TenTonHammer.com - Taking MMO Gamers to the Next Level!

By Cody “Micajah” Bye, Managing Editor

In the computer gaming industry, success is often measured by the number of boxes a company sells, the total concurrent users online at the same time, or the amount of money a person decides to spend on virtual goods. Just like any business, it all comes down to money. So if a game sells approximately 800,000 copies and manages to retain over 50% of that population, that’d make the game a success…right?

Over the last few months, hundreds of thousands of individuals have played Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures. According to their official marketing report, the developers at Funcom sold over 800,000 copies of AoC and have retained approximately 400,000 subscribers. Yet clouds of doubt and uncertainty remain over the product, as if only a few hundred thousand boxes hit store shelves and a handful of the subscribers stayed with the product. Why is this happening? What is driving people to such rampant negativity?

What drives the negativity behind the MMOG community? Isn't AoC a success?

After a bit of contemplation on the topic, I’ve come up with three factors that really drive how gamers perceive a released product. As always, these are only my personal thoughts on the subject, so feel free to argue (or agree!) with me in the forums.

1. We have really long memories. (Or once bitten, twice shy)

More than any other culture, online gamers are incredibly adept at remembering the developers that have failed the in the past. Through the widespread use of message boards and instant messaging services, gamers can easily bring up topics that have been discussed to the point of near exhaustion.

Take for example the infamous NGE from Star Wars Galaxies or the chaotic release of Anarchy Online. Even as I write this, I’m again bringing back awful memories for many users who considered these products to be their next great game only to find that their game is flawed or has become flawed in some way shape or form.

Unfortunately for Sony Online Entertainment and Funcom, those memories have haunted their more recent offerings as well. While SOE has yet to release a AAA game that has been fully developed under their roof since the release of the NGE, Funcom’s Age of Conan has certainly seen the negative affects of their previous offering. While the game shot out of the starting blocks by selling 800,000 units, there are still a vast number of nay-sayers online.  

Even with the problems seen in the post-launch version of Age of Conan, it’s nothing compared to what they faced with Anarchy Online, and they still ended up with a solid product with AO. Solid enough, in fact, to earn a massively multiplayer game of the year from PC Gamer back in 2002.

If it weren’t for the unfortunate memories of the past trials and tribulations of online games, would we consider Age of Conan anything but a success? Probably not. However, that doesn’t dismiss the fact that these events did happen and users were forced to go through the turmoil of their aftermath. It’s reasonable to be a bit cautious with companies that have faced problems in the past, but that shouldn’t be the single reason to dismiss a game as a “failure” after only a few months of live operation.

I know that in the past I’ve pointed a finger at particular moments in the MMORPG era as proof to stay only slightly optimistic about a game. However, I’ve been proven more than a few times that that sort of thinking only lends itself to not giving a game the amount of credence it deserves. In fact, after the initial hiccups that World of Warcraft experienced, I tossed in the towel and decided that the game was a flop. Waiting in queues was not my favorite pastime, yet several years later I now find myself with some level 70 characters and eagerly awaiting the release of the next expansion. Go figure.

I once thought World of Warcraft was going to fail.

2. We are waiting for a winner.

We – as gamers – almost always have an opinion about the future of an upcoming game. Many of us will state how it’s the next “X” killer, stating that the game that’s on top of the mountain is going to start showing weakness and decline. We did it with EverQuest, and now we’re doing it again with World of Warcraft. Ever since World of Warcraft came to dominate the market, many gamers have been eager to jump into the next great game.

However, with each generation of MMOGs that hits the market, that standard of excellence for the next “great” game rises ever higher. We want everything in our games. Solid player versus player. Engaging player versus environment. Instancing. Open world zones. Impeccable community tools. Our own web pages. Housing. Guilds. Auction houses.

It all needs to be in the game, and it all needs to be fantastic, or we simply turn around and walk the other way. Take Tabula Rasa for instance; it was a fairly decent game and a new way of playing MMOGs, yet it was lambasted by many critics because of limited community options and the lack of an auction house. Since it’s release, Tabula Rasa has gathered in a fair number of subscribers, but many individuals still raise the banners of “Doom!” at the earliest opportunity.

But even if a game does have all of those elements included in the game at release, it still may fall prey to the wiles of negativity. Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar had a nearly flawless launch, yet the boo-birds still found areas to complain about, namely that it was too much like World of Warcraft. Similarities did exist between the two games, but nothing that should have caused players any sort of discomfort.

Frankly, I feel that this particular portion of our gamer mentality is the worst. We’re so quick to jump to conclusions about a product – almost always within that 15-30 minute initial play window – that I’m continually amazed. I truly am aghast when I see a review for an MMORPG two or three days after a game hits the market. Our games are so big, so huge, and so time consuming that most reviewers should take at least 20 days to review a product, if not longer. That way a true experience can be gathered, and any nagging bugs that exist can have time to get squashed.

3. We are viral.

As my final reason for our constant negativity is the fact that gamers are viral. Our entire hobbies are based around living in an online space, surrounded by others who do other things online. We are constantly being barraged by opinions and ideas, and the movement of our opinions is an almost organic entity.

Will WAR live up to its RvR/PvP calling?

It’s truly an amazing thing to see. As I strive to be unbiased in my reporting, I often am forced to stand back and take a look at the true opinions of the gamers around me. While there are some that banter back and forth, it’s often about simple, trivial matters. The true choices have already been made, and a preconceived opinion has already been formed.

World of Warcraft is the king of MMOGs. EVE Online is a stellar economy based game. This same notion exists for games that haven’t even been released. Warhammer Online and Age of Conan were both slated to be the next great PvP games. While WAR has yet to see if it does or does not live up to its reputation, many Age of Conan aficionados opted to make characters on non-PvP servers, simply because they weren’t confident of the status of PvP in the game at its launch. They were so concerned about it not living up to expectations that they chose to simply ignore the preconceived notion and do the exact opposite.

While much of the hype surrounding a game is generated by the marketing forces behind the title’s development, the online gaming community certainly has a hand in making a game fit into a certain niche. Without it’s avid PvP community, Warhammer Online certainly wouldn’t be considered a true contender for the PvP crown.

But what do you think? Do you agree with my three reasons behind the constant negativity we see on the Internet? Are there other factors we should include? Let me know on the forums!