Warcraft, Wolfhead and What should an MMO be

I started reading Wolfhead after he had already stopped posting as much as he used to, but, even though I don't often agree with him, I always find his posts thoughtful.  He wrote a late response to Blizzcon in December and this is my delayed response to that post.

I played Ultima VI and VII in the early 90s and remember some fascination with the idea of an Ultima world where multiple people could play together when Ultima Online came out in 1997.  I also remember reading about EverQuest in Computer Gaming World when it came out in 1999.  However, I never seriously considered playing either game.  It seemed like a fascinating experiment, but it didn't seem that much like a game.  It reminds me of my wife's response to the first SimCity.

However, when I read about World of Warcraft (WoW) in 2004, it seemed like something different.  I had played Diablo I and II (and Lost Vikings) but the Warcraft games weren't of much interest to me since I never enjoyed real-time strategy games.  I had played many role playing games besides the Ultima games and if I had to pick my favorite genre, it probably would have been RPGs.

World of Warcraft was something that, unlike Ultima Online and Everquest looked more like a traditional RPG.  I was used to the pattern that I guess was originally established in Dungeons and Dragons where there was a plot one followed, minor battles and new places to explore interspersed with large battles.  I played the beta, found a guild and started playing on the release date and have played with some breaks ever since.

I believe Wolfhead wants something much more like the Ultima Online or Everquest experience where there is a world to play and explore in, but most of the content is driven by the players, not by a plot dictated by the designers.  He is correct in saying that this is more easily sustainable than the plot driven model of WoW.  However, I believe he makes the mistake in thinking most MMO players want the same thing he does.

To me, much of it is a matter of convenience and time.   I don't have the time or inclination to generate our own content or depend on the content that others have created.  I want to be able to follow the breadcrumbs and make progress on our own or join with our friends when it is convenient.  At one point, when you finished the breadcrumbs, about the only options were new characters, raiding, or pvp.  Pet battles have provided a new way to spend time (and help level a character if that's what you want to do).  I am enjoying Archaeology and Engineering as ways to build or gather toys, pets and mounts.

I believe there is a significant market for the kind of game that Wolfhead and many others want, a game that allows for real exploration and the sense that you are living in a dynamic world that you can influence.  I hope many games of this type get created.  However, my belief is that these will always be a relatively small market compared to what a more structured game like World of Warcraft.

Maybe I'm wrong.  The 33 million Minecraft users is many more than the 12 million maximum that World of Warcraft had.  Maybe there is a giant market for a sandbox game that some team will find the right formula.  Maybe there is a third way that some team will find in the future.  Maybe MMOs will all but go extinct like other genres.  I don't think either of those things will happen anytime soon.  Wolfhead keeps focusing in his post on the millions of users lost by World of Warcraft.  The other way to look at is that 7 million users in still many times more than any other subscription MMO and that having that many users for a 9 year old game is quite remarkable.

I believe we can learn more from people with different opinions if we allow ourselves to be open to our differences.  I also believe that World of Warcraft will thrive for many more years.

Theme park and Sandbox MMOs for a Casual gamer

Iorek meets our new friend Nomi

I just finished reading The Shattering by Christie Golden (yes, I know I am almost 3 years late reading it).  I enjoyed it, but that isn't what I am going to talk about.  It explained a lot of what happened led up to the Cataclysm and Mists expansions of World of Warcraft.  There were sympathetic characters who you meet in the game and it did make we want to play the game more (and I found humorous all the discussions about how you might enjoy playing World of Warcraft if you enjoyed the book).

Others have complained (I'll try to find references later) about having to read a book to truly understand what is happening in a game.  Part of me agrees that the game should be self-contained, but as I have thought about it, if we want truly interesting stories, I'm not sure we have a better option.  It is possible for solo content to have cutscreen videos within the game, but if this is supposed to be a multiplayer game, that takes you away from those with whom you are playing.  People have tried to put stories within the game while allowing people to play together, but there are people who never want to wait and it doesn't work well to make everyone wait for whomever is slowest.  Hopefully a player who wants to watch the 'story' can find friends who are willing to watch it with him or her, but that doesn't always happen.  

A video accompaniment might be possible, but I'd suggest that would encourage people just to watch the video and the game becomes secondary.  Books may be the best alternative, allowing the developer to build the background and motivations while still allowing you to participate in the plot.


I believe part of the reason I want an independent story provided to me is that I have limited play time.  With a lot of game time, it is much easier to have momentum and just build your own story within the game.  When you don't have much time, it is great to have some outside motivation that allows you to participate in the game world without always having to build your own story.

This leads directly to the conversation about 'Theme park and Sandbox' games (yes, I finally got to the subject of my post).  For many serious gamers, a Sandbox (or World) game like Eve or like Everquest Next is purported to be is what they are looking for.  They want to build the stories themselves and I can certainly understand that desire.  However, when I analyse how I play, I don't believe I would enjoy an MMO like that today.

I can't commit myself to a time to play with others and, while games like GuildWars 2 has made it is easier to group with others on the fly, it is a poor substitute for playing with people you know.  I really like being in my guild and having participated with them, even if it has been sporadically, over many years.

More generally, I suspect the market for a "Sandbox" game is more limited to than the one for a "Theme park" game.  Most people who play MMOs don't play for the many hours a week that the serious gamers and most of those who write about games play.   There is a place for a well-written story that isn't written as you play but let's you play a side part.  There is a place for a book that gives the background to the story in depth in a way that a casual gamer could never see within the game.  

I suggest there are probably many more people who would happily participate in a game like this than there are those who have the time to build their own stories.  I do believe the 'sandbox' gamers have been neglected and I hope, as trends seem to be going, that there are more games that cater to their needs.  Have said that, I doubt I'll be playing those 'sandbox' or 'world' games with them, and they may have to accept that those games will have a more limited market that those where the player participates in the story told within the game.