to be desired. Levels 1-59 were great. It's really hard for me to get motivated to go do these instances for set gear, when all this gear is going to help me do is... what? Be better at doing the same instances for the rest of my gear? I already hold my own well enough in PvP, so a slight edge isn't really motivation.

Besides, you get all your gear, and then what? Go for the next tier, that requires an even larger investment of time, and a larger raid group?

Don't get me wrong, some of the armor sets look cool, and have interesting bonuses. I really like the ones that lower a cooldown on some ability, or make some ability more powerful, kind of like a talent point or two does.

It's just there's very little motivation to get it, because once you get it, then what? At least levels 1-59, you look forward to better gear to help you level more effectively, look forward to new spells for new tricks, etc.

Maybe some of this would be allieviated somewhat if the PvP was better. Both battlegrounds at the moment don't really require much strategy. You can win if you can convince everyone to stick together and attack the same target. It's the classic zerg.

Having said all that, however, I am still playing. Since levels 1-59 are what I enjoyed the most, I have several alts. It's fun playing with different classes abilities and strategies, and is probably making me a better PvPer in the process, as I'm learning everyone else's tricks first hand.

I imagine I'll get bored at some point, but for now, I'm still hooked despite all my grievances.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Zed2K]

I hit 60 a long time ago but you know what I did? Rolled a completely different character. Take a different path in doing the quests. Now I have a level 60 paladin and a 55 priest and a 22 mage. I haven't even tried the other classes yet nor have I tried the horde side. There is still a ton to do in the game after you hit 60.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[CFTM]

Same thing happened to me, accept I got bored at level 20 :p

Blizzard is still making money off me though, I should really cancel my acct....

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[ildon]

I've done MC over 20 times and I still want to keep playing. I never got full devout set. It sucks anyway. Not going for full Transcendence or Prophecy either. Just playing to have fun with my friends, and maybe challenge my skills sometimes. Maybe that's what you were missing.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Landazar]

Yea, I had several alts too horde and alliance. I had played every character type except mage to at least 30. (Seemed like a warlock without a pet, constantly begged for water/portals, not interested)

PvP the way the game is made can't be much better... The click/wait no collisions style gameplay doesn't work that great for pvp. Maybe for some, but not if you come from a FPS or even an RTS background that have real pvp and strategy.

If they could nail that endgame they'd really have other companies worried.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Landazar]

Yea, I levelled a priest and warlock concurrently to 60 doing basically completely different quests and zones. When I almost hit 60 with both I started a druid and shaman on horde side got them to the mid 30s, and a few characters (pvp rogue/warrior). Horde is basically the same, it's fun to see Origrimmar and Undercity, fun to play though their low level instances, see the morons on Barrens chat. It's all basically the same boring quests/grind again, unless you're playing with a friend(s).

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Landazar]

Yea, I went to MC about 40 times with one character over 2 months, and a few times with an alt I levelled to 60, I played though all of the high level instances too many times to count. (enough to ALMOST a full tier 1 set for both and better dire maul pieces than the full set to make up for it)

Yea, there's a point where the game burned me out, especially as a healer or caster, clicking the one same button, watching the same bars. There's no skill for 95% of a 40(10/15) man raid, only during the boss fights and then it's typically a kill them/keep the killers alive before you run out of mana or potions challenge.

Oh I had all that, I don't think I was missing anything, I'm really amazed at the guilds that go as far as Blackwing.

Re:It's definitely changed how I play

[Landazar]

The money really was nothing though, $15 a month? I spend that in a few days in gas/lunch almost now. It was more the fact that if I'm paying for it or have an active account I feel obligated to play. I've got so much time now I don't know what to do with. ;)

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[deathy_epl ccs]

Anyways, enough rambling .. game designers, get to work, and PLEASE go back and look at MUDs that have stood the test of time.

I don't think the designers are the real problem here... Raph, for example, was a long-time MUD geek before he got involved with UO. I think the real problem is those that look at the bottom line...

Sounds like what you'd really dig would be a Neverwinter Nights that has more depth and capability.

They get my dollars, nobody else does.

[supabeast!]

Since WoW came out I've purchased two new games. I used to buy that many in a slow month. I look at it as a money saver - for $15 a month I get a lot more gaming in then I ever get out of most games I pay $50 for.

On a related note, Everquest always had the potential to do this, but the horrible sever instability in the first few years of the game meant having to keep other games on hand for all the server downtime.

WOW OW!

[sahilsinha]

WoW hurts my wallet and my soul. While I understand the business model that has been implemented in wow and other mmorpg's and even understand why I have to pay for it every month, I still hate it. WoW was the first game that made me take the plunge into monthly payments, and as a consumer I am not satisfied. The game is beautiful and entertaining (one quest that was entirly underwater blew me away), however its still the same thing over and over. I dream of a mmorpg that allows the players to have a greater control of the world they inhabit. Imagine guild generated quests and items. I could continue to gripe about the problems with wow but I have to level.

Re:Not a new phenomenon: I did this with Starcraft

[Anonymous Coward]

But the key here is that WoW also has a monthly fee that would have potentially gone to other games. StarCraft only had one expansion, and was never (is never) a monthy fee.

WoW's impact on open source software?

[AGTiny]

A couple of the developers on an open source project I'm involved in are big-time WoW addicts now. I wonder if there are many devs out there on various projects who now prefer to spend their free time gaming instead of coding?

Just remake the damn game

[ahbi]

Seriously, just remake the damn games.
Update the graphics. Move some things behind the scenes (make turn based RPGs pseudo-real time, by not showing the turn changes). Copy all the dialog, maps, etc.

I would love to play some of the RPGs and Simulations (X-Wing/Wing Commander) hits from the 80s/90s on my 2000s system.

Look how well Prince of Persia did and that was a total remake. It would take less people to remake X-Wing, Warcraft I, Balder's Gate, etc. The foundation and structure of a hit game are already there, just replaster the walls and slap some new paint on.

Re:Just remake the damn game

[buckthorn]

I agree completely. Reading all of this makes me nostalgic for the X-Wing/B-Wing/Tie Fighter series. I loved that series and it would be perfectly playable now. The thing I hate is that really GOOD concepts get lots in the "It's been done before" bin.

Better graphics, better sounds, a better physics engine, all would be wonderful to see in a remake of X-Wing. But ffs just give me the gameplay.

oh yes, the inevitable

[geekoid]

IF's been diouing MUDs since x and they were better" post.

well, I did muds a very long time ago, and they sucked. Do you know why? Player created content. 99.9 % of which suck-diddly-ucked, Flanders.

Look at Biowares player added content..SUCKS. Maybe one out of a thousand moduals is really worth a damn.

OTOH it would allow for yet another giant module re-creation.

Re:oh yes, the inevitable

[cpu_fusion]

Well, I certainly saw a number of MUD zones that were based on Marvel comics, Smurfs, or someone's inside joke. Yeah, people can create crap with player created content; no question.

Of course, professional game designers can shovel out crap too. I've spent hard money for EQ expansions that frankly should not have seen the light of day.

Key ways to counter this
1) allow players to vote on which content they enjoy and make sure that content is more prominently "linked" into the world. Players will filter out the crap;
2) provide good building blocks;
3) smartly limit what is possible.

Seriously, would you prefer the world wide web was centrally administered simply because something like Geocities could exist?

Re:oh yes, the inevitable

[FeloniousPunk]

Seriously, would you prefer the world wide web was centrally administered simply because something like Geocities could exist?

I think that is an exceptionally poor analogy. The WWW is too broad in scope and too general in purpose to compare to something like a game.
I have to agree with the parent, after having played NWN for some time: player created content really sucks. I kept looking and looking for diamonds in the rough to crop up eventually and make that game worth it. Never happened. Even the good stuff fell far short of a mediocre effort by a dedicated developer. I think this underestimates the effort it takes to make game settings that are as immersive and interesting as what you can find in a game like WoW.

I ran out of mod points

[Anonymous Coward]

Just when I needed them.

OK, not sure what happened there.

[geekoid]

I think someone slipped something into my shake.

lets try again:

  "I've been doing MUDs since x and they were better" post.

well, I did MUDs a very long time ago, and they sucked. Do you know why? Player created content. 99.9 % of which suck-diddly-ucked, Flanders.

Look at Bioware's player added content..SUCKS. Maybe one out of a thousand modules is really worth a damn.

OTOH it would allow for yet another giant module re-creation.

Balldy on WoW

[sl4shd0rk]

(Enter Dexter in MegaCorp Games)
Dexter: "Bad news sir."
Balldy: "Just tell me it's not WoW."
Dexter: "Sorry sir. They've logged another 10,000 players. I'm afraid they've cut our user base again."
Balldy: "I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill WoW."

Re:English lesson: Blizzard is a single entity

[Bogtha]

Blizzard is a single entity, and ought to be treated as such in standard American English.

That might be true for American English, but don't try and foist your Yank oddities onto somebody who is actually English. American English differs from proper English in a number of ways, this being one of them.

You sound like a redneck hick.

You sound like an ignorant American.

I can tell you it seriously damaged me

[Anonymous Coward]

I can tell you it seriously damaged me, I can't go outside and deal with jiggly polygons without pinching my helmet.

Got bored

[ninjakoala]

First I played during the open beta and then I started a new character. I only got to around level 17 when boredom set in though. The game just felt like a chore. Then I tried Guild Wars and after a while that felt like a chore too.

Then I tried Anarchy Online (which you can play for free at the moment) and so far I'm hooked. The storyline is pretty cool and people actually have an effect on it. Plus it has a very social side to it with in-game DJs, parties and so on. It's very hard to get into (steep learning curve), but very rewarding when you figure things out. It's the only game I start on my PC these days. The graphics aren't as great as WoW or GW, but the gameplay and role playing elements are awesome.

And they don't deserve it!

[NotQuiteReal]

Bunch of good-for-nothing video zombies!

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[steelfood]

While I don't think contribution of content to the game by the players is a wise idea at all (besides the inherent security risks, few would actually want to contribute to a game they paid for without due acknowledgement, something that a company cannot legally offer if the content actually goes into the game), you do make a very good point. Changing the game every so often will contribute to the game's longevity. By changing, this can mean anything, from new places to explore, new items, new features, to even new mini-games.

Gaming companies have been doing this, to a certain extent. However, they have always released them as expansion packs that people have to buy. This fragments the community, as some people will inevitably buy the expansion, and some will not. Repeated fragmentation will eventually lead to the downfall of the MMORPG, as the player base is really what makes a MMORPG. The key is to force updates on everyone. It is safe to assume that anyone playing something like WOW will have broadband. By periodically releasing patches that add content, this continously freshens the game, keeps it interesting. Somewhat aside, not all new content needs to be done client-side either.

Psychologically, people will tire of a game eventually. That's how it is. And more often than not, they take some of their RL (Real Life) friends with them when they leave. To attract new members into the community, it is important to do a significant name change. Name changes, subtle or not, (and box/title artwork redesigns along with it) after a major patch that changes the game significantly would make the game sound new. There will be a little confusion, but good customer service policies can satisfy the people who bought the same game twice, once under a different name.

Finally, there are several drawbacks to long-running MMO games, especially MMORPG's, that will also prevent the attraction of new players. Uber-high level l33t characters might bully the n00bs and discourage them from playing. People might also want to go back, and be discouraged by the need to rebuilt their character from the ground up. Items of great rarity or very rare unique items might already have been found, leaving the newer gamers with no hope of ever getting any prized item. There are many ways to fix these, especially if the game is continuously getting updated with new content or features for the latter issue.

Oh yes, as for money, well, a new release of a game or an expansion will create a quick infusion of a large amount of money. However, putting money into maintaining a fanbase is nowhere as risky or as expensive as completely redesigning a game from the ground up. In fact, if done right, it could almost be like releasing a new game every so often, but with the same graphics and sound engines (with a few bug fixes and internal updates perhaps), and with the added advantage that new gamers get all the features of the old game, and old gamers get to keep whatever they've built up.

