[Continuing the year-end retrospective at Worlds in Motion sister site Gamasutra, discussing notable games, developers, and industry figures of 2007, MMOG Nation's Michael Zenke takes a look back on the biggest moments of the year in massively multiplayer online games, events that heralded the five biggest trends in a year that history may show as a turning point for the genre.]
This has been an unbelievable year for Massive games. Unfortunately, I don't mean that in a positive sense. When I made a few back-of-the-napkin prognostications about the coming year in December of 2006, I thought I was being a huge sourpuss.
It turns out I wasn't nearly sour enough. Closures, projects failing in their development phase, the departure of notable individuals from high-profile titles, weak launches, minor scandals, a number of games that were just plain delayed ... it's been a hell of year.
It wasn't all bad, of course. Specifically the mainstream acceptance of World of Warcraft and the successful launch of Lord of the Rings Online speak to future successes for the genre. There have also been several 'dark horse' contenders showing their heads, plenty of new companies throwing their hats in the ring, and (finally) some measure of success for foreign games imported to the states.
Despite all these negative signs, I see 2007 as generally positive. The Massive game industry is still in its infancy, in many ways, and these failures are hard growing-up type lessons. I've tried to keep that in mind when constructing a list of the Top Five MMO Trends of 2007.
In the spirit of previous Top Five articles from other observant commentators, these points will try to sum up the most impactful events of the year for Massive gamers and the hobby they love so much... with an eye to what lessons we should draw for the future.
Let's hope looking back on 2008 will be more about sugarplums and less about coal.
1. 'Little' Games Get Huge
All year long there's been a growing swell from the 'underbelly' of the Massive gaming scene. While people focus a lot of attention on World of Warcraft and other AAA titles, games like Runescape and MapleStory have quietly been accruing huge numbers of players. While those numbers have been building for some time, it feels like this is the first year that commentator in and out of the industry have realized the full import of these games. WoW may be an 800-pound gorilla, but Runescape's million-plus player base isn't a housepet either.
What's especially interesting is how the success of these 'small' titles mirrors a warming attitude toward imports in the states. MapleStory is easily the highest profile of these, claiming over 3 million subscribers in North America since its launch here early this year.
As the concept of free-to-play games gained popularity among the web-savvy teen and 'tween markets, 2007 saw an explosion in 'garage-coded' games going big-time. Maid Marian's Sherwood Dungeon might the most noteworthy of these games, all done done on the cheap, in Flash, and hitting huge numbers of players.
This was also the year that saw virtual worlds hit the big time. Whether we're talking about the over-hyped Second Life, the announcement of Metaplace, or the under-rated Club Penguin, social online experiences have definitely become front-page news. Killer apps like Webkinz and BarbieGirls pushed the folks who wouldn't necessarily identify with swords and sorcery into an avatar, and primed them for future (subscription-based?) online exploits.
Lessons to learn: Graphics aren't everything. Free is the best price. Chat is one of the most important part of MMO game design.
2. Messy MMO Failures
It's easy to point at where this trend began in 2007: Vanguard. Every rumor you heard about Sigil and its founders was probably true, and only the largesse of SOE kept the title alive past May. Then you have the explosion of Perpetual Entertainment, a cataclysm that killed Gods and Heroes, may have "nerfed" Star Trek Online into a casual game, and has prompted an already controversial lawsuit.
Gods and Heroes wasn't the only high-profile failure this year; Auto Assault launched in such a lackluster fashion last year, it begged the question: "What happens if they launch an online world and nobody comes?" The answer: they shut it down.
It came down to the simple reality that neither NetDevil nor NCsoft had enough interest to keep it running, and so the players who liked that game lost out. An unsuccessful product shutting down may not seem surprising, but the last AAA online world to shut down was Asheron's Call 2 in 2005. Before that, I can only think of a handful of other titles that were in active operation which were closed down.
And there are a few games that are now the online equivalent of Schrödinger's cat. Is Marvel Universe Online still in production, or has no one yet formally informed the public of that the project didn't make it? The shakeout is not, I think, unexpected by industry onlookers. Just the same, they're sobering signs of the stakes in 2008.
Lessons to learn: High profile doesn't mean low risk. You need more than Vision(tm) to make a game. Silence is not golden.
