Bad launch? So what.
I’m sure that many will disagree with my title for this post, but I stick by it 98%. A poor launch has to be beyond abysmal to truly screw up an MMORPG. As long as the problems are fixed, the game will stand on the merits of its gameplay.
The 2% exception: Anarchy Online still holds the title for worst MMO launch because not only was it messy, it involved registration issues (and related credit card fears) that left some players allergic to MMOs altogether. Yet even though AO’s launch scared off customers in large volumes, it still survived and is running to this day.
Every major MMO has launched with problems, either technically on the launch itself or lacking significant content / features.
The real test is how the developers respond in the months that follow.
The WoW example
Blizzard’s launch for World of Warcraft was an epic mess. Game awards were retroactively revoked and servers commonly had downtimes measured in days. Blizzard’s immense and stubborn fanbase probably helped, but more importantly Blizzard stepped up and did what they had to do to recover from the failures. WoW still has the odd bad patch but they always rebound with the game stronger than before.
WoW launched with less pre-orders than Aion, Warhammer Online or Age of Conan. Astonishing when you think of how much (and how quickly) it grew once it stabilized.
WoW did have over 600,000 subscribers after the first month, but here’s something that’s rarely mentioned: Their subscriber base dipped before climbing again. Blizzard literally stopped selling the game until they could sort out the significant problems. Many players left during long queues, disconnects and all sorts of bugs and downtime, but when Blizzard consistently added fixes and content: New players flocked into the game in droves. It was later, months after launch that WoW hit critical mass into millions of subscribers. An even larger bulk of WoW players arrived in its second year.
Past Examples and the Present
Perseverance after launch pays off. EVE Online didn’t get over the hump until after CCP bought it back from their publishers. Dark Age of Camelot spiked its largest numbers after 2 years with its Trials of Atlantis expansion. City of Heroes has restored most of its population after 5 years. Notably, most of the rebound examples predate WoW.
Recent MMOs have tried to copy WoW’s success in a myriad of other ways, but they’ve unfortunately been slow to get their wheels moving after launch. New content and zones often get mentioned early but then pushed back, sometimes longer than a year, or in worse cases earmarked for an expansion. Big necessary changes don’t get made for fear of upsetting the playerbase. Server infrastructure is often skimped on, planning for population decreases instead of increases. Some notable games have been flat out shut down.
The MMO playerbase is incredibly resilient to changes as long as they’re necessary and well designed. More content is always welcomed. Many players wait until after launch just to see how the game pans out.
On the other hand players only tolerate broken for so long and once the smell of stagnation sets in, they’ll leave in bulk.
The months after release = more important than the launch week.
That’s difficult to master for most game studios. After a few years of development, I’m sure they just want to get the thing out the door and take a deep breath or even a (well deserved) vacation. Burnout at this point is probably the biggest risk at such a critical time.
Not every studio can afford to keep up development either, costs are soaring in the age of HD visuals. Betting on a big launch to restore dried up funds doesn’t usually work out. Running under big publishers has its risks too, they’re accustomed to games making or breaking on initial box sales and they’re not known for being patient if a game doesn’t score big right away. These are company health and business issues regardless of launch issues though.
Bad launches suck, but on their own they don’t break a game into failure.
IMHO, it’s all about ramping up the game after launch.
Mythic + BioWare restructuring
EA has reorganized Mythic and BioWare and kinda / sorta / maybe merged them. In name at least, they’ll remain separate but basically the gist of it is that the two docs at BioWare are in charge and Mark Jacobs gets flicked off the gameboard. If you want the more complete description + commentary I recommend reading Lum’s take and Keen’s take, each with their own perspectives.
This is probably a reflection of the current status quo: The upcoming big expectations of the next game versus the somewhat disappointing results of the last game. If you recall, EA also restructured soon after Mythic was acquired.
I admit I’m not a fan of Mark Jacobs. As a personality he’s um… large, but that didn’t stop me from trying Warhammer. There’s an inappropriate temptation to roast him right now, but I only met him once and that was years ago. You could probably get more mileage from the opinions of Lum (who worked at Mythic once-upon-a-time) or Keen (who’s interviewed Mark more recently).
Convenience Trumps All
There are essentially five driving forces for MMORPG players. These games, by their very nature have numerous (or at least multiple) activities and each player is motivated by the following:
- Progression – Experience to level, or obtaining gear at Endgame.
- Rewards – Gear, currency, notoriety or any other status-symbol or in-game possession.
- Fun Factors – Is the activity just plain fun to do, or awe-inspiring in some way?
- Competition – Many players are keen to compete and compare their performance with other players / groups / guilds / factions.
- Social Interaction – At the core of any multiplayer RPG is the basic social satisfaction from hanging out with your friends & guildmates, teaming up in a cooperative way and meeting / interacting with new people. Human desire to be accepted as part of a group should not be overlooked.
Each of these can motivate players in different directions. For instance, an activity could be fun, but the players may feel discouraged if it doesn’t provide experience. It’s great to be social, but if solo’ing is the fastest way to level, players will shun teaming up.
The first two motivations can be considered incentives in their purest form, in a way they are both rewards although it’s important to separate them because one will motivate a certain type of player whereas the other may not.
In an interview with Ten Ton Hammer, Mark Jacobs repeated an established adage in MMORPGs:
[quote=Mark Jacobs]
Players are always going to look for the quickest way to level. That’s true for any MMO. Any developer that doesn’t see that hasn’t been paying enough attention.
[/quote]
I’d call this more truthiness than truism, because it’s missing an important element–
Add Convenience
Convenience is the sixth motivator and it’s the trump card. You can take any combination of the above and mix in convenience and whatever the activity is, it will go over in a big way. One example is if quests are trackable on a map, most players will naturally complete the quests that are closest rather than any sort of story-progression.
Players will always find the shortcuts.
For Warhammer, Scenarios match multiple categories, they’re certainly competitive and fun and if the queues are short the experience is good. But above all, they’re super-convenient.
Mythic may try to nerf Scenarios, or more likely boost the incentives for other activities, but the fact of the matter is that they need to boost all of the motivators, not just exp and rewards if they hope to make their game more well rounded and get players deeper into RvR and Public Quests.