Anyway, it's a little off topic, but these are my thoughts on how to make a MMORPG last for a long time. As I'm typing this last bit, I have in my head Highlander. In the end, there can be only one...

THe point is

[geekoid]

Should BLizzard be able to force you to do what they want with the game you have purchased?
Sure they can put it into there EULA, but that does NOT make it so.

I acn sell hammer and make you sign a piece of paper saying you will only use it with 10 penny nails. If I tried to get a court to stop you from using it on panel nails, I'd be laughed out of court.

Re:THe point is

[orkysoft]

Alright, now try the same trick with inkjet cartridges...

Re:THe point is

[geekoid]

with a 10 penny nail or panel nail?

I don't really understand the question here. Try what, using the inkjet for some other purpose then the manufatured intended? OK, I doubt I'll get taken to court if I decide to do something beside put them in a printer.

WoW vs NWN (or Corporate vs Community)

[RogueOne]

To me the only serious competitor to WoW is NWN, but then I'm an old skool RPG geek (AD&D PnP steez)

WoW, kick butt on the graphics front
NWN, allows you to create your own content and the community that has evolved surrounding this is amazing!

WoW: buy the game and sell and little of your soul every month for subscription to their servers
NWN: Buy the game and get free access to any of hundereds of FREE servers worldwide

Re:WoW vs NWN (or Corporate vs Community)

[NBarnes]

NWN is hardly 'competition' for WoW in the sense that the original article had in mind. I'm sure you like it and it is a very nifty piece of meta-gaming software, but... I don't think sheer force of advocacy will make NWN a meaningful comparison to WoW.

Re:WoW vs NWN (or Corporate vs Community)

[RogueOne]

Agreed... NWN2 however will be one to watch on this front....

Re:WoW vs NWN (or Corporate vs Community)

[Anonymous Coward]

NWN has turned into an amazing game due to all the player created content, but IMHO it isn't the same thing as MMPORGS like EQ and WOW.

That takes nothing away from it - in many ways I find it *more* fun than either of those two. And it runs native on Linux! But it just ain't quite the same sort of beast to be called a real competitor.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[klept]

You seem like a dedicated gamer, and I have had great fun playing with "real" gamers. The reason why EQ and City of Heroes blew it is because they drove away all the good gamers.I've heard this first hand about EQ, and observed it myself on COH. Haven't played WOW yet, but from what understand, they haven't missed a step. As for COH, it has now mostly a bunch of idiots that dont have the first conception of team play. In short they are mostly a lot of wining babies, and will get flamed for this, plenty of them are stupid broads. How do I know they are girls/ women? Because they seem more interested in making a connection, like exchanging phone numbers or email addresses. And most of them have problems that you could really care less about. After all the game is suppose to be to have fun, not play Psychiatrist. Wonder if the Sims has a psychology character?

QfG2 Remake

[DrYak]

Sierra On-Line didn't do it themselves.
But Anonymous Game Developers (formerly known as Tierra), a group of highly motivated fans, are working to make one.

They already made 256 color remake of King's Quest I (Sierra did only remake the old AGI [160x200 16col] to SCI 16color. No 256 point'n'click color) and King's Quest II+ (with additional content, hence the +). Both game are available free for Download.

Note though, that these remakes don't use Sierra's old SCI engine, but with Adventure Game Studio engine. Therefor, you won't be able to play them on whatever hardware you want with FreeSCI, you only have a less versatile binary-only interpreter for Windows and Linux.

Sierra did also 256 color remakes of Larry 1, Space Quest 1 and Police Quest 1.

Re:Comparing WoW players to need for speed players

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm posting anonymously because I don't want to get anyone in trouble, but... from what I hear (from people on the team, no less), most of the Need for Speed developers play WoW and take great pride in their level 60s :)

Re:English lesson: Blizzard is a single entity

[Anonymous Coward]

Typical European collectivist mindset at work, subtly working its way into the language itself.

The United States is the dominant superpower on the planet, and this site is owned and operated by a US entity. It is not unreasonable to expect standard American English to be adopted as the standard form of communication in such a forum.

You also may want to consider brushing your teeth on occasion, while you're at it.

I agree

[AsmordeanX]

On average I purchase about eight games a year. Roughly one every six weeks or so.

Between November 2004 and May 2005 I played WoW. I didn't buy a single title in that time. Infact didn't do much beyond keep my seat warm. I invested just over 1100 hours of my life into WoW which I enjoyed for the most part but grew bored and quit.

Since I have quit I have already purchased two games and there are a few titles coming up that I will buy as well.

More power to Blizzard

[skingers6894]

As a Mac user I have always been impressed with Blizzard. Some of the greatest games of all time and all available as dual format Windows/Mac.

Congratulations on their WOW success.

Wait, did we miss something?

[Bhasin_N]

"Cut into buying across the industry" ?
Huh?
Is it just me or isn't there some terrible assumption here?

Since when has "cutting into buying" been something to worry about???

Do we complain about Ipods "cutting into buying across the industry" ??

Did I miss the sign which says "donate to EA"?

Real fear? They're scared? That people wont buy their game? Why? Because your game is NOT as good as WoW?
Is the industry admitting that their products are not competitive?

And this fear, is being reported as "helping or hurting the industry"?
Wow, it sounds like I'm reading the painful part of an Ann Rand novel. ?

Is it just me, or is this being reported in the same tone and style used to report "threats"?

A real fear we might bungle up laying gas pipes.
A real fear that WoW will cut into buying across the industry.

How are we tolerating such reporting?!

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting post, but I'm guessing most people just want to play the game and don't want to bother making a game themselves. You're certainly in the minority.

Also, the Java language wasn't release to the world ten years ago, you liar.

Not impressive

[biraneto2]

Being #1 MMORPG of the world may be not impressive at all. It's due to the great success of the WoW series instead of the game being the best game ever. Others like ragnarok online were much more impressive since they got their fame from scratch. MMORPGs are around for some time already... I really think WoW online is much more like a fever and will not last long, like most games do.

30 hrs a week

[NFNNMIDATA]

Aside from losing sleep, I also have missed out on about 4 or 5 FPS games I normally would buy that have come out since WoW. Maybe the clearance bin will have 'em when I finally escape...

Re:30 hrs a week

[NFNNMIDATA]

Oh yeah, and also me and my roommate would normally have already started playing Madden '06 but thanks to WoW we can't even be bothered to buy it...

No New Games Since WoW

[ZebadiahC]

I havent purchased any new games in the past 6 months simply because I have spent my limited gaming time on WoW and don't have the time to try new games. (havent seen anything that great anyhow.)

And three more cheers for Blizzard and their continued support for the Mac Platform!

Re:Not a new phenomenon: I did this with Starcraft

[Simon Garlick]

I did this with Starcraft, with Diablo 2, with Warcraft 3.

Moral? Blizzard makes fantastic games that people want to play.

Burn them!

800 pound Gorilla indeed.

[Toaster Assassin]

I believe that WoW has turned into the 800lbs gorilla. I am a retired player, and this game is absolutely amazing. The addiction is an avalanche. You begin playing for free, and the beginning area is very nicely set up. Quests build and story line develops. By then you have played for your free month, and you have been leveling fast so you pay for another 6 months. Now that you have forked out nearly 150 bucks for the game and playing time you feel obligated to play. You play partly because the game is awesome, and partly because of the expense. Then you get better and better, and the story line gets worse. Quests no longer build up like they did (for players see Deadmines with Van Cleef, and then later on with Scarlet Monestary). The first takes about 6 quests to finally get to the final one, where you take on Van Cleef himself. Then by the time you are in your mid to late 30s you go on to Scarlet Monestary and you get one quest linking to the whole thing. The prediction is by this point you are involved in your character and arn't as worried about story line (true for some, not for me). Once you hit the legendary level 40 you have it all, a mount making pvp a lot easier and more fun, because you have an escape and can catch others with ease. For me (and a friend) this died off at about level 42, where we were then happy with how much pvping we had accomplished and wanted to return to leveling. At this point it took far to long to level (another scheme at making you play for extended lengths of time for little gain). The only way to level at this point was to run instances (dungeons for the non players) and grind (mindless killing). This got old... and for some it may be interesting; for me, my 6 month was almost up and I was exhausted. So for 7 months blizzard made 150 dollars off me alone. Now once one hits level 60 there is a lot more of getting no where fast. My guildie had played a total of 50 ish days (game time)and was still playing. Blizzard is continuing to make money off of him... So all in all for 7 months I purchased no other game... but Blizzard made money throughout. Pick whether its hurting or helping the gaming industry, either way WoW is a big Gorilla, quite possibly a 850 lbs gorilla.

Re:800 pound Gorilla indeed.

[boogy nightmare]

Try playing Kingdom of loathing (at www.kingdomofloathing.com) instead, its cheap browswer based (no installs) with a massive communitiy and play ID's hitting 650k. You can pay via donations to the game (which gets you accessto some awesome objects).

I play this at home/work and its an intense game.. plus you can never finish it, great pvp etcetc..

And funny.. forget about it..

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Danny Rathjens]

Java was developed in 1991 by James Gosling and other Sun engineers, as part of the Green Project. After first being made public in 1994, it achieved prominence following the announcement at 1995's SunWorld that Netscape would be including support for it in their Navigator browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_programming_lang uage

Wake-up Call

[Feral Bueller]

Ultimately I think it's good for the industry, if they're willing to pay attention and learn:

1. Leverage your existing franchise(s)
2. Public Beta=Good.
3. The customer is more important than the publisher.

Last but not least, and this is one that game manufacturers miss all the time: release the game simultaneously on Windows and Mac OS: any game that is multi-player benefits from this.

Some manufacturers get this and their sales and customer loyalty reflect it.

Help Save the Industry-Play Guild Wars Instead!

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer GW's better quality graphics and story and FREE online play.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

Yeah yeah, I originally got interested in Java when the first betas showed up on Sun's website in part because I'd seen such interesting things done with another virtual machine, the LPC VM that is part of LPMud. I knew that virtual machines had some solid advantages when it came to server security, and I see that is where Java has planted its roots most deeply.

gorilla because they made a good game ?

[bxbaser]

Or is it the game industry thinks we will mindlessly buy whatever they put out ,unless we are paying a subscription.
Maybe make a good game with some depth.

Remember when you would buy a game and play it for 6 months+.

Want a game to get immersed in.
http://www.supremeruler2010.com/

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

Yes I know Raph started out with MUDs, but his attitude towards players expressed on his personal website led me to believe he saw them as sheep rather than an important creative resource. I went looking around to tread up on his background after experiencing the horror of Star Wars Galaxies post-launch, and frankly I was unimpressed.

He seemed more worried about analyzing the player community to manipulate it for his ends than harnessing it for the player's ends. Proper respect to him and all for earning a living designing games, but ... I won't play another of his games again. Simply not enough "power to the people" and way to crappy an attitude towards the players.

That's why MUDs were great -- you sank in enough time, you typically got to a point where you could affect the world in a dynamic way; be part of the administration; be a god of some portion of the world. Players actually had some power; they could obtain the ability to affect the game in ways that were typically left to designers.

Now the crafting system in SWG was nice, and I understand about the player housing in SWG and EQ2, but I have yet to see a Sony game that lets players expand the world in ways that text MUDs provided in the early 90s.

It can be done; it can work; but it takes some faith in the players and I don't see that in Raph.

And yeah, I did explore NWN and its scripting system but you have to do memory-snooping to make it a distributed, persistent world. Online games DMing with a group of RL friends is fun and all, but the joy of mudding was meeting strangers and playing with 100s (or 1000s) of people. NWN isn't the game for that.

Re:Comparing WoW players to need for speed players

[Shtonkalot]

Fair enough, But how many developers play there own games? Serious question I have only known one person on a development team and his product never saw the light of day because "the game sucked".

