MMORPG Genre

[S_B_R]

Not really SEQ related but definately EQ related. I saw this (http://www.bastionpress.com/column.htm) article linked over on games.slashdot.org (http://games.slashdot.org/games/03/12/17/0557206.shtml?tid=127&tid=186&tid=206&tid=209)
Thanks to the QT3 forums for pointing to a Bastion Press column discussing why EverQuest and its sequels may always be the most popular MMORPG series. (http://www.bastionpress.com/column.htm) The author argues that EverQuest, though not without its problems, is good at keeping up with the competition: "Sony learns from other products released into the marketplace, and they continue to watch new developments from new games and absorb the more innovative features." This is all part of what he calls 'The Skaff Effect', referencing a similar phenomenon seen in another genre: "Despite a number of very good games in the tabletop RPG marketplace, none of them have ever managed to topple D&D (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome) as the #1 game in the field. Skaff Elias (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/rb10) (one of the guys behind the Magic (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=magic/splash/welcome) revolution) hypothesized that any new game released into a marketplace dominated by one brand would only serve to drive more consumers to that brand."Ratt made a post (http://seq.sourceforge.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2585) some time ago with basically the same overall concept. So anyway I thought I'd post this for discussion.

To me the "Skaff Effect" makes alot of sense and the available data definately supports it. Everytime a new MMORPG is release people predict EQ's death but EQ's player base continues to grow.

-edit-
Found Ratt's post (http://seq.sourceforge.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2585).

[Dedpoet]

You'll also notice that EQ is always the basis of comparison. Even over at Sigil's (http://www.sigilgames.com) forums, where they say over and over that their game is not at all based on EQ, EQ references and comparisons dominate. Look at the FAQ - it's all questions about "How will you address X problem that we see in EverQuest?"

How many posts have you read about people who quit for weeks, months, or a year, played some other game, and then came back? How many board signatures have you seen claiming the player is "retired" from EQ, yet they still troll and sometimes actively post on class boards? If you read as many boards as I do, your answer is probably hundreds.

I hadn't heard about the "Skaff Effect" before, but it makes sense, even if you have to put a name on something that has seemed obvious to people who have followed the "gaming" industry at all. Growing up, I played or was at least exposed to every popular pen and paper RPG you have probably ever heard of and my friends and I still always compared them to D&D. Super hero game, vampire game, fantasy game, space game, miniatures game set in the obscenely distant future, miniature ship to ship combat game, mech game, post-apocolyptic or post-awakening game - all compared to D&D by their players. Amazing.

[BlueAdept]

I can understand why D&D was so popular. There was nothing like it when it came out and it was quite some time before anything similar came along.

Everquest on the other hand was not the first one out. UO was the first and ruled the MMORPG. I dont remember if EQ was the second or the third one out. Anyway EQ even as buggy as it was, stole the title from UO.

I still swear they pump subliminal messages to you when you play. It truely is EverCrack.

[Ratt]

Hah, it was nice going back and reading that post...

I still stand by what I said, 100%. I've tried some of the new games (AO, SB, DAoC, FFXI, etc...) and it's just as I figured it would be... EQ with new clothes.

There are a few little tidbits, and nice features/additions that blow EQ away... but at a fundamental level, it's still EQ.

MUD/MUSH/MOO's touched on this area, but they did not have the population for the most part, that EQ had/has, coupled with the fact that they were more difficult to access than Joe Average consumer, and there was less accountability on the part of the operators and it was a recipe for a niche market that would not expand into the mainstream like EQ has.

A year later, I still see no possible new developments in the MMORPG genre that will suddenly make me sit up and go HOLY HELL! I need to spend every single moment of my free time and cut into my sleep time to play this son of a bitch.

FFXI is a perfect example... the game looks like it's fun to play. I *want* to play it... But I can't bring myself to churn out levels again... and you have to do that in FFXI. You have to do that in DAOC. You have to do that in SB. You have to do that in EVERY SINGLE MMORPG in existance to get to the "Good stuff."

Why? Because, as I said in the original post, you have to have crappy stuff to make the good stuff... good stuff, otherwise it's just "stuff."

How can you overcome that seemingly insurmountable problem? Currently, you can't. You have to focus on another Genre, or change the playing field so drastically that the old stuff is new again.

To illustrate that point, how is EQ fundamentally different from any other role playing game? Basically, it's not. You start out at one level, and you have a goal to reach another level/objective. That's pretty much the essense of all games.

What made EQ different was the fact that you're suddenly thrust into a word rich with intelligence. Sure the monsters are dumb as a box of hammers, but there are other people there... effectively infusing the world with human level AI. Add to the fact that it's not really AI, but actual people that you can build a real emotional bond with, and suddenly the tired old RPG formula takes on a whole new light. The old is new again. Everything is fun!