3. Warcraft's Mainstream Success
That World of Warcraft is still doing well, some three years after the game's launch, would be a gross understatement. The almost flawless launch of The Burning Crusade expansion in January kicked off a year of amazing in-roads to mainstream culture. The South Park episode, the Toyota commercial, the Mr. T/Shatner spots... any Massive gamer that still wants to sit in a corner and feel misunderstood is missing the point. Once the Shat has done a Shaman impression for your game on national television, you're a permanent part of popular culture. It's that simple.
The question becomes, was this year's in-roads into mainstream consciousness WoW-specific, or something that the genre as a whole has accomplished? Do parents see the connection between their kids playing Webkinz and this sword-and-sorcery thing that Mini-Me is pimping? 2008 is primed to be an even better year for World of Warcraft with a noticeably faster 1-60 experience, a finely tuned set of 60-70 zones, and the promise of a brand-new expansion to draw even more players into the world of Azeroth. If Activision Blizzard doesn't announce 10 million players sometime next year I'll be awfully surprised.
Lessons to learn: Polish is king. Mr. T is funny. I am the law-giver.
4. Big Companies Fight MMO-Style
Activison Blizzard is, of course, a company that didn't exist as of two months ago. The merger of the publisher and Vivendi's best-known subsidiary was not only surprising, it offers up another insight into what it takes to compete in this marketplace. Facing off against the new titan is the old one: EA. Electronic Arts has its own MMO designs as well, with BioWare's title waiting in the wings and Warhammer Online garnering more fan enthusiasm with every month that passes.
Warhammer's delay, rather than being a negative sign, is in my view a very good thing. It shows that EA understands the commitment it's made. Giving Marc Jacobs and his team the chance to get things right before the game sees retail launch is a sure sign of maturity in the EA managers handling the game.
From the content we're now being shown, it's fairly clear that only two thirds of the game was "ready" at the time the game was due to launch... and even that is giving them the benefit of the doubt. Even just the couple of months since the launch date went past has seen leaps and bounds in new content. By mid-year, they should have quite a product on their hands.
Which makes Mythic and Blizzard even more directly in competition. Warhammer's release will be the first real attempt to imitate World of Warcraft's success in western markets. The producers may talk about WAR being Led Zeppelin to WoW's Beatles, but I'm sure the hope at EA is that this game will be another multi-million player juggernaut. Blizzard's unnamed in-development MMO may well be a direct competitor for BioWare's game, as well, giving the two giants even more to skirmish over.
In one short year we've seen the creation of epic competition for EA in the single-player realm, and the beginnings of a worthy adversary for Blizzard. It's going to be a heck of a fight.
Lessons to learn: Getting it right is worth any price. These things print money. The unstoppable force, meet the immovable object.
5. The Question of How To Pay
At Austin GDC there was a panel on the last day of the event ostensibly intended to discuss the 'biggest opportunities' in online games. The reality of it was that the table was stacked with Marc Jacobs (a staunch opponent of Real Money Transfer) and two big proponents of microtransactions: Raph Koster and Eric Bethke. What resulted is described on Gamasutra as "a tussle for the future of online games". That one moment nicely summed up possibly the most important trend of this year, and speaks volumes about what we're going to be talking about in 2008.
The fight that day was about the value of paying a flat subscription fee versus microtransactions, as seen in games published by Nexon. Blizzard's well known acceptance of both models is an exception, as most companies choose one or the other as their business model. Ultimately, this may be a question that's out of the hands of the designers: American players are already indicating their love of micropayments and RMT by heavily playing newly arrived games of this type. Despite lawsuits and crackdowns, people are still paying real money for gold and other online currencies.
While I think it's unlikely we'll see many companies openly accepting gold sellers in their games, there are a few who have already begun to walk that path. The nebulous acceptance of the newly announced Live Gamer service by Sony Online Entertainment and Funcom speaks to the kinds of arrangements we might see in the future.
Lessons to learn: The only thing better than free is micro-payments. Players secretly like paying for gold. Celebrity game designer deathmatch would make an awesome show.