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

Before Java was available in Netscape's browser, you could get it off the Sun website. It ran in a browser supplied by Sun (written, interestingly, in Java). There were a few demo applets, the sorting one is the one I recall. I think it may still be part of the JDKs. An engineer at Control Data showed it to me and I thought, gosh big deal, LPMud has had a VM for a long time.

Then I got asked to write an applet to do calendaring in Java on the client, and the whole time I thought, "gosh this is a buggy crappy client-side GUI toolkit." It did NOT work the same across platforms. AWT was a steaming pile of dung. And funny thing is, it never improved. Enter Swing and now SWT, and Java is finally ready for the client side.

It's funny as a consultant talking to companies about working in Java for 10 years and they are usually highly skeptical. That's ok though, it wasn't worth much back then anyways and the language has changed so much since then, I don't think those extra years of experience are worth anything anyhoo.

(Now if only I'd bought some Sun stock back then and sold it in 2000. ;)

I used to play Counter-Strike...

[gknoy]

...until I became addicted to World of Warcraft. :)

For at least two years, I tended to rate games by the "Counter-Strike Factor": Is it more fun for me to play this, or would I rather just play Counter-Strike?

KOTOR: Totally more fun than CS. I played it 3 times through straight. That was about the only one, though, that I can think of.

I really enjoyed playing CS, at first, when I had a good server to play on (the "CDMA data" test server someplace in San Diego). Then, condition zero came out and the server disappeared (from 1.6 lists too)... and it was a struggle to find servers that I liked to play on. Playing with strangers isn't much fun.

At first, CS was very hard. The learning curve is VERY steep. Often, skilled players will do so well that it seems that they are cheating. (Sometimes opponents ARE cheating, which sucks. ;))

I was at the point where I was better than most n00bs, but no where NEAR as good as any of the guys on the pro / amateur league circuits. It could be fun, but other times it was a dreary slog of trying to find a server that wasn't either full of cheaters, full of retards, or WAY above my skill level. :)

WoW seems to require less skill... it's very easy, i hear, to solo to 60. I'm almost there (59!), but play mainly with guildmates. Grouping with others to do hard quests is where the skill and comraderie comes in -- you learn to work well together, etc ... *shrugs*.

If I weren't playing WoW, I'd be playing CS:Source, probably, or Battlefield2. In WoW, though, I seem to have more fun.

Waiting for groups SUCKS. Traveling sucks, in that I sometimes wish I could put on autopilot. However, there are still moments where I am running through a pretty lower level zone (Feralas) and get warm fuzzies.

Is it me, or do the zones seem to get uglier as you level up? :D

Once upon a time...

[Dputiger]

I actually played other games on the PC, and quite a few of them. Since WoW launched, the only other game I've played and beaten was Half Life 2.

If that's indeed indicative, than yes, the game industry may have a problem. ;) Until WoW, I'd never been hooked on a game this long.

It runs on my mac AND came out at PC release time!

[Xenious]

you can't beat that! Mac users got a game the same time as PC users and it was done by the same devloper. yea blizzard!

Aw, man

[Anonymous Coward]

I love the XP system in Wolf:ET. It's really cool earning your dual pistols from mastering small arms, or getting faster at difusing landmines if you engineer for a while.

Doesn't subtract from your point however, it takes a few minutes to get promoted, not a few weeks.

Biased survey

[BubbaJonBoy]

Everyone that I know playing WoW is barely cognizant of the outside world anymore - so this survey is biased to say the least because WoW players are simply unavailable at the moment for such mundane things as reading /.

I think it does take away some $ spending on other

[Anonymous Coward]

Never really had a chance to play WoW or any other online RPG lately, but from my own experience w/ other MMORPGs such as EQ, DAoC, they were definitely a time and money sink. Couldn't even play both of them effectively simultaneously. Before starting and after stopping playing EQ and DAoC, I was spending more on other games than I was during. Can't really speak for the general gaming population but I think my point is clear enough.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[slithytove]

Excellent post.

I agree with everything you said. I do think there is a place for player-created content, but the framework in which it's built needs to be more comprehensive and specialized. You can't expect players (in general) to produce professional-level content, but you can, for instance, give them the tools to provide jobs/quests/missions for other players. You have to give them an in-game motive for doing so, and the kind of economy that allows them to provide the reward. And above all, you need a cutting-edge, friend-of-a-friend reputation system to allow the good stuff to rise to the top, and the abuse/crap to be quickly filtered out.

And, as you said, if you're going to take the time to build such a game, and accumulate good player content, it should be built to last, and updated often without additional cost. Luckily, there are at least a few people who get this, and are doing something about it. I work for a small company with a released (but never done) MMO called Vendetta Online. Check it out

Naw not a huge problem

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow is an 800 lb gorilla for about 20 played days. Then the reality of all MMO's starts to sink in, you can play 40 hours a week every day and still not be able to keep up with your guild, and it gets repetitive.

I think in truth wow will kill the industry for a little longer than any other broad appeal game, but it will lose a lot of fanbase as the population gets up to 60. When Doom3 or HL2 came out was there much point in releasing a game that week if you weren't id or valve? Probably not. But now that school starts to come back (and those of us who played EQ are all too familiar with this), the play time drops out, and when people find they can't manage enough time to keep up with their guild, their friends, whatever they'll play something else.

Of course the other reality is that if you're a 15 year old kid, you aren't going to be buying gold from chinese farmers. But those chinese farmers and seriously wrecking in game economies on all the servers basically, and that gets frustrating fast.

Of course people will look at the industry in november and go "oh no wow has killed the industry!" and garbage like that, because this year hasn't seen a lot of good games. Some to be sure, but we'll see what impact is really has when we get into next year and the newer consoles are out, and there has been a chance for some of the up and comming popular titles to take off. Off the top of my head the only things I can think of that really warranted huge attention since wow came out are Battlefield 2 and GTA which have both been very successful. Could they have been 10 or 15% more successful without WoW? Possibly, but next year I doubt big titles will suffer even that much.

I think each game will eventually loses to...

[Chr0n0]

...time

No matter how good a game is, you'll eventually get bored with it (IMHO), but that doesn't mean you're not gonna replay the game again, you might in the future for nostalgic reasons (I know I did replay my old games for those reasons, such as Heroes of Might and Magic series, I always go back to see that giant as-big-as-a-purple-dragon fairy :P)

But we're not talking about single player game here are we? I still think it goes the same for MMORPG, how many people still plays Diablo II over bnet compared to the number of people who played when the game was at its prime?

There's always a higher mountain, sooner or later another title will take WoW's throne, that's my personal opinion.

LFG

[cdenn016]

60 shaman LFG pst

Yes.

[aderack]

It's already done the worst it can do, by succeeding and giving people the bright idea that it's doing something right, so it should be replicated. And even honored. When it actually kind of sucks, when it comes down to it. This just ain't no way to make a videogame. It's a confused, blobby mess that I see stifling progress and distracting the distractable for a few more years.

Re:Yes.

[tuxedobob]

If you learn how to skin and work leather, you're not allowed to fish or sew.

You might want to try knowing something about the game first. Anyone can learn to fish, no matter what their professions are. And level 20 is hardly a measure of the entire game. Most classes are just starting to become unique, and almost every instance is intended for 20+. You also might try visiting Ironforge and learning about the auction house.

If you didn't write your link, pass it on to whoever did.

Wow is just like how AC or EQ was

[Zoko Siman]

And wow, games were still made, and bought! imagine that...

Do we need another driving sim or another FPS

[carsamba]

If it's a good game, people will continue to play it, no matter what. Xxx the game "industry". My opinion is, there are way too many basically indistinguishable games, as there are way too many Hollywood "blockbuster"s going around. Either get a genre and do it right this time, or invent something new. Making games or movies have become too industrialized now. They are no longer labors of love. They are simply laborious repetitions.

Hardly a gorilla, game hasn't been out a year?

[garylian]

The numbers playing WoW are impressive, but the game has not even been out a year. When it has been out for 6 or so years, like EQ was before EQ2 and WoW sucked a ton of players away, then we can talk about it being a gorilla. Right now, it's just a noisy chimp.

As many people as join the game each month (and those numbers don't seem to be that high here in the U.S.), there are probably just as many that are leaving for greener pastures.

I suspect that City of Villians will make a dent in the WoW playerbase, as PvP is added to the game. City of Heroes made gameplay more fun for a lot of people. No loot hassles (you don't know when someone else gets an enhancement) and very little game economy. Take those two elements out of a game, and a lot of the complaints you had in WoW (loot arguements, "Chinese" farmers, gold selling, etc) go away.

it's great!

[aarku]

As a game dev, it's great for the industry! Most of the game devs I know are off playing WoW instead of making a game to compete with mine!

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[evolutionaryLawyer]

You really should learn more about contract law before you go about spouting off as if you are writing an informed opinion. EULA have been found to be enforcable in many jurisdictions, as long as the End User is required to demonstrate assent. You do have a recourse in EULAs, you can manifest your non-assent to the terms of the contract by returning the software. But as soon as you say, "Yes, I agree to the terms and conditions of the EULA," you are legally bound. And for all the fucking times I read RTFA, you should be ashamed for not RTFC.

Your strawman arguments about terms that are unconscionable would never be enforced, they would simply be stricken from the contract. But that doesn't mean that the portions of the contract that are reasonable, e.g. only being allowed to use one copy, no reverse engineering, would be enforced.

(IANAL, but I took contracts last year, where we covered Click-Wrap Licenses and their enforcability)

Haven't played games in a while

[SumDog]

Back when I got into computers in elementry school, I'd play all those nice Sierra Adventure games. I kept playing adventure games into high school until the genre died. I miss games like Zork, Lesuire Suit Larry (I have actually played the new one which is pretty funny), Space Quest, Return to Zork, Full Throrrle, etc.

Thanks to ScummVM I've played some of those old games in Linux, but I haven't really been able to keep up with new games in a very long time. I played Counter Strike in college and back when I still had a Windows box and lived in the dorms, I played Tony Hawk (3 I believe) on the Lan.

Since I moved out of the dorms I just kinda quit playing games. The fastest video card I have is in my dieing laptop, a GForce 440 Go and guess what, the laptop runs Linux.

The second fastest card I have is a GForce2. I just don't have time to play games anymore and I don't have the money to spend in buying a better video card and hoping games work under Cedega. I tried playing SimCiy4 and TheSims2 once upon a time on my lappy, and it was fun for a while, but the graphics took their tole on the crappy GForce 4 Go.

My genre died off and now I'm trying to figure out why I'm a computer scientist. I think I wanted to create adventure games, but I wanted to do more of the story part than the programming. I wish I had majored in English or Psychology. Don't get me wrong, I'm a damn good computer scientist, but I hate working in a room filled with cubes.

Sumdog

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Confessed Geek]

Have you taken a look at NeverWinter Nights? It really seems to fit the bill your looking for. Not so much "Massive" but some of the "worlds" do have consistant player numbers equal to a midsized MUD. It also has a full construction tool set...

It will be very very interesting to see what they do with NWN2.

I can't really imagine that you DIDN't Try NWN nights though, so I would be interested in hereing your critique.

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[veddermatic]

If you can make it past the first 200 pages of that pile of drivel, you're all set to spend constant hours doing repetitive tasks in WoW.

Why she took that long to explain her "philosophy" when it can be summed up in two sentences is beyond me. Much like leveling up in MMORPGs is beyond me.

World of Warcraft is a feeling...

[Anonymous Coward]

...who needs a social life?

thank you purepwnage.com, for helping to expose WoW as the drug it really is.

Experience...

[CFBMoo1]

The quests are rich and interesting. Being a tauren you do get the feel of being in a nomadic people who just decided to settle down but still go on hunts for great beasts. Elven quests are taxing to some but have an interesting story to them. Forsaken are just plain ruthless in some of their quests.

I play on a roleplay server, I find that to be a more rewarding experience then the PvP or PvE crowd. Still the PvP and PvE's are the biggest portion of the population. On my server we have almost a 3:1 ratio Alliance favor but the roleplay community there is strong and standing firm even with an influx of non roleplayers.

