The industry is in chaos, no one knows where it goes, everyone speculates and meanwhile the smartphone and tablet market opens up an entirely new segment.
Lets take 2 examples:
http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/31/forget-the-xbox-one-and-ps-4-the-most-powerful-gaming-device-is-your-pc/
Yes, your PC is faster than the next gen. Is it? Its not, simply as the number nerds forgot that on the next gen you can access the hardware directly, on the PC you can't. The layers of software between the games and the hardware is so thick to be compatible with 30 years old history that it slows down your games.
On next gen that is not the case. Ask yourself why most XBox 360 titles still look better than the most recent PC titles. That's why.
My favourite of the week is however this one: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/05/30/take-two-ceo-talks-mmos-next-gen-gta-v-and-zombies.aspx
Oh boy. MMO's don't work in USA. Thats what he said. Thats why he partners with TenCent for Asia, that's it. No MMO works in USA. I had to read that twice.
He also focusses in Asia on MMO's where 10-20 are successful. What a wrong numbers game. Does he know that in Asia they release like a new MMO per week?
But it gets better!
He believes the rental problem on console games only exists in the first 8 weeks of new games. Really. Did he ever visit a games rental store?
If I owned Take2 shares I would sell now. Or wait, no, I would sell after GTA V release.
2013/05/29
June 10th 2013 will be remembered
June 10th will be remembered as the day which changed our (games) industry. June 10th is the day where the key press conference are on E3. Big announcements will be made by Sony and Microsoft for their new consoles.
But.
Apple makes another keynote on June 10th as well. Deliberately placed to compete with the important gaming conference. Readers take note. I warned you.
June 10th 2013. Not a nice date to remember. 06.10.2013 (US) or 10.06.2013. 100613. 061013. Doesn't look nice.
Here is what else happened June 10th in our history: http://www.historyorb.com/day/june/10
But.
Apple makes another keynote on June 10th as well. Deliberately placed to compete with the important gaming conference. Readers take note. I warned you.
June 10th 2013. Not a nice date to remember. 06.10.2013 (US) or 10.06.2013. 100613. 061013. Doesn't look nice.
Here is what else happened June 10th in our history: http://www.historyorb.com/day/june/10
2013/05/27
2013/05/23
XBox One Big Brother is watching you
Many things have been said about the epic fail of Microsoft's presentation of their XBox One (and the bad name), but this here basically cuts my interest to buy one in half:
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/139706-microsofts-new-kinect-patent-goes-big-brother-will-spy-on-you-for-the-mpaa
Yes, this is really a plan. Do you really want Microsoft watching your living room. Really?
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/139706-microsofts-new-kinect-patent-goes-big-brother-will-spy-on-you-for-the-mpaa
Yes, this is really a plan. Do you really want Microsoft watching your living room. Really?
2013/05/19
What bothers me in most computer games
Yesterday I answered an interview of the magazine Spiegel about Eve Online and one of the questions was "What do find so fascinating about Eve?"
When I answered I realized what the single thing is what bothers me on most games to date: they tell me what to do and how to do it. The freedom is so limited that you feel like a game on rails. Worst invention of the industry in this regard: QTE. Yes I mean you Call of Duty.
The one single player game I played recently for longer was Dishonored. I could pick up my mission when I wanted, still could roam around my base afterwards and went to the boat which dropped me in the mission area. Even there I could approach my goal as I wanted, there was no timer, path or QTE telling me how to do it. I love that game.
In MMO's its similar: World of Warcraft has a path of success. You level up, then you do your attunement quests (old times), then you did 5 man heroics until you get bored and finally you raid and progress until you beat the end boss of the current expansion and have the ultimate gear ... until the next expansion made it worthless. What a waste of time? What a way to be masochistic?
In Eve Online you are a pilot of a space ship. So there. Thats it. What do you do? Well what do you WANT to do? Simply do it. Pirate? Diplomat? Spy? Trader? Logistics? Flying missions? Troll? Scammer? Being part of large scale war? Explore the universe for alien artifacts?
And here is the problem why those "sandbox" games aren't as big as World of Warcraft: in order to enjoy the scope for the game you have to know what you want, you need to motivate yourself. And exactly here most players fail: they want to be entertained but not work for it. They are lazy.
And game developers are lazy too. Because producing a game on rails is easier than creating a sandbox. Otherwise we would see more of them as they are very successful even as single player games.
When I answered I realized what the single thing is what bothers me on most games to date: they tell me what to do and how to do it. The freedom is so limited that you feel like a game on rails. Worst invention of the industry in this regard: QTE. Yes I mean you Call of Duty.