Despite the mixed news, 2007 was a big year for the Massive gaming genre. Even if it remains to be seen whether mainstream acceptance of MMO games is all that we could hope for, gamers are definitely starting to get on board.
The ranks of online gamers grows every year. From all accounts World of Warcraft's success is not coming at the price of market viability for other games the way it was once feared. The only explanation for this is that ever more gamers are turning to online entertainment as a way to connect with their fellows. Barring any huge or unexpected events, 2008 is going to be another amazing year for Massively Multiplayer Online Games.










Comments (14)
WHAT ABOUT STARWARS GALAXIES???? The best MMO ever was DESTROYED by SOE. I will NEVER buy another SOE games as they are CONMEN. They release expansions and said nothing until everyone bought it then changed the whole game from DIAMONDS TO BOBO'S! If you have ANY sense dont get into a SOE game as they couldnt give a monkeys about YOU or any other of their customers. What losers!
Posted by Niall Kelly | December 31, 2007 10:32 AM
Posted on December 31, 2007 10:32
The unfortunate fact with mmo's is that they have to remain at the front of peoples minds. I play dark age of camelot which has had practically no advertisment either in magazines tv internet.
The sad thing is that the EU servers totally self destructed after GOA failed to act on what the player base had been saying for at least 2 years.
I think companies forget that most people will happily promote a game for them BUt when it comes down to the crunch they have to invest some of the money they gained from subscriptions in activily advertising it.
Most MMO's on the market although have seemed to move away from the kill xxx number of bunnies aproach and instead spoon feed the player through the game with completing quests the best means to complete the game. People have forgotten that the most fun from the game is not hitting the cap level as fast as possible it is instead meeting the people along the way that can be life long friends.
Posted by andrew giggal | December 31, 2007 10:40 AM
Posted on December 31, 2007 10:40
Once again no mention of EvE-Online, With its continued growth and release of its free GFX update it should give a better indication of the state of the niche MMO market.
Posted by John Edmunds | December 31, 2007 11:49 AM
Posted on December 31, 2007 11:49
I agree with John Ed. EVE online is a beautiful game that doesn't have some of the cliche elements of level level level. The biggest drawback though is the steep learning curve and the relative difficulty.
Posted by Wooster | December 31, 2007 4:42 PM
Posted on December 31, 2007 16:42
The downside to the merger of Activision and Blizzard is that they get too big and forget about the paying customers.
I have just bought the Battlechest version of WOW and have had no end of problems trying to get it to work.
I have patched to the latest drivers for graphics, sound etc and done all they suggest on their website.
However contacting technical support is impossible as there is a fault in their email system.
I am one of many with these connection problems and unhappy with the lack of response judging by complaints on the forums and I along with many others will cancel their subscriptions before they have started.
I have have no problems with other MMOs such as Lord of the Rings or Guild Wars. They all work brilliantly.
Are Blizzard so big now that they will take the money from new customers and then forget about them as being small and insignificant compared to long time players.
Big does not mean better.
Posted by Tim Peters | December 31, 2007 7:09 PM
Posted on December 31, 2007 19:09
Hi, I have to agree regarding EVE Online, with its single shard design and massive user base it represents pretty much the only evolving game universe currently in existance. Well done CPP.
Posted by Gary Coulter | January 1, 2008 3:41 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 15:41
I actually clicked this link wondering if EVE had gotten any of the limelight, but seems not. The game has really taken MMO's in a different direction with how its built compared to other more mainstream MMO's.
Posted by Jonathon Bowyer | January 1, 2008 3:53 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 15:53
Another one who agrees about Eve Online. CCP has consistantly released huge upgrades, for free, of both systems and content, including recently a complete revamp of the graphics engine. They use a single universe (shard) meaning that actions of one player or group of players will ultimately affect ALL players of the game. It would be nice if it got some recognition.
Posted by Starfury Shang | January 1, 2008 5:07 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 17:07
You forgot one huge failure in 2007: Tabula Rasa. While the game hasn't been shut down - and won't for some time - NCSoft has not released any subscriber numbers and instead started referal and free-test programs, something other games only do very late in their lifetime. Since TR cost 100-130 Mio US$ to make (depending on who you ask and how you add up various rumors) they'll probably keep it in a zombie state for a long time. But I wouldn't be all that surprised if Tabula Rasa will cost someone's job in 2008 - and no matter how you turn things, the sheer cost of TR makes the horrible launch a huge disaster.