I definatly got my moneys worth. The only two things I want from it is dynamic weather and instance housing.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[kcb93x]

Good ideas...

YES! GAME DEVELOPERS, LOCATE THYSELVES IN MINNESOTA!

Sorry...I like it here. We know what a "white christmas" is like (and no, you trolls, and, uh, I guess everyone else, I mean SNOW!)

Plus, we've got the U of M, which also happens to be one of the first sourceforge mirrors (GREAT way to test bandwidth on any pipe here in the Twin Cities, by the way)

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

Yeah you're right, I had tried NWN. I even bought it twice, but that's a long story.

NWN shines because it has a fantastic implementation of the AD&D (3rd ed I think) rules; and those rules are good because AD&D is tried and true. Right from the start, NWN is great because they chose a balanced RPG to build on. Great move; wish other MMOs were that wise. (And hey, there are still some great rulesets out there, game designers. Traveller, Gamma World, GURPs, TMNT, and that TSR spy game I can't remember off the top of my head.)

NWN also has some nice building tools, a decent scripting language, and (in my impression), was relatively bug free.

The big problem was, it wasn't designed to support persistent, distributed worlds. So a few clever folks have hacked on programs that snoop the memory and integrate that way. Honeslty, that stuff should have been built in from the start.

NWN took a LONG time to come out. It was anticipated for quite awhile. During that time, Everquest was exploding in popularity. I'm really surprised they didn't at least put the hooks in to support a distributed, persistent world.

But then again, who knows what sort of licensing restrictions they were under from TSR/Wizardsofhtecoast/whomever. Maybe they were specifically not allowed to support an MMO.

Anyways, my critique would just be:
  + for using a solid game system,
  + for supporting scripting,
  + for encouraging live GM intervention,
  - for no built in world persistence (DB hooks),
  - for no scalable distribution framework,

If NWN2 supports distributed, persistent worlds, with pluggable rulesets... holy crap! Haven't read anything about it though. Here's to hoping...

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[TrebleJunkie]

Well, let's have it then. What is your two-sentence summation of Rand's philosophy?

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

It's funny, because it is just history at this point, but Minneapolis was actually quite a tech center for awhile. Control Data was headquartered here in Arden Hills, employed like 60,000 people locally, and they were an IBM-league company for awhile. Most people today are like "Control who?"

We also had Cray (now SGI); I knew some cool gamers there; helped run a MUD with them ;) I think most people on Slashdot know the name Cray.

On top of that, lots of cool MUD stuff happened locally. CDC "Cyber" (yes, that was their brand name, before "Cyberpunk") mainframes, and systems like Plato, were used in some of the first MUDs. Some of that work was done at the U of M. Also one of the developers of MudOS is a TC native.

But this is a cold place, and apparently game companies like it warm. And most of them are too paranoid to let their developers telecommute. (Unless it is from India.) So screw em, I'll work for meself.

Movie ticket

[phorm]

The so-called movie ticket 'contract' basically gives them the right to kick me out (without refund) for misconduct and possibly ban me. Also, a movie ticket is a pass to an activity, not a physical item such as a game CD (including the data within).

If blizzard wanted to kick me off bnet for running bnetd, that would be within their rights. Telling me I can't make interoperability software is not, but courts favour the rich.

Worst.. analyst.. ever??

[DeadPrez]

Quote from the New York Times article:

"I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month," said Michael Pachter, a research analyst for Wedbush Morgan, a securities firm. "World of Warcraft is such an exception. I frankly think it's the buzz factor, and eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers."

"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

Mental note from when I become rich and/or powerful. Don't trust the advice of Wedbush Morgan.

Re:Worst.. analyst.. ever??

[alstor]

Yea, I thought the same thing when I first read the article...

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, let's have it then. What is your two-sentence summation of Rand's philosophy?

I don't know about that guy, but for me I can sum Ayn Rand up in one (long) line:

"Ugly women *can* lead a successful life; they simply need to develop a philosophy that essentially reads 'common sense at the expense of humanity is cool', and write really long novels with that philosophy at the core."

I'm pretty sure that if Ayn Rand was alive today, her favorate game would be "Dnood" for some reason.

It's not WoW's fault...

[Ryan Amos]

If there were more than 2-5 decent games released a year, people would probably play them. As it is, I can blow through most single player games in less than a week and WoW gives me the constant gaming fix.

People hate WoW. But they play it because there's nothing else. FPS games have remained largely stagnant since Half-Life (HL2 and doom were pretty but offered nothing revolutionary) RTS games since WC3...

Give us something better than WoW and people will play it.

Re:It's not WoW's fault...

[mshurpik]

Well, that's a matter of opinion, but I happen to agree. I play WC3 and I don't play any other RTS because I've looked around several times and nobody can point me to a better RTS. Meanwhile, I don't play FPS because FPS has always been a fairly significant practical joke (note to the trigger-happy players: FPS games are not 3D). So if everyone is bored with computer games, is WoW proof that the phenomenon is finally over? Is this the game that makes the industry jump the shark?

I don't play WoW and I've been put under heavy pressure to do so. THe other day, my friend was telling me how mages can only wear cloth armor, and I was like, dude.....are you explaining the rules of Dungeons and Dragons back to me? I'm 29, this kid is 17 and I literally knew which races could wear cloth armor before he was born.

WoW is bringing D&D to the masses and I don't think any of us is prepared for how truly disgusting that is. In the process, WoW will work wonders for everyone else's credibility. When the whole world is hooked on WoW, watching FoxNews will be considered a "reality check."

Got bored of it and played other games.

[coaxeus]

Personally I Played WoW a few hours a day from beta through to a few months ago. Made a few level 60 characters, etc. but grew bored with it over time and started playing other games. Games like battlefield 1942, work, girlfriend, and this really great new graphically intense one called "outside".

I am horde

[Mustang Matt]

I'm on Thunderlord and I would agree with you that Barren's chat is probably some of the worst, but I tend to get beyond the barrens quite rapidly.

Interesting observation in terms of Next Gen

[SuperKendall]

I think you have a really insightful point that more and more people are buying used games and trading in old ones.

So a big question in my mind is what does that mean for next gen systems where games are $60? That's starting to got pretty darn expensive. Sure there will be an initial rush but then it seems like a lot of people will wait to buy systems until the bargain titles start to arrive. I'm mulling over doing just that myself (though probably I will break down and get a PS3 with one or two games I hope to last a while).

As far as trading in goes I soured on it after just one use - I traded in a few games and got around $2 each. After that I decided any other game I didn't really want anymore was going to eBay instead.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Anonymous Coward]

fine. You can keep the pager then.

WoW?

[mr_burns]

What, there's a game other than Battlefield 2?

Need for speed? No.

[SanityInAnarchy]

Halo? Yes.

The point is, WoW is worth it. Need for Speed, OTOH, is just Yet Another Piece of EA Crap. Notice how they were up to six or seven before they started calling it "underground"? It's probably getting close to version 10 now, and still, nothing new to make it worth $50.

Halo 2, OTOH, is worth $50, plus whatever an Xbox costs now, even if you only use it for Halo. Plus a TV tuner card or video in line, if you don't have a TV.

Similarly, old as it is, Final Fantasy 10 is still worth the cost of a PS2, plus whatever the game goes for now. Final Fantasy 7 is priceless, although it can probably be had for under $20 and run decently on any PS emulator.

And Half-Life 2, with all of its mods, is a steal at $60 for the Silver Edition.

Would I buy Half-Life 2 if I was already playing WoW? Hell yes. Would I buy Need for Speed Underground Super Happy Drift Mode, if I was already playing WoW? Hell no.

It's not an 800-pound-gorilla (sony), or piracy, or the media, or dumber kids, or games that are too easy, or a lack of ethics (Hot Coffee) that's hurting the industry. It's that crap like EA is still seen as "THE Industry", and good indie and even free games/mods (Natural Selection, for one) are often completely overlooked in the media (Slashdot, IGN, Gamespy) orgy over inane things like hardware and the latest Doom/Quake.

We don't just need good, innovative Indie games -- we have those (Katamari, Natural Selection, Cube) -- we just need more publicity. Maybe even more piracy. Guess why a completely unknown and oddball show originally about "demon magic" is now the #1 Ninja Anime in America (Naruto)? I think the world is better for it.

"Slashdot opinion"

[l3v1]

I can imageine what the slashdot opinion is. Still, I don't have anything against it. It's a nice game, it's no problem that they make money from it for a longer period. All others have to do is make a better, nicer, more addictive game. E.g. take a look at the demo that was given on the GDC (www.gdconf.com) on Spore (I'm not affiliated).
 

If WoW is that good why play any other game?

[Trius]

If people aren't buying games because WoW is so good, it just means the other games aren't good enough to buy. Why buy a bad or mediocre game when you've got WoW waiting at home? If developers want people to buy their games, they need to make them good enough to merit time away from Warcraft.

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[Trepalium]

(IANAL, but I took took a class and believe I know everything about this)

And yet your opinion is just as useless as the parent. Even lawyers don't all agree on the enforcability of software EULAs, and as far as I know (and I'm not a lawyer either), judgements have gone both ways when presented to courts. A lawyer will tell you to add the EULA even if it isn't valid because even if it isn't, you've lost nothing (aside from the money you've paid the lawyer to write it). If it is held as valid, you've gained rights you otherwise wouldn't have.

Some day a case based on this will reach up to the supreme court, or some foolish politician will get a bill passed, and this dispute will be solved for good. Until then, both answers are right.

There're plenty of gamers to go around

[Lord Kano]

WoW seems to have taken the lion's share of the gamers who are willing to pay a monthly fee to keep playing.

Gamers like myself will NOT pay money to keep playing something that we've already bought.

Hell, I'm not mad at Blizzard. It's cool that they've made such a great game. I just will never play it.

Hopefully this lights a fire under the collective ass of the rest of the game development world to get some more competitors into the market.

LK

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[interstellar_donkey]

I don't think you need to read "Atlas Shrugged" to get the point; I'm pretty sure there are more concise and more entertaining options out there which can explain the same thing (and if there isn't, there should be).

Nonetheless, I agree with you. There is an unsettling theme in modern business where those behind the curve will criticize the winners, crying "foul" whenever somebody does something better and with more success then they do. The obvious answer is to change the way you do things in order to compete, but too many businesses seem unwilling to do that, instead opting to stick their fingers in their ears chanting "no fair!" instead.

I could understand being upset if the front-runner is cheating, using practices of questionable morality to achieve their goals (Personally, I'd put Microsoft in that category). But when you're losing to a company that finds success by producing a superior product which, all things being equal, customers would prefer to purchase and use then they would yours, then you really have no room to complain.

The best current example I can think of deals with all the hub-bub surrounding Google. Now at the top, Google is geting criticism from all sides. But from what I can see their only crimes have been producing products and services which are superior to their competitors while simultaneously developing a revenue stream which doesn't insult or annoy their users.

Of all the complaints I've read about Google, the one that irks me the most is "It's not fair! They have all the best software engineers!" Since when has it been wrong to spend more money on salaries or create an attractive working environment in order to get better employees?

I can't say exactly what the root cause of this dislike for industry leaders is, but I think it goes a little beyond simple jealousy. Modern business, especially the entertainment industry heavily relies on preexisting formulas for direction, knowing that deviation from that formula is likely to lead to failure.

A video game developer, for example, knows that a success of a title is going to rest a great deal on following the rules. The formula says a title has to have graphics which will yield good looking screen shots for game magazines and webpages. While not an absolute necessity, the formula highly encourages a new title be a part of a popular pre-existing game franchise or linked to a successful movie or television show. The formula demands that a game belongs to one of a small number of game genres (like being a first person shooter or a "platform" game, among others). The formula might recommend "dumbing down" a game that is a little too cerebral for their target market; it will never reccomend "smartening it up".