The one single player game I played recently for longer was Dishonored. I could pick up my mission when I wanted, still could roam around my base afterwards and went to the boat which dropped me in the mission area. Even there I could approach my goal as I wanted, there was no timer, path or QTE telling me how to do it. I love that game.
In MMO's its similar: World of Warcraft has a path of success. You level up, then you do your attunement quests (old times), then you did 5 man heroics until you get bored and finally you raid and progress until you beat the end boss of the current expansion and have the ultimate gear ... until the next expansion made it worthless. What a waste of time? What a way to be masochistic?
In Eve Online you are a pilot of a space ship. So there. Thats it. What do you do? Well what do you WANT to do? Simply do it. Pirate? Diplomat? Spy? Trader? Logistics? Flying missions? Troll? Scammer? Being part of large scale war? Explore the universe for alien artifacts?
And here is the problem why those "sandbox" games aren't as big as World of Warcraft: in order to enjoy the scope for the game you have to know what you want, you need to motivate yourself. And exactly here most players fail: they want to be entertained but not work for it. They are lazy.
And game developers are lazy too. Because producing a game on rails is easier than creating a sandbox. Otherwise we would see more of them as they are very successful even as single player games.
2013/05/18
Nintendo - again and again
With each transition year the same discussions appear generation after generation - and I can't really hear it anymore: Nintendo is in deep shit and should stop making consoles - instead they should release their core IP's like Mario & Zelda on all other platforms.
WTF.
This is the worst decision they could make. The sole existence of that argument proves that Nintendo should not do it: if you want to play their great games then buy their hardware.
And Nintendo still builds the best console hardware. Microsofts XBox is louder than a vacuum cleaner and red circles all the time. The PS3 is huge, can't be stacked and its only advantage is the Blue Ray.
Nintendo has one weakness they need to learn fast: online. That's where Sony and their PS4 learned very fast - the XBox paved the way but Microsoft screwed it up.
Let's see what may 21st will bring when Microsoft spills their beans.
Only one ting is clear: Nintendo, being 125+ years old, having a market cap others are envious about - has patience like an elephant. If this generation isn't theirs then it might be the next.
NEVER underestimate Nintendo!
WTF.
This is the worst decision they could make. The sole existence of that argument proves that Nintendo should not do it: if you want to play their great games then buy their hardware.
And Nintendo still builds the best console hardware. Microsofts XBox is louder than a vacuum cleaner and red circles all the time. The PS3 is huge, can't be stacked and its only advantage is the Blue Ray.
Nintendo has one weakness they need to learn fast: online. That's where Sony and their PS4 learned very fast - the XBox paved the way but Microsoft screwed it up.
Let's see what may 21st will bring when Microsoft spills their beans.
Only one ting is clear: Nintendo, being 125+ years old, having a market cap others are envious about - has patience like an elephant. If this generation isn't theirs then it might be the next.
NEVER underestimate Nintendo!
2013/05/17
A/B testing for lazies
Every time there is a question hanging in the air people call for A/B tests to find out the right solution. Isn't that a bit lazy? You don't have the time to test out everything with A/B tests, considering they aren't as easy to do as you think.
My answer is always do what best practice is from successful online games. So you simply take a bunch of them and look how they do it. Most of the long running ones have tested the hell out of their systems, so why don't you take their lesson and simply steal their key findings? They have it right there for you, online, in their game.
So there was a question recently if its better to sort your premium currency packages low to high or high to low. The answer is now really obvious if you follow my advice. You don't need to run an A/B test to find out.
You can learn so much by looking at good f2p games and what they do. Some of them even have fan made statistic sites which you can use how successful they are in various countries, popular items or vehicles. Simply look for them.
So open your eyes. All knowledge is right there in front of you, a simple search away.
My answer is always do what best practice is from successful online games. So you simply take a bunch of them and look how they do it. Most of the long running ones have tested the hell out of their systems, so why don't you take their lesson and simply steal their key findings? They have it right there for you, online, in their game.
So there was a question recently if its better to sort your premium currency packages low to high or high to low. The answer is now really obvious if you follow my advice. You don't need to run an A/B test to find out.
You can learn so much by looking at good f2p games and what they do. Some of them even have fan made statistic sites which you can use how successful they are in various countries, popular items or vehicles. Simply look for them.
So open your eyes. All knowledge is right there in front of you, a simple search away.
2013/05/09
Mobile is not worth it (NOT!)