Posted by Nils | January 1, 2008 5:12 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 17:12
I have decided that I will never bother with an mmorpg again. I played SWG for a year. During that time they rewrote the game twice. The first time, although a drop in quality, difficulty and fun was bearable, but then they rewrote again and destroyed it about 6 months later, and all the time invested in it was gone, for no good reason.
So I have decided as fun as these games can be they are not worth it as the companies who can afford to run them only think of the bottom line.
I put the blame on 2 types of people greedy company execs and under 16 children who complain when everything is to difficult.
Posted by RingSting | January 1, 2008 5:31 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 17:31
EVE-Online is nothing but a grind and gankfest. Unless things have changed since I left two years ago, after starting in the final beta and playing from release.
EVE has some curiously diehard fanboys, who have no doubt created half a dozen threads on the official forum linking here and asking other people to come 'big up' the game to try and get it attention it doesn't deserve.
Lets sum up the EVE online experience: Grind your *** off for months/years to pimp out your ship. Then either spend your whole life living in secure space where there is nothing to do except the same pool of 20 quests over and over again (I quit after a few feet of dust grew on my Apoc Navy Issue due to lack of anything to do), or go to low secure (forced PVP) space where its about 5% more interesting, but the first jumpgate you take will have 20 sad gits who camp out the bottleneck 24/7 to gank people 20 vs 1 and think they're great because of it - you lose your ship and all fittings, months/years of work gone with no warning, unless you log in an alt to check the way is clear first (good for maintaining the RP element of the game, right?), if not clear you can't go anywhere until they leave, you sit in your ship getting even more bored waiting. After being ganked all you keep are the skills in your 'head' after being cloned. Oh yeah skills, you train skills over time at a speed determined by your attributes, but you can never ever catch up to the existing players, at best you can one day gain skill points at the same rate as them, but they have years of point accumulation behind them. Points are gained whether you're logged in or not, which helps casual players keep up, but removes reward for hardcore players.
Free expansions! Yeah right, what CCP call expansions Blizzard call patches, both contain equivlent content. They have to be free because nobody would buy them and the way the game is designed clients on different patch versions couldn't play together so customers forced with paying for a patch or quitting would just quit.
Posted by David | January 1, 2008 6:04 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 18:04
I would like to further the support for EVE,quite possibly the best MMO I have ever played.
The game has a steep learning curve, I will admit that - but it has a very user-friendly mouse-control based interface, and immense depth.
It has few limits, and that is the joy of it. It offers both elements of immediate reward for brief actions, while at the same time rewarding and requiring long-term character development.
Posted by Andrew Dennison | January 1, 2008 6:24 PM
Posted on January 1, 2008 18:24
I've just left Eve online after 3 years because of wide spread and unfixed problems. Eve has had a disasterous year. Three failed patches that left the game unplayable for days and in one case weeks. A patch that left one in ten people's PCs un-bootable. Little or no action against exploitors and cheaters, which include staff and the dreaded alliance of the Band of Developers ganking everybody trying to get access to the interesting parts of the game in low security space.
Posted by Martin | January 2, 2008 4:18 AM
Posted on January 2, 2008 04:18
Interesting article which obviously focuses on just a section of the MMO market.
No mention of Everquest. I stopped playing EQ when EQ2 launched thinking that was the death knell. Yet X years on I find out they released about another 7 expansions beyond the 7 I already had played.
To me getting the feel of a genre right is probably the most important part of development. CoH/CoV are an excellent example of that, rarely do they get a mention. Instead crap like 'Habbo Hotel' which just happens to get a bag load of free to play kiddies joining it overshadows the vast development gone into a game like City of Villans.
Conan? Pirates of the Burning Sea? Hellgate London? The declining fortunes of DnD online. The mishandling of SWG, the failure to capitalise on Planetside...(funny its always SOE who seem to botch stuff) There are more...all play their part in bringing the industry into the public mind.
Posted by Jason Charles | January 2, 2008 5:51 AM
Posted on January 2, 2008 05:51