Other attributes, like "entertainment value" or "game play" are incidental. A game's initial success rarely, if ever, relies on these things. A game might be loads of fun but unless it follows the formula it just won't fly. I'm not a game developer, but I can only guess how much the needless frustration gets to them. An exceedingly entertaining game which doesn't follow the formula won't just find it hard to be featured in the gaming press (which seems exclusively concerned with graphics), it will find it difficult to be picked up by a distributer or see the light of day on a store's shelves.

The trick to developing a highly successful game is in finding fun and entertainment within the confines of a deeply restrictive formula. World of Warcraft appears to have done just that. The graphics are pretty good. It's part of the popular Warcraft franchise (In this case, Warcraft is just a name to attract people. You could have the exact same game but call it 'Ogre Fight 1000', and it's likely it wouldn't have had enough early adopters to get the title off the ground.) Finally, it's a part of the increasingly popular MMORPG genre.

Moreover, in addition to having all those necessary attributes, the game is actually fun. Not for me, mind you. I played it for a

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[Anonymous Coward]

I just want to point out that the case agianst BnetD was in the 8th Circuit which, as mentioned in an earlier post, does recognize the EULA as valid.

Location, location, location.

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[TrebleJunkie]

I agree with you almost totally. Where I don't, it's really not enough to really get into, it being 2:30 in the morning and all. *grin* So, suffice it to say, "Right On, Brother!"

And don't worry about me being modded flamebait, I'm used to it. *chuckle*

Actually, it's not entirely true

[Moraelin]

The "only graphics matter" mentality was mostly pushed by marketting, than ever being a reality among gamers.

Quick, what's the most played online FPS? Well, according to GameSpy, it's _still_ CounterStrike. It half a decade old, and still more people play it than several of the newer games combined. CS, to borrow a MacHall expression, pretty much looked like classic ass at release. Yet it quickly got 1000 times more players than SOF or SOF2 with their photo-realistic gore. It made a _lot_ of people give up on their newer and more photo-realistic games, and go out and buy HL just to play CS.

Quick, which MMO game has more subscribers?

A) EverQuest 2, with its photo-realistic graphics, several shaders used on every pixel, and insane polygon counts, or

B) WoW, whose graphics are frankly cartoonish (not ugly, but cartoonish), lower polycount, and I don't think it even uses shaders for anything but water?

Well, the answer is right in the summary. WoW currently has 10 times more subscribers than EQ2 at its peak. For all its eye candy, many EQ2 players nowadays describe it as "like playing Morrowind, except you meet another player now and then." That's how low the population got.

So no, gamers never really had graphics as the only criterion. Lower graphics quality games with good gameplay routinely outsell crap whose only merit are the graphics.

That only graphics and screenshots matter, was just a publisher's dream that the marketroids tried to push upon us. They _wanted_ us to care only about graphics and shiny weapon models, because that's the _cheap_ part. Spending a year testing and tweaking the gameplay and balance to be just right is much more expensive than photographing a brick wall in higher resolution.

And more importantly graphics were the _guaranteed_ part. Businessmen hate risk. You can just say "ok, I want 1024x1024 textures this time", and get exactly that. Gameplay is still not completely understood yet even by the top league designers. And the rest are even worse. They seem to love repeating mistakes that were already explained all over the place by Will Wright, Brian Reynolds, and other good designers. Yet every year someone comes and repeats one of them, thinking he's the epitome of originality.

So the publishers _really_ wanted us to turn into mindless zombies that buy only for screenshots and hype. But if you look at what actually sold and what didn't, hype and screenshots only did so much.

that gorilla seems to be growing fast!

[Anonymous Coward]

ooh first it was the 800lb gorilla, now it's the 1600lb gorilla!

any bets the next poster is gonna be on about a 3200lb primate? =)

Nice

[t_allardyce]

Games like these are a drug, and as soon as I can come up with the most addictive, time-wasting, costly game, I'll be made for life. I've had a few game addictions in my time, there was allot of cable cutting and CD breaking involved, and now I just feel dirty when I sit down to play something, I feel like im wasting my life by spending an hour on something like that. Its good to keep people tied up in game-playing tho, it clears the board for me!

same old executive crud

[Buzh]

it seems every other week there is some big threat to the content industry, this week it's wow, next week it's piracy, week after that it's pirate ghosts or whatever, bottom line is the execs in these types of companies are very good at coming up with excuses for why they aren't making as much money as they've been telling their boards and shareholders they would.

If you want to compete with WoW, then make something better. Don't whine because noone wants to buy your outrageously priced plastic discs to play the next rehashed title for a couple of weeks before losing interest. Which, really, is the case with most of the stuff that comes out of said industries - it has little or no lasting appeal. Unlike WoW.

need to comment -

[mseidl]

I didnt read the last 500 comments, so I dont know if this was already posted. But, to comment on, if its hurting the gaming industry by kids playing this all the time instead of buying other games like need for speed- well, first of all, need for speed is a crappy game, like a lot of other games. Not, using this specifially, but what I mean, is... is this hurting the industry? no. frankly, I wouldnt buy games like need for speed because they suck. a lot of games suck. WoW is a great game. So, other game companies need to get their ass in gear and make a good game, one that can compete with WoW. So, hopefully companies will realize this, and if they do, yes it will be good for the industry. But, in what ways could it be bad? well, i hope ea does go under. I cant stand to see another madden. Or else Im going to puke.

Martin

Dont think so

[Occidio]

I cant see how one mmo could ruin the market. EQ was the same way and there was alot of people still playing other games just as normal. There are thousands that still dont even play mmo's, let alone people that do play them, play other games.

SAME COMPANY

[Anonymous Coward]

Vivendi owns Blizzard.
Vivendi is publishing 50 Cent: Bulletproof
WOW is out and making money
Therefore, WoW is FUNDING 50 Cent: Bulletproof.

Oh what a twisted world we live in.

Actually, it's COH's fault

[Moraelin]

First of all, in any other game, I'd say "it's not them, it's you". If you think that a MMO means everyone being there just to shut up and get you xp, and god forbid that they ever dare take a 10 seconds break to talk or exchange email addresses instead of grinding to get you T3H L33T XP... it's you who are in the wrong genre, not them.

If it were any other game, I'd say even nastier things, because in that message you embody everything I despise in MMO player. But it's COH.

And here's the scoop: it's not them, it's (probably) not you, it's COH that turns people into misanthropic sociopaths. I know it turned even me from socializer to avoiding other players. No, let me rephrase that: turned me to hate the very idea of even being in the same square mile as another player.

COH has a thoroughly screwed up balance, and a thoroughly screwed up way of matching instance content to team size. For a few builds (e.g., post-level-30 fire tanks) the only reason to take anyone in the group is to make the game spawn more enemies, while for a lot of others simply being in a group gets you killed. (E.g., try being in an 8 person group as a SR scrapper. No, really. The enemy level goes up and they start hitting through your defenses all the time.)

A lot of other choices are there which again, might benefit one person in the group, but get everyone else wiped out repeatedly. E.g., the difficulty slider. A high level fire tank's auras and burn patches always hit and he has no dodge-based defenses, so higher level enemies just mean more xp. But for others it means a swift death. You can get one-shot by those enemies. (E.g., SR scrappers again or woe to the Blaster that caught any aggro.)

Etc.

I won't go here through the whole mile-long list, but there are a _lot_ of things in COH that seem to be designed just to create conflicts inside a group, or to make it actually harder to finish a mission as a group for some builds. Even if not as such, it actually needs everyone to work _perfectly_ together, have _exactly_ the right build for that group, and make no mistakes ever. Every single mistake in a large group is thrown back in your face and could mean a group wipe. (Which again, tends to create "you all suck, I could have done this alone faster and safer" kind of conflicts.)

For me it had gotten to the point where soloing was what got me good XP, while grouping just got me killed and into XP debt. I started actually avoiding other players because of that.

Try some other game sometimes, e.g., WoW. It might help you get over the misanthropic fit. It sure helped me.

It might help you understand that that pent up frustration isn't really because the COH players are any worse, but it's purely a result of COH's own design faults. The exact same players work _much_ better as a group in WoW (or EQ2 or whatever) than in COH. Unlike COH, I've never regretted taking an extra group member in WoW, or joining a random pickup group. An extra group member in WoW may at most be not much help, but, unlike COH, the game will never turn him/her into a pure liability or "filler".

Also, WoW doesn't make you choose between a pure group build, or a purely solo build, or something piss-poor at both. (Cue the never-ending "healer vs offender" and "tankers without taunt" flame-wars on COH's boards.) That's just another source of conflict just doesn't exist.

Or take kill-stealing, since whining about it was constant theme in COH. In WoW it just isn't a problem, once you realize that other players just can't cost you any xp or loot there. If you've landed a first blow on an NPC, there's _nothing_ another player can cost you there. If they come and kill the NPC for you, eh, you still got the kill, the xp and the loot.

Again, I'm not claiming that people in WoW are smarter or anything. It's just that while Cryptic built a whole bunch of causes for conflict between players in their game, Blizzard's design choices help avoid it.

Re:Actually, it's COH's fault

[klept]

You must be one of those stupid broads that dont like being called stupid broads. And if not you're in the wrong gender. To begin with jerk, I never complained about not getting xp. And it wasn't 10 sec breaks, but some girl trying to talk to me on private chat through a whole mission, and half the time they weren't on the team. I had no problem getting along with players. In fact you could say being nice was my problem, in the sense that plenty of girls wanted to make that connection. But it sounds like you had some problems. Teams on COH were great for getting xp in missions and tf's. Last year was on great teams, and we got tf's done in 2 hours. And guys did talk and have lots of fun doing tf. In fact today played with great team, just like old times. But those regretfully are few and far between today. It would have been nice discussing gaming with you, but your inaccurate insults make that difficult. Yes, I know what you want to say, the phrase "stupid broads" is also insulting. But I was using the word in a broad sense and not necessarily talking about womenhood in general. But then I dont have defend my right to free speech. You can take your political correct bs and shove it.

Re:Actually, it's COH's fault

[Kildjean]

OMGUROXXORS

Jeez dude have a life...

Re:Actually, it's COH's fault

[klept]

I will ask this nicely. What the hell are you talking about? I just express my opinion, it doesnt agree with you, and so I dont have a life? I knew posting that comment was going to cause me problems. Now I understand more than ever why free speech is in danger. And that is why I will continue to exercise it. Because once we lose that we lose all our freedoms, including the freedom to think, which is very precious to me. Hey what does OMGUROXXORS mean? And are you a female, or should I say of the more gentle gender? Hmm, if you are of the more gentle gender, maybe today that would mean you are a man.

Re:Actually, it's COH's fault

[Kildjean]

OMGUROXXORS means: Oh My god you Rocksors... Rocksors is an extension of rocking hard.... but honestly don't believe it. For one i think you are like the previous person replied a whiny pathetic idiot and sincerely you should go out more, get laid and live outside the game you are playing because you have ISSUES. What is wrong with socializing and making friends over a game? That is one of the most awesome details of playing it. Its an extension on how you meet people and interact with them.

One of the benefits of the Internet, is anonimity... and my gender to this conversation is irrelevant, then again reading your conversation of Gentler Genders, makes me think you are just plain stupid or jut generally sexually challenged.

Re:Actually, it's COH's fault

[klept]

Well I dont know what to say. My reaction to your comments are that I am still laughing. For the sake of ending this, I wont make any further replys except a couple of remarks. Sexually challanged? Yes I would be with you. Just plain stupid? Diginifying your comments with a reply is plain stupid, I agree. Have ISSUES? Yeah, I guess if thinking I still have rights as an American citizen are ISSUES, then I have ISSUES. Lets see what else did you say? Oh yeah, getting laid. Well, lol, a gentleman never kisses and tells. And I never said there was anything wrong with socializing and making friends over the game. Please read what I wrote. But enough. Have a nice weekend. I'll take your advice and quit COH and get out more. But gee, who wants to have anything to do with a "whiny pathetic idiot" lol? Hey what are you doing this weekend? JUST KIDDING :). Please dont respond.