I will remind Bobby about this in 5 years when he regets this:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-05-09-activisions-kotick-brushes-aside-the-mobile-market
Cheers
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-05-09-activisions-kotick-brushes-aside-the-mobile-market
Cheers
WoW dies (NOT!)
Here, 8.3 million subscribers only. Wtf, its dead Jim!
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2418730,00.asp
No its not. Even with 5m, heck even with 2m subscribers its an awesome business case. And even in 5 years, no 10 years we still can play WoW. Wanna bet?
Simply because until today no successful MMO has been shut down. You still can play Ultima Online or even Tibia if you want, both like 15 years old?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2418730,00.asp
No its not. Even with 5m, heck even with 2m subscribers its an awesome business case. And even in 5 years, no 10 years we still can play WoW. Wanna bet?
Simply because until today no successful MMO has been shut down. You still can play Ultima Online or even Tibia if you want, both like 15 years old?
2013/05/08
Additional signs of change
EA posted its financial earnings and it disappoints. Without their cash of 1.6b in the bank they would be gone by now. "Don't expect growth on the giants EA and Activision" they say. Ok, so why do others grow like hell. And some new mobile companies have a market cap of 9 billion. Wtf.
Those are all signs of disruption. Its happening and quick. The old games market will change dramatically in the next 2-3 years, so don't moan if your favorite FPS is no longer the #1 topic on the web sites.
Then EA announced they bought the Star Wars license. Oh my. Thanks no, I see what you did to Harry Potter. And fail, major fail: the license excludes online, social and mobile platforms. That deal is like an ancient relic. Fire the guy who did it.
But then its all about small 90 men companies doing more money than the old economy.
So when are you joining?
Those are all signs of disruption. Its happening and quick. The old games market will change dramatically in the next 2-3 years, so don't moan if your favorite FPS is no longer the #1 topic on the web sites.
Then EA announced they bought the Star Wars license. Oh my. Thanks no, I see what you did to Harry Potter. And fail, major fail: the license excludes online, social and mobile platforms. That deal is like an ancient relic. Fire the guy who did it.
But then its all about small 90 men companies doing more money than the old economy.
So when are you joining?
2013/05/05
LoL is not a good role model for f2p
League of Legends, or LoL for short, is often mentioned as a successful f2p game you should learn from. Fact is that LoL is one of the largest MMO's to date. Of course it makes tons of money for Riot and their owner Tencent.
So why am I hesitent to use LoL as a role model for good f2p models? The reaon is simple: their monetization system is very very specific and only works due to their reach.
Simple explanation: Revenue = Active users * conversion * ARPPU
Their active users is phenomenal high (42 million MAU as of this writing) and this multiplies the revenue formula to the skies.
But their conversion is low, i.e. how many players actively pay. That is my biggest critic. If you use LoL as a role model you might end up with a low conversion and if you fail to get the reach your game fails badly. That's a huge risk. A game can survive with an average reach and a good conversion easily, but rarely the other way around.
Note that the ARPPU is somewhat dependent on the conversion. If your conversion is low your ARPPU can be unusually high and vice versa.
Again: LoL works wonderfully for Riot and Tencent as their reach is so high. Sidenote: their reach is so high due to Tencents reach.
So why am I hesitent to use LoL as a role model for good f2p models? The reaon is simple: their monetization system is very very specific and only works due to their reach.
Simple explanation: Revenue = Active users * conversion * ARPPU
Their active users is phenomenal high (42 million MAU as of this writing) and this multiplies the revenue formula to the skies.
But their conversion is low, i.e. how many players actively pay. That is my biggest critic. If you use LoL as a role model you might end up with a low conversion and if you fail to get the reach your game fails badly. That's a huge risk. A game can survive with an average reach and a good conversion easily, but rarely the other way around.
Note that the ARPPU is somewhat dependent on the conversion. If your conversion is low your ARPPU can be unusually high and vice versa.
Again: LoL works wonderfully for Riot and Tencent as their reach is so high. Sidenote: their reach is so high due to Tencents reach.
2013/04/29
Eve Online - post two
CCP held their yearly fanfest last weekend and also celebrated the 10th anniversary of Eve Online. So CCP showed Dust514 and also details about the next expansion Odyssey.
That's where I come in with my rant. As in the last years all we get is graphics and data edits. We get "new" ships which are nothing else then modified existing ships with new data and texture, the latter even taken from existing ships.
Again: we get re-balancing in mining and ore, manufacturing materials and some UI improvements which are overdue.