Now EQ is old, the MMORPG genre is old... it's all been done. People/humans want something new and stimulating, not the same things over and over again. How can you make the MMORPG genre new again? You have to change it funadmentally; you have to give it a whole new wardrobe... but the problem is, we need a Saks Fifth Avenue for the current gaming public, and the only thing close by is a K-Mart. I'm afraid those Blue Light Special Converse All-Star High Tops and Leg warmers aren't going to cut it.

The MMORPG playing field needs to expand into new areas. But there's nowhere left to expand to. You can only show so much stimulus through a 20" 2D window... there can only be a limited amount of visual information communicated by such a thin bandwidth medium. We need the equivilent of broadband for our brains to make the next step into gaming... the current dial-up through our eyeballs is not going to generate enthusiasm beyond a gee-wow factor for the first 10 minutes.

That leaves expanding the skill required to advance in a game, and the only way you can do that is by engaging additional senses. People only want to memorize so many puzzles or arcane mouse clicks... but they WILL memorize arcane hand movements coupled with esoteric words. They will be willing to endure real, physical pain to prove themselves better than the guy or girl next door.

People compete in sporting events all the time, and online gaming will be no different. I envision MMORPGs becoming a spectator sport, probably one of the highest grossing spectator sports ever, when we can watch real people virtually live and die in what amounts to an unscripted movie/adventure/realTV.

Football, Soccer, Baseball, etc... are all artificial competitions, catering to a limited skill set. They imitate the conflicts of real life, and remove people from the gorey details of actual combat. There is a place for that, but deep down, a sports competition is nothing more than combat... We don't have gladatorial games anymore because it's brutal, inhumane and barbaric... but why is that? They were POPULAR... wildly popular. People want to see it, even if they don't want to "see" it.

But real live MMORPGs can offer them that, and more... while still being politically correct as it were. They can have all the gore, without all the guilt. People will eat that up.

I'm divided on if that can ever be accomplished physically, or if it will be silly, even in a fully virtual world. You can't really slam your competitor upside the head with a virtual mace and have him or her feel the full effects, otherwise you'd have real, lasting and possibly lethal physical harm... so real, physical MMORPGs might *still* be one step removed from the spectator sport to end all spectator sports.

I'm wandering a bit off topic, however. My point is that the next step in online RPG evolution is beyond our current technological limits... but we are AT those limits. That's a good thing.

You're probably saying "Huh? How the hell is that a good thing?"

Well, gaming has always been *the* driving force behind faster, more powerful home computer enhancements. We are at a technological limit right now; a barrier to progress. Someone, somewhere isn't going to like the limit very much and is/will seek to break it. Now that RPG gaming has reached a platue as far as the technology is concerned, someone is going to take the next step... and risk it all on a gamble that they will be the next big thing. The person/company who succeeds is going to be ridiculously wealthy. Since it's gaming that's at this barrier, our progression into the next step of computer hardware evolution is going to be pushed forward faster than it would if the technological limits were up against some other genre of computing. There's billions or trillions of dollars to be made in gaming, and companies want a piece of that ... but you need to be innovative

Someone is going to figure a way to make that next step and turn it into something profitable. Money is a great motivator, and the money pit is wide and deep in the gaming genre. We are in a good position for advancement at this point.

[S_B_R]

As usual a thought provoking read Ratt.

I think some of what you described, about Virtual Games be the next spectator sport, has already come to pass. Not in MMORPGs but in a slightly older genre, First Person Shooters. If you've ever been to a major LAN Party you'll know what I'm talking about. The majority of people attending aren't ever going to be able to compete with the top players. They know that, but they come to watch, and they get a good deal of satisfaction from just watching the final battle(s).

All that satisfaction from a Game genre that arguably has fewer consequences to battle. The "DoomGuy" character really has no personal value and definitely no value to the other combatants, or the spectators, beyond being the target. In MMORPGs character have value to person behind hind the character, and there is a perceived value to the other participants and to the spectators. All the time and effort involved in character building translates easily to value.

I guess my point is, FPSs have already attained somewhat of a Spectator Sport status. Even though there is no physical risk to the competitors, and the game character has absolutely no value. MMORPGs add value to the virtual, the stakes would be greater, people would watch. All that's needed is a way to impart player skill to the combat, and a system to allow the spectators to spectate.

[BlueAdept]

Ratt has always had his hand on the pulse of the gaming community and has an accurate vision of where it should be going. I am very surprised that Sony never hired him. I dont know what Ratt does in RL, but if he doesnt work for some company in the gaming industry, he is missing his calling.