Blizzard deserves it

[Silicontoad]

Whilst I'm not a big fan of subscription games, the cost have got to be covered some how. It has got to be said that Blizzard takes forever to release a game. Why? So that the code/engine is efficient. Unlike many games, I have played, I have found blizzard games to be the most entertaining/crash free that never required UBER systems and UBER GPU's.

EA Games, I will never buy another game from you, disgusting and disgraceful, BF2 (You call that an Engine) its just so dam UNSTABLE, (great gameplay though).

The current trend goes to say and is reflected by the attitude in industry (Faster Machines means allot more shortcuts hence a boost in productivity and hence the game is built in 2 months) whereas Blizzard has never taken that attitude, on average a game is worked on 2-3 years.

In my view good on them, they deserve it and I hope EA goes out of business. While WoW is on the scene now, I wonder how Diablo III and Starcraft II will be received, will Diablo III be another WoW? I think so for Diablo die hard fans (and there are many including myself).

WoW and Co are hurting/changing entertainment!

[Qbertino]

I don't by games very often lately - I used to.
But WoW definitely is a innovation. It's like many HL2 (railroad storytelling) spread out over a large pane (MMORPG questing), playable by absolute n00bs with sloth reflexes. Add in Blizzards ultra extreme focus on playtesting (remember StarCraft and the 3 factions and how well they played? 2 *years* of playtesting that was!) their experience in "Hamstering Games" (Diablo anyone?) that fact that their games run smooth a easy on old hardware (I'm using a Geforce 4 and WoW looks cooool) which is purpose but also is due to the long playtesting. On top of that comes an interface that my grandma can operate with ease.

Bottom Line:
WoW was the last push MMORPS and online video gaming needed. This is the real thing.
When tablets and wifi become a household comodity, this type of entertainment will take over large portions of mainstream. That's the simple truth.

The rules of the game

[Anonymous Coward]

This is capitalism, remember? If you have a product that beats the shit out of the competitors, the other companies should get their asses moving and present a product that can compete with WoW.

It's neither typical, nor atypical

[Moraelin]

Some people are looking for MMOs, some people aren't. A MMORPG isn't a substitute for a SP RPG, any more than a FPS is a substitute for an adventure game, or than crossword puzzles are a substitute for watching football. Nor viceversa. They're just different genre.

So your experience with WoW is probably typical for someone who's into MMORPGs, but not typical at all for someone who's not interested in that genre.

Will you switch games? Chances are eventually you will. Everything gets old after a while.

Yes, you have a "time investment" in WoW, you have an "investment" in your guild and all, and that's actually what the publishers are banking on. That's what keeps people around long after the game itself has become more boring than watching paint dry and less fun than root canal. The illusion that it's some "investment" or "property" they just have to hang on to, and that they can't just throw away. But eventually even that's not enough any more.

Or at least that's most people do. Most plans by MMORPG makers are made around people staying an average of 6 months in a game. Some stay longer, some leave after the "free" month, but half a year is sorta where the tip of the Gauss curve is.

At any rate, it still doesn't mean much to us who aren't into that genre to start with. It's just another genre, not a replacement for everything else. FPS didn't replace (SP) RPGs, and RTS didn't replace simulations. The same happens with MMOs.

Blizzard a victim of their own success in the past

[mirni]

Having been in the past an addicted player of Starcraft for years, I thought I'd add my two cents.

I never bought any other game for two or so years. I didn't even feel the urge to try anything new. That game was so good that I spent hours on hours on it. Week after week. For months. Always lingering between 'chobo' and 'gosu', as the strategies of the game evolved, it never ceased being interesting.

Was that good for Blizzard? No. Because I wasn't the only one. They could see the devotion millions (literally) of people showed and they couldn't tap on it. I bet they had really gone crazy. OK, they published an extension, everybody got it, but that was that. And it's a thing that just won't die. (And even Warcraft III, "well, you know, it's OK, but it's not Starcraft." That was a major blow.) Not as popular after its original release (it has been 7 years or so, after all), it still has a strong following. People are asking for Starcraft 2, but only casually.

The new model is good. It's good, because it means that a good game will not only sell more units, but it will also generate revenue for a longer time per unit. Profit is not longer a function of a units, but of units by time. Think profit squared, for a really engaging game.

If they figure out a way to give us Starcraft 2 without our thinking they're ripping us off charging for what was free at Battle.net, I'd expect it any day now. But it's not easy, that's a concept better suited to WoW and the likes.

As I said, just the 2 cents of a former addict.

-m-

Hurting? Helping?

[Rogerborg]

Moving the goal posts. Like in the movie industry, you're only as good as your last film. Keep up or drop out.

What's the real point of the gaming industry?

[macraig]

Is the real goal of the gaming industry, as implied and self-alleged for decades, really to produce the "perfect game"? After all, what would be the end result of producing the perfect game, in particular one lacking frustrations and having endless replayability?

The result would be an initial surge in sales followed by a slow decline, as fewer and fewer new customers existed. Sure, new children being born might offset the decline, but how much and for how long? There's increasing evidence that global birth rates may be declining even without acts of god or genocidal outbursts.

Nope... the real point of the gaming industry is to produce IMPERFECT games, including new games which continue to repeat mistakes whose lessons should have been learned long ago. Imperfect games leave one frustrated or bored or both, and longing for the Next Big Thing, almost eager to part with $50 at a time for even a vague promise of pardon from one's prison of boredom.

If we want to see a resumption of effort to produce increasingly perfect games, there needs to be a revolution, one which puts design decisions back fully in the hands of the actual game developers, and not in the hands of venture capitalists, whether one calls them that or "game publishers". Likely this revolution will involve the Internet and some form of self-publishing and perhaps development financing coming directly from eager potential players as donations, something analogous to what's predicted for music artists in particular.

The worst thing that can ever happen to a privately-owned company with a carefully crafted long-term mission is to give into monetary pressures to go public and announce an IPO. The IPO represents the beginning of the end for that long-term vision, because the shareholders have no investment in that vision beyond what monetary profit they can receive from it, and a belief that said profit will be forthcoming on a timetable that suits THEIR desires. If the original company goal expressed any altruism, it's a guarantee that the company's new remote masters won't share that altruism.

That is what has happened to game development: the altruism and bliss of creation is gone, replaced by greed and concentration of wealth.

Welcome to progress.

Re:What's the real point of the gaming industry?

[mshurpik]

What would happen if I took all the interesting comments off Slashdot, the ones that are opinionated enough to be motivational without being inflammatory, and compiled them on my own website? Or better yet, printed a book, a technology toilet reader?

One thing I know is that it is totally doable. One step beyond comprehension, editing is the process of reading for other people. Editing is fun because most of it is deletion. All you need is a few gems and you have a product. The second thing I know is that with a dozen stories a day averaging 300 comments each, it would take all day, every day to keep up with the flow.

The final thing, is that unlike the garbage-strewn service offered by Slob Malda, mine would offer intelligent commentary by thoughtful people. Since my service would have *gasp* actual content, I could actually charge money for it. You're not the first person to point out that IPO=AFK, but with most of the country trying to get rich and famous playing Texas Hold'em, there's probably a lot of people who could use a refresher course on betting money.

Re:What's the real point of the gaming industry?

[macraig]

Errrr... thanks? I think that constituted a compliment, but it was pretty well encapsulated and abstracted. Still, it's almost as warm and fuzzy as being modded-up. :-)

OMG, here we go again?

[Blitzenn]

Blizzard makes a product that people like and are willing to invest their time in to play it. If the perspective of the article writer is correct, and for arguments sake, I will, then they made a better product than anyone else out there and they deserve the attention. The argument in the article seems to try to apply a monopolistic slant to WoW (World of Warcraft). How can that be? They simply put out a product, that people want. Perhaps there should be some law against companies making to good a product? If the other companies can't keep up and attract the consumer's attention with their crap, then perhaps they deserve to lose market share. Isn't the article leaning in the direction of calling Blizzard a Microsoft of the Gaming industry? It seems unfair to apply such harsh standards to a company who is simply delivering software that people want to play with. The implication here is that they should be punished or stopped from making something that attracts too much attention away from the rest of the market. Perhaps we should have laws against things that are too good? Secondly, if the cost of the game was too high, then people wouldn't invest the money into buying it or paying the subscription. Apparently that is not the case though, people are spending money on it and investing their time into it. Are they all wrong? I think not. They are having fun, I am sure. People are willing to pay a premium to have good fun and a great distraction to their everyday life. Blizzard happens to consistently deliver that.

BTW-I do not play WoW, and have never purchased the game. I can however understand the attraction. I also believe this will drive other companies to work much harder at making their products more than simply mediocre. We have seen far to much of that in the past years.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Mathness]

I want a fantasy (or scifi, or spy, or whatever) MMORPG that lets me contribute content and code to a dynamic world.

Take a look at Ryzom Ring, which will be a way for players to add to the game (Saga of Ryzom).

long term success

[fadir]

I'm not convinced (yet) that WoW will previal in long term. It's a huge sucess (even financial) for Blizzard/vivendi, no doubt. But I don't think that WoW has the potential to remain the "800 pound gorilla" over the years. Lots of people already leaving (myself included) after only half a year of playing. Remember that games like DaoC, Everquest and Lineage are online for many years already and I don't see WoW to be that strong in 5 years anymore if they do not change the game fundamentally.

Don't get me wrong! It's a great game - for casual gamers. But real hardcore gamers will lack the the real challenge:
I've played Tibia (a smaller but very successful mmorpg) for years now. Every time I was facing a really tough situation (a pk trying to kill me, a strong monster, ...) I was literally shaking on front of my computer. - In WoW I've never experienced this. It doesn't matter if you die or survive. You simply respawn and try again, over and over. You don't lose anything at all (except a laughable amount of money), so there is no real reason for excitenment in a fight.
That's great for casual gamers - but boring for power gamers.
Beside this the community in WoW is crappy. A crowd of anonymous nobodies running around doing the same each and every day. There is no space for "super heroes", people that others will look up to.

Those are 2 core points (among alot of others) I really miss in WoW. I'm convinced that they will keep WoW from staying the "800 pound gorilla".

Re:Just because it's in an EULA doens't make it le

[Anonymous Coward]

And throw in some "UCITA, UCITA, UCITA!" for good measure.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[Anonymous Coward]

Talking about player created content in MMORPG...

http://www.play.net/hj/

Well its already killed Penny Arcade...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Penny Arcade guys used to be a pretty good indicator of what games were hot or not... now all they talk about and make comics about is WoW. Which is of very little interest to those of us who don't play it...

Still, if even hardcore gamers who's job is based on playing lots of games admit they don't have time to play any other games due to WoW then the original articale has a point. What chance do WoW users who have full time jobs have to play new games?

Why is WoW so different from other MMORPGs?

[netwraith]

I don't understand why WoW is being targeted when other games such as Everquest, Shadowbane, Asheron's Call, City of Heroes, and Ultima Online require just as much time commitment from it's players and have been around longer to make a more definitive impact on the sales of other genre games. If these games haven't had a negative inpact on game sales for other genres then I do not understand how World of Warcraft will suddenly change that.

Re:Why is WoW so different from other MMORPGs?

[mshurpik]

I'm just guessing, but I think it's because normal people actually play Blizzard games, unlike Everquest or Asheron's Call where you have to be a hobbit to log on to the server.

Re:Why is WoW so different from other MMORPGs?

[netwraith]

Not around here. Most people have been playing Evercrack for ages and never switched to WoW. Guess that's why I assumed that EQ was still to pdog because of it's long history and role pioneering in the MMORPG frontier.

Cinema Forever

[Anonymous Coward]

"And how much money do you spend going to a movie theater every month? That is something you don't get to hold on to, are limited by what is immediately available (in the box office) and are required to enjoy on a set schedule."

Then on the other hand, this is called "going to the movies". Big screen, kick-ass audio, lots of people there with you, and generally the feeling of "an event" instead of just an evening at home (be it with or without friends).