What surprised me is stuff like in their keynote video they were surprised how well received the UI changes from probing were. Didn't they know what we were fighting with their sucky interface all the time?
To summarize: all changes they announced as an "expansion" is work from a small team, very small team. And that is where CCP is intelligent about their propaganda that a major team is still maintaining Eve. Its not. All their eggs are in one basket and that's Dust 514.
I think the community of Eve is being mislead and they don't even realize it. CCP is overspending on a genre they don't have experience in: a f2p shooter on a console which just is in its last year and dying. That is great business (not!).
And to top this off they announced a 10th anniversary collectors edition of Eve Online for fucking 149 Euro. What?
That's where I come in with my rant. As in the last years all we get is graphics and data edits. We get "new" ships which are nothing else then modified existing ships with new data and texture, the latter even taken from existing ships.
Again: we get re-balancing in mining and ore, manufacturing materials and some UI improvements which are overdue.
What surprised me is stuff like in their keynote video they were surprised how well received the UI changes from probing were. Didn't they know what we were fighting with their sucky interface all the time?
To summarize: all changes they announced as an "expansion" is work from a small team, very small team. And that is where CCP is intelligent about their propaganda that a major team is still maintaining Eve. Its not. All their eggs are in one basket and that's Dust 514.
I think the community of Eve is being mislead and they don't even realize it. CCP is overspending on a genre they don't have experience in: a f2p shooter on a console which just is in its last year and dying. That is great business (not!).
And to top this off they announced a 10th anniversary collectors edition of Eve Online for fucking 149 Euro. What?
2013/04/28
Eve Online - post one
If you ever wonder why MMO's are so vastly different to "multiplayer" or "single player" games read this. Simple as that:
http://kotaku.com/the-extraordinary-mischievous-too-short-life-of-sean-481060252
http://kotaku.com/the-extraordinary-mischievous-too-short-life-of-sean-481060252
2013/04/27
Major change incoming
We are living through a major change in technology and digital media. A large one incoming. Get ready.
This is my talk I held at Quo Vadis in Berlin 2013
This is my talk I held at Quo Vadis in Berlin 2013
2013/04/23
This is important
Times change fast, faster than ever before. I couldn't have made a better presentation than these guys: READ all slides to the end. World changing.
2013/04/13
Always on - is a good thing! Unless ...
Always on. Scandal. Microsoft getting bashed. A good man quit his job at Microsoft due to his Twitter slip - but he just stated the truth.
Whats going on? Why did this shitstorm happen out of a simple thing called "Always on"?
Always on means that the console in question needs an internet connection in order to work. I.e. if you don't have a connection you can't play. Usually that is the case anyway, so why the anger?
Case 1: Some people only occasionally connect their XBox to the internet. That happens on dial in connections or if the console isn't near the internet plug (note that old XBoxes didn't have Wifi).
Case 2: No or flaky internet connection. You will be surprised that a lot of people do not have a stable internet connection. This happens mainly at country side locations.
Case 3: Short internet service interruptions. That happens occasionally on thunderstorms or simply outage from hardware failures.
Case 4: Limited bandwidth contract. That is quite common in many countries - even USA. A console with is always on can't be controlled about the amount of data it sends.
If a game stops working simply due to the above situations then this could be seen as a fail. But as the console should offer a good service it should handle those gracefully.
In other words the game should continue to work even if the connection is interrupted - for a while. Of course most games require a connection due to online features, but that's another matter.
What matters is that the customer does worry that he can't play when he wants to. You know, internet usually doesn't work when you need it. This worry is what Microsoft has to get rid of. But so far their PR & marketing sleeps.
This always on isn't new. Uplay, Origin from EA or Steam had the same issue as also Steam. But they fixed it so no one worries anymore - but still the bad message exists and some people refuse to even install services like these.
So the fail wasn't that the Microsoft employee spread the news, the mistake is the bad handling of the user worries.
Whats going on? Why did this shitstorm happen out of a simple thing called "Always on"?
Always on means that the console in question needs an internet connection in order to work. I.e. if you don't have a connection you can't play. Usually that is the case anyway, so why the anger?
Case 1: Some people only occasionally connect their XBox to the internet. That happens on dial in connections or if the console isn't near the internet plug (note that old XBoxes didn't have Wifi).
Case 2: No or flaky internet connection. You will be surprised that a lot of people do not have a stable internet connection. This happens mainly at country side locations.
Case 3: Short internet service interruptions. That happens occasionally on thunderstorms or simply outage from hardware failures.
