"We Demand A Return To Normalcy"
I've heard a lot about World of Warcraft (WoW). It's one of those MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games), the one that currently dominated the market. It's getting a fair bit of mainstream attention, too:
In an article in the New York Times, (for those of you unable to access it, you can get a free login at Bug Me Not without selling your info to spammers) there is discussion of whether the overwhelming success of the game is "bad for the industry" or "a quirk, soon to receed." What the article failed in every way to do is address what everyone I know who plays the game assures me: it is very, very fun.
Consider: traditionally, MMORPGs are riddled with drugery, and/or timesinks, and/or limits to the size of the world. And, traditionally, there has been a pool of about one million customers open to American publishers. WoW seems to suggest that previous assumptions about the size of the pool were radically incorrect, as WoW has one million customers in the US alone, and 4 million worldwide.
A lot of people are pissed off, because their games aren't doing well as a consequence. The Matrix Online flopped. Everquest II did acceptably, but still faces an 8:1 disadvantage in world market share. Being upset, they grumble about WoW being the "800-pound gorilla" (a currently overused phrase in the gaming industry, applied to Sony, Will Wright (creator of The Sims and Simcity), WoW, and various other things that people view as unassailable).
Here's the fact of the matter: WoW is more fun to more people than the other games. Why? Well, there's a lot of reasons, frankly. It is better built for social experiences, and actually enhances the experience of teamwork rather than making it a tiresome chore. The game manages ot avoid the most egregeous timesinks seen in other games. It provides incentives for casual play, rather than allowing people who do nothing else to dominate. It lets you make as many characters as you want across multiple servers. It gives people the option to use player-versus-player servers or not at their discretion. It provides character-building options quite divorced from "gaining levels." This is to say nothing of the well-deserved credit that goes to its network, which (after some initial growing pains) is now rock-solid in its reliability.
If someone wants to compete with WoW, then they'd damn-well better learn from it. It hasn't reinvented the wheel, but it has repaved the road, making the journey smooth and pleasant by contrast to its earlier state. WoW is a milestone in online gameplay, and until everyone rises to the new benchmark, they're not going to get to really compete for that enormous new share of players.
When one game dominates a glutted genre, it almost always means it's better. And everyone else needs to further improve on the new model to be noticed.
Period.
In an article in the New York Times, (for those of you unable to access it, you can get a free login at Bug Me Not without selling your info to spammers) there is discussion of whether the overwhelming success of the game is "bad for the industry" or "a quirk, soon to receed." What the article failed in every way to do is address what everyone I know who plays the game assures me: it is very, very fun.
Consider: traditionally, MMORPGs are riddled with drugery, and/or timesinks, and/or limits to the size of the world. And, traditionally, there has been a pool of about one million customers open to American publishers. WoW seems to suggest that previous assumptions about the size of the pool were radically incorrect, as WoW has one million customers in the US alone, and 4 million worldwide.
A lot of people are pissed off, because their games aren't doing well as a consequence. The Matrix Online flopped. Everquest II did acceptably, but still faces an 8:1 disadvantage in world market share. Being upset, they grumble about WoW being the "800-pound gorilla" (a currently overused phrase in the gaming industry, applied to Sony, Will Wright (creator of The Sims and Simcity), WoW, and various other things that people view as unassailable).
Here's the fact of the matter: WoW is more fun to more people than the other games. Why? Well, there's a lot of reasons, frankly. It is better built for social experiences, and actually enhances the experience of teamwork rather than making it a tiresome chore. The game manages ot avoid the most egregeous timesinks seen in other games. It provides incentives for casual play, rather than allowing people who do nothing else to dominate. It lets you make as many characters as you want across multiple servers. It gives people the option to use player-versus-player servers or not at their discretion. It provides character-building options quite divorced from "gaining levels." This is to say nothing of the well-deserved credit that goes to its network, which (after some initial growing pains) is now rock-solid in its reliability.
If someone wants to compete with WoW, then they'd damn-well better learn from it. It hasn't reinvented the wheel, but it has repaved the road, making the journey smooth and pleasant by contrast to its earlier state. WoW is a milestone in online gameplay, and until everyone rises to the new benchmark, they're not going to get to really compete for that enormous new share of players.
When one game dominates a glutted genre, it almost always means it's better. And everyone else needs to further improve on the new model to be noticed.
Period.
posted by Belarius at 4:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home