To each their own, of course. For me, movies at dedicated theaters happen to have some extra magic.

(I have a DVD player, but no video projector yet. However, when I get my home theater into shape, I probably won't stop going to movies. Like I didn't stop listening to radio after I got broadband and MP3 gear.)

Re:Cinema Forever

[l1_wulf]

Then on the other hand, this is called "going to the movies". Big screen, kick-ass audio, lots of people there with you, and generally the feeling of "an event" instead of just an evening at home (be it with or without friends).

And playing a Massively Multiplayer Online Game is an experience you are unable to get, or duplicate anywhere else. Take keep sieges in Dark Age of Camelot--where else (but in an MMO) are you going to be able to play a game where hundreds of people can get together like this? There are specific elements that are built into the game to handle the logistics of doing just this, not to mention the strain this puts on the actual servers themselves (having this many players in such a small area). It is imposible to find something that duplicates this PvP experience in a non-MMO, much less any free MMO that I am aware of (not including games that are in beta and the like).

You point out that paying the extra money to watch a movie on the big screen is worth it because it gives you the feeling of doing something you are unable to do anywhere else.. The same applies to both MMOs (as I point out above) and music subscriptions (where else are you able to just select just about any type of music you are in the mood for and have it play that instant?). Again, it has been pointed out elsewhere that there are situations where people are more of an exception rather than the "common man". There will always be the occasional person who's musical tastes are so different from the average Joe's that he is unable to find any value in the music subscriptions due to lack of content. For the rest of us, they may not have everything, but there damn sure is plenty of other things I enjoy listening to./p

Re:Social aspect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who on earth modded this down? Sitting for hours in front of a computer is NOT socialising.

I wouldn't be surprised if these kids eventually forgot how to speak and write properly after all the abbreviating and leetspeak they use online.

Months of playtime w/o $15/month

[Peldor]

You could make the same argument about other games (some online, some not) with high replay value too.

How many weeks or months have many people spent playing Counterstrike or Q3A or UT2004? The only games I've bought since UT2004 came out were PopCap games for a few friends. Or Civilization I/II/III? Weeks and weeks of my life have disappeared to that trio.

It's not about the monthly fee eating up your game budget. If you're consumed with playing something else, you're not likely to run out and buy a new game.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[markov_chain]

I'm really picking nits here so I can plug the MUD I play on, but it's a bit of a stretch to say LPMud has a VM; it's more like a P-code interpreter ;)

--
Tsunami

And so much more!!

[LanMan04]

* Multiplexed Analogue Components (TV transmission)
* MAC (cosmetics)
* Media Access Control, in computer networks. See also MAC address. This meaning is occasionally rendered as "Machine Access Code".
* Mammalian artificial chromosome
* mandatory access control
* Maximum allowable concentration of toxins, e.g. in food or as reference in environmental remediation
* Mean Aerodynamic Chord
* Merchant Aircraft Carrier ships
* Message authentication code, in cryptography
* Metropolitan Airports Commission, operator of airports in the Minneapolis-St. Paul region of Minnesota
* Mid-American Conference, US collegiate sports conference
* Middle Atlantic Conference, US collegiate sports conference, also its parent group, the Middle Atlantic Corporation
* The Midlands Arts Centre, a venue in Birmingham, England
* Military Airlift Command, the predecessor of the Air Mobility Command of the United States Air Force
* Minimum alveolar concentration (Anaesthesia)
* Michigan Agricultural College, usually written "M.A.C.", was the name of Michigan State University from 1909 to 1925.
* Multiply-accumulate, especially in digital signal processor contexts
* MAC times in a computer file system are times of last modification, access, and change of a file.
* Michigan Aerospace Corporation, a company in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
* Moves, Adds and Changes - System administration tasks related to a telephone system. Sometimes referred to as MACD (moves, adds, changes, and disconnects).
* Mobile Advisory Council
* The Archaeology Museum of Catalonia (Museu d'Arqueologia de Catalunya)
* Casamancian Autonomous Movement (Mouvement Autonome Casamançais, a now-defunct political party in Casamance, Senegal)

WoW

[wolfrider1420]

WoW to me is no different than Diablo[2] or Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn. For both of those games (more BG than Diablo) when I was playing them for the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of hours, I was not playing a single other game. And I still love to go back and play Baldur's Gate 2. Infact if anyone out there knows of a RPG that rivals that one please let me know

Some kid? ...

[skyggen]

As a WoW player (On linux yo!) I realize that some kid is not really playing all that much. From my experience I tend to meet people more in my age braket the early to late 20s. Dont get me wrong one of my game friends is 14, but in my interaction he is the minority. I don't think some kid really has money to buy games. It is some young adult raised on atari and nes who are purchasing these games. Some young adult who has a nice job and makes good money where $50 start-up and $15 a month is a drop in the pond. I dont think the gaming industry even bothers with the 12-17 age braket anymore wheres the money in that? At best one game a month? Bah, in my age bracket we buy atleast 2 while waiting in line for PSPs.

Poor Phrasing

[brokenarmsgordon]

"Time investment"? Let's get serious, here. "Investment" implies some kind of productive return. Time sink is what it is.

Re:Poor Phrasing

[wolfrider1420]

productive return: time alone with your whiring machine :)

Re:Poor Phrasing

[brokenarmsgordon]

I don't need to pay $15 a month to achieve that.

It'll fade

[amigabill]

It used to seem like Final Fantasy XI was in the same position. Now only one of my friends is still playing it. Plus there's going to be a number of people like myself that find they aren't into that genre of game and will find others to enjoy. Every time id releases a new game, that's the thing to have for a while, no matter what, but then people find other things to enjoy, and the same will happen here.

Different Gamers

[DrugCheese]

I think the MMORPG gamers are a different breed. I myself spend WAY too much time gaming, but never got into the MMORPG games. I know people that play them and some are unaware that their computer can do other things, like turn off.

I think there's still many more FPS gamers, and RTS gamers then MMORPG gamers, IMHO

Keys to success

[GodSpiral]

WoW's success comes from:

*You can hit the level cap in 400-500 hours play time. Far faster than any other game.
*You dont need a game guide to make your way around and get to the level cap.
*very quick transportation systems
*very easy to have sufficient money for needs.
*long betas to iron out balance and bugs

WoW's game once you hit the level cap is ok, but not spectacular. A nice technical innovation they have is seemless loading of new areas.

Any new game can do well if they match WoW in all of the above keys. And provide more variety for the end game. A better WoW is one that's even faster with less time sinks.

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[veddermatic]

Hey that's pretty good. My summation would be:

Selfishness leads to altruism. Non-Selfishness leads to greed and oppression.

Not sure how that works outside her bizzaro world, but I guess that's why it took her 1500 pages to set up a situation where he system actually works.

Related GTA experience

[egriebel]

When you have games that are this huge with high production quality, there is no way shorter games can compete for the hard-core gamer's dollar. Once I started playing GTA:III, I have basically played nothing else but GTA series since. I have Halo, UT, and other games that I used to love playing just gathering dust on my shelf, and because of that I don't buy other games because they likewise won't be played either.

Part of the reason I spend so long playing is that I game only 5-10 hrs/wk (compared to 5-10 hrs per day for a MMORPG). But, the other part is that the GTA series is so rich and deep. It's no MMORPG, but the game world is huge for the genre (which is it, an FPS? RPG? Driving game? :-] ). It's fun to jack a car and drive around the city for a while, because you'll always find something new even after playing GTA Vice City for a year. And the game world in the new GTA San Andreas is many times bigger, with lots more stuff, adventures, mini-games, Hot Coffee (!), etc. thrown in.

Reassuring the venture capitalists...

[GrnArmadillo]

Market saturation is a myth to placate the shareholders. What's actually going on here is that companies have yet to grasp that online games are a different business model from offline games. A crappy licensed game is a sucess if there are a million copies sitting on shelves in players' closets somewhere. That reknowned low level of quality just doesn't cut it anymore if you're expecting your customers to keep paying a monthly fee.

But that's very scary for developers. That would mean that they have to convince whomever is funding them that they're going to have to make a GOOD game. Market saturation, on the other hand? Now there's a good excuse. That's a problem you can throw money at. Our game doesn't suck, it was just released at the wrong time, with a bad ad campaign, or the latest movies were critically panned. It's anyone's fault but the people who made a mediocre game, so clearly future investments in that game studio remain a good idea.

heh

[Moraelin]

Let me get this straight. Those players' great crime against humanity, and reason enough for you to call them "stupid broads" and "idiots" and claim that they "drove all the good players away" is that:

- they tried to keep in touch with you. Even when they weren't on your team!

- people were even exchanging email addresses!

Well, gee. Dude, let me take back what I've said before. I owe Statesman an apology. It's not COH, it _is_ you, after all. You're just a sad little idiot whiner. The kind that needs to blame others for his own faults and problems, and put others down to mask his own insecurities.

No, I'm not saying you should be social or extroverted. But if you feel insulted and need to lash back just because people were social around you in a MMO, you have problems. Go see a shrink, for your own good. Or get a life. Put down the crack pipe, and join a 12 step program. Whatever gets you back in touch with reality.

As for the whole rant about your "right to free speech" to call people "stupid broads", get a clue, little ignorant. Read that ammendment and see what it actually says. Because it cracks me up to see ignorant idiots like you waving their "right to free speech" around without even knowing what it says.

Here's a clue: like the rest of the constitution it's about your relationship to the government. That's all. It doesn't say anyone should listen to your retarded 13 year old tantrums on private property. And NCSoft's servers or bulletin boards _are_ private property. Unless you're playing on a government-owned server or posting on a government-owned board, you don't have _any_ of those rights.

It's not "political correct bs", it's just that you're a little whiny ignorant low-life. You disgust me profoundly.

Re:heh

[klept]

Right to free speech only has to do with the government? Now let me tell you something jerk, read the court cases. Practically all of them have to do about private issues. And come to think of it, you ought to learn to read in general. Because most of what you are accusing me of posting I never wrote. Come to think of it, that is the main factor of mental illness, or should I be polically correct, lol, and say special needs. You appear to have a lack of reality concerning me, and if this is the case in general, sounds like you need the shrink. I will make one point,though, to third party readers, but not to you because you're too stupid to understand. When I go swimming, I go to swim, not pick up ladies. When I go to the bookstore, I go to browse books, not socialize. Oh you can meet nice people and make friends. In fact got acquinted with over 50 people swimming and a bookstore manager wants to hang out with me when I'm there, and no it's not to sell me books. He just moved to town. But the primary purpose of these activities is to swim or browse, not devote all my attention to some screwed up person. And believe me they are at both places. And they are also on mmorgs, like you. Hey, you never told me if you are a stupid broad or a wannabe. And what part of the USA do you come from? But it doesnt matter. Wouldnt know if you were telling me the right answer or not. And come to think of it, lol, neither would you. Have a fun week. Or at least try to.

Re:heh

[Moraelin]

Heh. You really want to prove beyond all doubt that you're a retard, right? No, you go read those court cases. Libel and slander are not covered by your "right to free speech".

Show me _one_ case, where private speech between two private parties involved that amendment. _One_.

No, you learn to read. Because you show the typical mark of the ignorant redneck: being raised on the idea that "freedom of speech" means the right to troll and throw fits in public, and that it applies to everything _except_ the government.

Learn your constitution, dude, because that's how you'll lose those precious rights: by not even knowing what they are, and from whom were you supposed to defend them from.

As for the rest of the insults, heh. Maybe I'd mind them if they didn't come from someone like you. As it is, they're just somewhat funny.

Especially the thrashing and foaming at the mouth about "political corectness." Riight. So yet another retard who's too dysfunctional to function in society (to the point of not even being able to deal with people exchanging email addresses around him), rants and raves against political corectness. Not even original. Dude, there is no political correctness or incorectness involved. You're just yet another broken dysfunctional loser, that's all.

Obviously

[TonFTP]

I play Eve Online and I do not buy or play other games. I used to buy 2-4 new games a month. That number is now 0. This article should be expanded to all MMORPGs. WoW for some reason brings up all these questions...