Case 4: Limited bandwidth contract. That is quite common in many countries - even USA. A console with is always on can't be controlled about the amount of data it sends.
If a game stops working simply due to the above situations then this could be seen as a fail. But as the console should offer a good service it should handle those gracefully.
In other words the game should continue to work even if the connection is interrupted - for a while. Of course most games require a connection due to online features, but that's another matter.
What matters is that the customer does worry that he can't play when he wants to. You know, internet usually doesn't work when you need it. This worry is what Microsoft has to get rid of. But so far their PR & marketing sleeps.
This always on isn't new. Uplay, Origin from EA or Steam had the same issue as also Steam. But they fixed it so no one worries anymore - but still the bad message exists and some people refuse to even install services like these.
So the fail wasn't that the Microsoft employee spread the news, the mistake is the bad handling of the user worries.
2013/04/11
F2p is not a game!
Free to play is not a game. Why do I say this obvious statement - because people do forget and put all f2p games into one basket.
So here he comes and tells me "This f2p game does this and that, we should be looking into this to adapt it as well".
Wrong: you can't copy/paste stuff from one f2p business model to another. And that's what it is: f2p is a business model - NOT A GAME.
So if you think that a feature from one f2p game fits yours you should better think twice and carefully analyze WHY it works for that game & genre, if at all (you usually do not know if it works!).
That is why most monetization mechanics from let's say Candy Crush Saga won't work in your f2p FPS or strategy game. Those are entirely different genres and games and the user does behave differently within the game environment. Of course you can learn a lot from King.com's cash cow but be professional when adapting mechanics!
This brings me to another point: most companies within the f2p space discovered "their" style of monetization model which works best for them and their games. You will find that within the portfolio of these companies they implement the f2p business model in a very similar way.
This leads to some odd behaviors of f2p companies:
1: They think their model is the best
2: They think other models aren't working as they tried adapting them and failed (see above)
It is a very odd situation and basically is further made worse as real data of what works and what doesn't isn't readily available.
That's why specialists who has seen data of working games from more than one company within the f2p space are so high in demand - until this information is widely available.
So here he comes and tells me "This f2p game does this and that, we should be looking into this to adapt it as well".
Wrong: you can't copy/paste stuff from one f2p business model to another. And that's what it is: f2p is a business model - NOT A GAME.
So if you think that a feature from one f2p game fits yours you should better think twice and carefully analyze WHY it works for that game & genre, if at all (you usually do not know if it works!).
That is why most monetization mechanics from let's say Candy Crush Saga won't work in your f2p FPS or strategy game. Those are entirely different genres and games and the user does behave differently within the game environment. Of course you can learn a lot from King.com's cash cow but be professional when adapting mechanics!
This brings me to another point: most companies within the f2p space discovered "their" style of monetization model which works best for them and their games. You will find that within the portfolio of these companies they implement the f2p business model in a very similar way.
This leads to some odd behaviors of f2p companies:
1: They think their model is the best
2: They think other models aren't working as they tried adapting them and failed (see above)
It is a very odd situation and basically is further made worse as real data of what works and what doesn't isn't readily available.
That's why specialists who has seen data of working games from more than one company within the f2p space are so high in demand - until this information is widely available.
2013/04/07
I was a huge Sony fan
In my younger years I was a huge Sony fan. In the time of Hifi, Walkman and classic Tube TV's Sony was the #1 quality manufacturer, they were the 'Apple' of their time.
Now Sony is in trouble since some years and even the PS3 didn't seem to make Sony happy. Now they announced the PS4 and somehow developers are excited - why?
First: the PS4 is a powerful machine considering its a high end PC but without all the compatibility brakes from Windows PC's. It features 8GB of ultra fast memory. And the graphics card is pretty nice but actually is better than its PC counterparts as games can use it to its full extend without worrying about backwards compatibility of 15 years VGA graphics. It will be actually much faster than comparable PC graphic cards.
But that is not the most important thing, we expect new consoles to be powerful. What is important is that somehow Sony learned from its past mistakes and someone up there at Sony decided to correct all of them.
First Sony announced to make their approval process easier for games - switching to a one step process just like the App store from Apple. For my readers who do not know how the approval process works on XBox360 or PS3 should google it, its a pain in the arse for developers and actually very expensive - impossible to finance by smaller studios.
Speaking about smaller studios: Sony wants to embrace indies (about time!) and is actively seeking them out for partnerships. They also announced the partnership with Unity3d, a good development engine for everyone.