They Should Have Archive Service!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly why I would pay for archive service - say a buck a month - to keep my characters alive while I do something else.

~Gildas

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[TrebleJunkie]

That explains a lot. Your summation is totally, utterly and completely wrong!

Altruism, the notion that you must sacrifice yourself -- your time, your money, your mind, your best efforts -- to others at no gain to yourself, is absolutely vilified in Rand's philosophy. Non-selfishness IS altruism. Altruism IS self-destruction. Sadly, altruism is the mode and motive of nearly every way of life, government and religion on the face of the Earth. (With the possible exception of LeVey's Satanism, which should be rejected, too, for other reasons which I'll leave up to the reader to figure out.) Sacrifice to society or state for the Common Good. Sacrifice to your fellow man for reasons of faith. As such, no matter which way you go - Red State or Blue, Christian, Muslim or Jew, Commie or supposed Capitalist (there is no true Capitalism in the world, sadly), we submit ourselves willingly to our own eventual destruction.

A more accurate, although still-lacking, summation would be this:

Every man exists for his own sake, not for the sakes of others.

That summation is lacking because it fails to declare reality to be objective and non-contradictory; it fails to declare reason, logical non-contradictory identification of reality, as a man's only means of survival; it only touches on the declaration that a man's pursuit of his own happiness is his highest purpose; it is only by inference that one could conclude from it that voluntary trade -- of best effort for best effort, value for value -- for mutual benefit is the only acceptable basis of any relationship. But if I have to come up with the _best_ possible summation, that's it in a nutshell.

Original solution

[Anonymous Coward]

My God! Maybe someone will have to come up with an original game that doesn't necessarily appeal to the exact same people!

Sense of Accomplishment!

[slappyjack]

Favorite quote:

"It may continue to grow in China," Mr. Pachter added, "but not in Europe or the U.S. We don't need the imaginary outlet to feel a sense of accomplishment here. It just doesn't work in the U.S. It just doesn't make any sense."

I don't know what country Mr. Pachter lives in, but its not the one where people watch this much TV a day, or gamble this much, or blah blah blah...

Don't beleive your own hype, Mr. Pachter.

I'm just sayin'.

Perfect example

[OaXlin]

I'm probably a perfect example of this. Although my gorrila is EverQuest.

I used to buy a new PC game about every 2 months or so, but since I started playing EverQuest over 2 years ago I have only purchased 1 other game (neverwinter)

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[wormbin]

User defined content is a double edged sword and requires a really good community to work well. For whatever reason Blizzard has cultivated a horrible online community in WoW. Maybe it's the bnet kiddies, I don't know.

One of my favorite quotes reguarding player created content in WoW: If Blizzard created a "shovel" item, in one week Azeroth would be a giant hole. It's so much easier to destroy or vandalize than to create.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[deathy_epl ccs]

And yeah, I did explore NWN and its scripting system but you have to do memory-snooping to make it a distributed, persistent world. Online games DMing with a group of RL friends is fun and all, but the joy of mudding was meeting strangers and playing with 100s (or 1000s) of people. NWN isn't the game for that.

Actually, you don't have to do memory-snooping to make it distributed or persistent... it was capable of distributed servers out of the box and persistence was added in a pretty early patch.

Still, ultimately it was nice and all but a little too bland. I'm hoping Dragon Age is better, and it looks like it could be.

I'd also like to see something more like LP/MudOs where we can define our own game ruleset instead of being forced to use the one the game came with... someday, I suspect this may actually become a reality but for now I guess I'll just keep wishing in the one hand and leave it at that 'cause I don't want to get my other hand dirty.

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[cpu_fusion]

Actually, you don't have to do memory-snooping to make it distributed or persistent... it was capable of distributed servers out of the box and persistence was added in a pretty early patch.

You're right, it does let you link servers together through portals, and there's auto-save.

I should have said, "distributed module across multiple server processes" and "database persistence." If those are part of NWN, I missed it.

http://www.nwnx.org/ addresses part of this

Mac, not MAC

[antdude]

MAC Addresss. ;) You meant to say Mac. I am just being a spelling Nazi today.

C&C RENEGADE RULES

[Anonymous Coward]

C&C RENEGADE rocks, and is free, and has 10x the action comapred to WoW...........

mydogREX RULES 8-)

btw, here's the text of that amendment

[Moraelin]

"Right to free speech only has to do with the government?"

Here's the actual text of the first amendment

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So there you go. It mentions "Congress" and making laws very very clearly. So unless someone gets a law through Congress to prevent you from talking, they are _not_ violating it.

So just as a quick list that I wish more of your kind finally got through their skulls, in no particular order:

- people being offended by your retarded insults and/or ignoring you, are _not_ violating your first amendment rights (unless they're members of the Congress and pass a law for it)

- getting moderated/banned/deleted/etc on a board is _not_ violating your freedom of speech

- getting banned from a game, board, IRC channel or whatever, is _not_ a first amendment violation.

- freedom of press applies to those who own the press (including there newer media, such as forums, boards, IRC, in-game communication, etc.)

- the _only_ one you're guaranteed a right to petition for redress is the government. No more. It doesn't give you the same rights in regard to forum moderators, IRC ops, game support people, other players, etc.

As I've said: learn your rights well, because otherwise you'll lose them, and not even know you had them to start with.

Re:btw, here's the text of that amendment

[klept]

Did you read the case law assshole? Every point you mention has nothing to do with free speech and I never said it did. In fact I wish you would do me a big favor, and ignore me. And you are a stupid broad. Your posts amply prove that.

Blizzard hurts in a good way

[Avatar8]

Instead of jumping on the MMO debate or how WoW has changed my gameplay life (quit 8.5 year UO habit and haven't bought a game since November '04), let me just say this:

Blizzard is Da BOMB when it comes to development!

If Sony, Microsoft or any EA-sucked-in company put half as much effort developing and debugging as Blizzard does, THEY would have good games, too.

I was impressed when I heard Blizzard delayed the release of Diablo 2. It was worth the wait. WoW also had some delays. Again, worth the wait. The servers/connectivity/lag issues were all related to an unanticipated response from customers: too few copies, too few servers and too little bandwidth. That's all been resolved now to support the record number of subscribers.

Every other company could learn a great deal from Blizzard.

For a while I feared that EA would use their muscle to buy out and ruin Blizzard, like they did Origin, Maxis and a dozen other developer companies. Now, I have little fear of that since Blizzard is doing so well. I'll gladly keep paying my $15/month to thwart EA from conquering the computer gaming world.

Developers distracted

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I don't know if the industry is really getting hurt by the face that so many players are playing WoW but I can think of something that may be a serious threat to the industry. I have heard stories about developers, producers, and other members of the game industry playing WoW at work rather then working on the game they have in development. This has gone so far that at some places upper management has had to make IT block the port that WoW runs off of in order to insure there employees aren't playing it at work. This could defiantly lead to a loss of quality in the end product. Now WoW isn't necessarily to blame for this. The developers should have enough dedication and self control to actually work at work.

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[veddermatic]

I know what she alleges her philosophy is, but in practice, when everyone starts acting selfishly, well; when the few super brilliant movers and shakers she cares about start doing so, they create a world where everything is wonderful, even for the masses who can't hope to be as brilliant as those who "can do", since the selfishness of the few elite has given them jobs and all sorts of super-duper technology.

If you read her books in context of her and her personality, her whole philosophy is lashing out at a perceived "injustice"... she feels that her brilliance should be exalted by the world, and since it wasn't, she wrote horrible, horrible books about a magic world where she would have the power to do whatever she wants and rise to the top and spend her days in the company of other "greats."

I also find that a lot of the people who identify with her also feel that. Obviously, I don't know anything about you at all, so please don't think I am holding you to that characterization, but Rand's views play perfectly into the mindset of those who feel THEY should be on top, because those who are on top aren't as "good."

BTW: It's nice to actually have a discussion on /. with somebody who can type in complete sentences =)

Re:Blizzard Shrugged. Heh.

[TrebleJunkie]

BTW: It's nice to actually have a discussion on /. with somebody who can type in complete sentences =)

There's a few of us who can, but we're usually modded flamebait pretty quickly. ;)

If you read her books in context of her and her personality, her whole philosophy is lashing out at a perceived "injustice"... she feels that her brilliance should be exalted by the world, and since it wasn't, she wrote horrible, horrible books about a magic world where she would have the power to do whatever she wants and rise to the top and spend her days in the company of other "greats."

I tend to separate Rand's personality from her philosophy. Rand had a *brilliant* mind, a simply amazing ability to think, and created a wonderful philosophical framework, but had trouble walking the talk -- as I wrote recently in a discussion with another friend of mine, "Rand couldn't practice all of what she preached. In her personal relationships, if you didn't worship her at all costs, you were an outcast. If you didn't agree with her logic, and reach her conclusions, you were an outcast... The people around her had to live for _her_, had to love _her_, many times at the expense of their own happiness and values, which is a stunning major violation of the philosophy" that you live for your own sake, and do *not* sacrifice yourself for the sakes of others. (Wow, if you've never tried it, quoting yourself is _weeeeird_.) Rand's life fails to imitate her art. In her work, characters took time to reach the conclusions they did. In life, people do the same, and no amount of external will can change that. Rand also failed to recognize and/or accept that which she called in her work "errors of mind." She identified them as breaches of morality.

I also find that a lot of the people who identify with her also feel that. Obviously, I don't know anything about you at all, so please don't think I am holding you to that characterization, but Rand's views play perfectly into the mindset of those who feel THEY should be on top, because those who are on top aren't as "good."

I'm self-admittedly tough to pigeonhole. :) I reached a lot of objectivism's conclusions long before I ever read Rand. I read The Fountainhead without really seeing much of her philosophy shining through. (Probably because, as my intro to Rand, I tended to skip over the multi-page diatribes. I've tried re-reading it. I still can't.) Atlas Shrugged made the last few pieces of my own personal puzzle "click" for me. I identify myself as being mostly objectivist, deist (and non-contradictorally so, but that's a long story) and perhaps a tinge of buddhism, (I did my homework -- you seem to have an interest in it, yourself. :) ) in that I don't particularly crave much -- not power, not material wealth, not sex, not success -- although I disagree with the buddhist tenet that all life is suffering (or some variation on the word), there's actually some parallels between objectivism and buddhism. (But then, I'll admit I've done very little study of Buddhism except for the little that's on wikipedia. I'm a quick study, however, and that's enough for me to know what I think is wrong with it. I'm not a big fan of Nietzsche either, and I've not read more than 10 words of his. *shrug*) I crave only my own happiness and freedom. I wish to live as much for my own sake and no one else's as I possibly can. I wish to make as few concessions to that as possible.

I will admit to having little patience for mediocrity and a hatred for any infringement of my rights. I will admit to shaking my head at the beliefs of most religions. I think that most people have no idea -- for better or for worse -- their true value. I'm fairly aware of mine, but I do have things here and there yet to sort out.

I know what she alleges her philosophy is, but in practice, when everyone starts acting selfishly, well; when the few super brilliant movers and shakers she c

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[kcb93x]

Cray's still there, in fact, I attend college in their old headquarters (Brown College, formerly Brown Institute, in Mendota Heights, across the river from MSP Int'l Airport...Cray has an office down the street from the college.

I seem to remember hearing something about Epic (Unreal fame) being nearby, or having an office here. Although I might be quite wrong with regards to that. *shrugs*

The U of M is still quite large - being a Sourceforge mirror and all. Maybe we need to set up a Minnesota (or just Twin Cities) Slashdot user's group (NOT on meetup.com .... stupid group fees)

Re:How about some innovation please? thx

[deathy_epl ccs]

Well, to be fair, LPMud had a similarly lacking persistence for the majority of it's life... I remember every time I'd log out of the game, the majority of it would reset for me.

Of coz, this was only with the default lib which nobody in their right minds USED, but still...