And here is the kicker: usually you need very expensive development kits to create games on consoles, not this time: Unity3d compiles on retail PS4 machines, i.e. everyone owning Unity3d and asking Sony can develop for it and try to get approved. AWESOME.
The future looks suddenly brighter for the next generation of consoles if Microsoft follows Sony's example - from the past news though they seem to screw it up.
And just to make it clear: I play on PS3 - and will order a PS4. I AM a Sony fan!
Update 2013: Sony is back: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/09/sony-2012-earnings/
Now Sony is in trouble since some years and even the PS3 didn't seem to make Sony happy. Now they announced the PS4 and somehow developers are excited - why?
First: the PS4 is a powerful machine considering its a high end PC but without all the compatibility brakes from Windows PC's. It features 8GB of ultra fast memory. And the graphics card is pretty nice but actually is better than its PC counterparts as games can use it to its full extend without worrying about backwards compatibility of 15 years VGA graphics. It will be actually much faster than comparable PC graphic cards.
But that is not the most important thing, we expect new consoles to be powerful. What is important is that somehow Sony learned from its past mistakes and someone up there at Sony decided to correct all of them.
First Sony announced to make their approval process easier for games - switching to a one step process just like the App store from Apple. For my readers who do not know how the approval process works on XBox360 or PS3 should google it, its a pain in the arse for developers and actually very expensive - impossible to finance by smaller studios.
Speaking about smaller studios: Sony wants to embrace indies (about time!) and is actively seeking them out for partnerships. They also announced the partnership with Unity3d, a good development engine for everyone.
And here is the kicker: usually you need very expensive development kits to create games on consoles, not this time: Unity3d compiles on retail PS4 machines, i.e. everyone owning Unity3d and asking Sony can develop for it and try to get approved. AWESOME.
The future looks suddenly brighter for the next generation of consoles if Microsoft follows Sony's example - from the past news though they seem to screw it up.
And just to make it clear: I play on PS3 - and will order a PS4. I AM a Sony fan!
Update 2013: Sony is back: http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/09/sony-2012-earnings/
2013/03/04
Eve Online - the future of online games?
Many people ask me why I use Eve Online as a reference for game mechanics, even though most players who tried Eve know it basically is a hardcore game for old farts. Its accessibility doesn't exist, the tutorial still sucks even though it has been revamped multiple times now.
Still Eve Online hit the 500.000 subscriber mark - after 10 years. Compared to World of Warcrafts 11 million Eve must be a failure, right? 10 years and only 500k subsribers?
Well it isn't - as it solely finances CCP's Dust514 f2p PS3 game (thats a lot of abrev right there) and also finances their Vampire game in development.
Why Eve is so important is that it is a sandbox. A nice interview what this means to your player base is found here, and it will push away some of you who might just have thought trying the game:
You will hear that CCP doesn't do anything against scammers or even Ponzi schemes within the game. So beware, space is a dangerous place as its inhabited by the most dangerous creature known to man: himself!
So back to topic: Sandboxes are important as they seem to be a solution to the content dilemma MMO's have. Developers never catch up with the speed of players consuming content. So making a sandbox is an obvious choice.
The funny thing is that MMOs then come around full circle as they started out being sandboxes: Even Ultima Online was one, and one of the best.
The problem is that sandboxes are not understood by many developers. The easiest thing you need to learn is the hardest: let it go. Do not control. Something the designers of todays quicktime event games have a hard time to adapt to. Or managers. Even worse.
Still Eve Online hit the 500.000 subscriber mark - after 10 years. Compared to World of Warcrafts 11 million Eve must be a failure, right? 10 years and only 500k subsribers?
Well it isn't - as it solely finances CCP's Dust514 f2p PS3 game (thats a lot of abrev right there) and also finances their Vampire game in development.
Why Eve is so important is that it is a sandbox. A nice interview what this means to your player base is found here, and it will push away some of you who might just have thought trying the game:
You will hear that CCP doesn't do anything against scammers or even Ponzi schemes within the game. So beware, space is a dangerous place as its inhabited by the most dangerous creature known to man: himself!
So back to topic: Sandboxes are important as they seem to be a solution to the content dilemma MMO's have. Developers never catch up with the speed of players consuming content. So making a sandbox is an obvious choice.
The funny thing is that MMOs then come around full circle as they started out being sandboxes: Even Ultima Online was one, and one of the best.
The problem is that sandboxes are not understood by many developers. The easiest thing you need to learn is the hardest: let it go. Do not control. Something the designers of todays quicktime event games have a hard time to adapt to. Or managers. Even worse.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)