World Of Warcraft Crushing PC Game Industry? 397
simoniker writes "Age of Empires co-creator and Iron Lore co-founder Brian Sullivan has been discussing his studio's first game, Titan Quest, but along the way has openly wondered whether World Of Warcraft's success is part of the reason for the decline of the PC retail game market. Sullivan commented: 'For retail PC games, I think the biggest problem is World of Warcraft... It is such a compelling MMO game that it sucks up a lot of money and time that would normally be spent on other retail PC games.' Does WoW's growth actually mean that PC games in other non-MMO genres may sell fewer copies?"
Wrong argument? (Score:5, Insightful)
His entire argument is that any game that's more popular than his, especially MMOs, takes away from his game.
Gamers are an educated demographic, for the most part, and have fantastically high standards. When something that comes out is so good that it shakes up the entire industry, complaining about it will get you nowhere. It's kinda like he's making an "I'm hardcore and therefore better!" argument, but applying it to the big kid on the block (yes, WoW is a "casual" game in many respects, but he's not addressing that aspect).
And even at all that, aspiring to understand why it's so wildly popular so that he may make better games seems to have escaped him.
Sounds to me (Score:2, Insightful)
Like this guy is just upset that his game hasn't got the stuff, and in one last final grab at attention he tired to get it on Slashdot, because before this, I had never heard of the game (probably because it doesn't have a big enough fan base to really get it mentioned alot, atleast not in the corners of the internet where I lurk. Seriosly though, he needs to figure out that an RPG unless really innovative these days isn't going to attract attention because they have been done over and over again.
Infact the last innovative RPG I remember was themed after an MMO infact (and I would love to see more on similar theory. Players want more freedom (something the MMO introduced, another player to a traditionally single player world) and now the RPG makers are going to have to catch up, they have to introduce a human like AI, that can give the element that for so long they have been lacking (and Yes I know there are multiplayer RPG's out there)
I doubt it. (Score:5, Insightful)
And then there's people out there who, like me, look at WoW and go "Geez, I don't have the time to devote my life to this." and never play it. I've looked at it in fascination, but I've also woken up on Sunday after a long binge of Civilization X, and wondered where my weekend went. Those experiences taught me that I need to pick my gaming prudently. So I don't play WoW. I've already seen people's lives disappear when they start playing.
Also, like any other "where are the gamers?" question, you need to make sure the games you're making are fun or you have no room to complain.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure I'd love to play WoW, but I have a job, I take night classes, and I'm trying to find that elusive thing called "girl". Dumping time into the hole of WoW would kill off at least one of those. And I think when I'm 50, I'd rather look back on the fun times I had with (eventual) children than fun times I had with avatars in a world that didn't exist.
Maybe it's just me.
Works for me (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not saying the game I like is better than the game in the article, but what I do observe is that a well-crafted MMOG can pull a player in for hours and weeks at a time. I know I don't bother considering buying games right now, because I know that I probably won't play them - hell, I'm not playing the ones I already have. So you have probably four big MMOGs dominating the landscape, which is great for Blizzard, CCP, etc., but the rest of the industry sees a decline.
So what's the problem? If you want to compete with the market leaders, produce something more compelling, exciting, shiny, and innovative than what's out there. Don't whine that better games are eating your lunch. From what I see, the big MMOGs are winning because they are that good. Now, if someone were to put out a spaceship-based MMOG where you could dock into a station, exit your ship, and engage in FPS combat to take over the station, land on the planets to do missions, PVE, PVP, world-building, etc., I'd be in line at midnight to give it a try. I bet if someone did a robe-and-wizard-hat MMOG where there were no shards or instances (a-la EVE's ginormous server cluster with anywhere between 15,000-25,000 players on at any given time), then you'd see guys in tunics camping outside Fry's.
In the games industry, if you can't beat 'em, go work for EA, where you can at least be sure of steady income for producing shit rerun knockoffs. Or you could do better, and actually beat 'em.
Re:How do people have time for this? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes and no. The difference is that with a "normal" game you will beat it and then move on to the next game. Obviously there are exceptions to this, and I suppose moreso on pc than consoles, with the multitude of multiplayer strategy games, etc But on average, I believe most MMOs will end up being played more fanatically than other games over a much longer time period. On top of that they have continued monthly costs that other games generally don't, eating into the funds that otherwise could have gone towards other games.
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:5, Insightful)
This player may have had alot more fun with 6 different games, but he never payed attention to other games because his guild needed his help camping some dragon spawn.
If this is true, then it could have an adverse effect on the PC gaming industry because we will end up seeing less games in general. That means less chance for innovative new ideas, and probably just more churning out sequels. I am not saying that this is the case, and neither was this guy, it was just his speculation.
--
It's not about lack of money... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's about time. Between work, WoW, and the occasional outing into the real world, there is no time left for these other games.
In fact, WoW has actually SAVED me money. Now I spend $15 a month for my gaming needs, instead of the $200 I previous spent buying a new game every week.
Re:Of course it does (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How do people have time for this? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry that you have a half-dozen friends that have no self control, but from personal experience, this statement is false.
My roommate, my girlfriend, several other friends, and myself all play WoW. Yet somehow, we manage to maintain education, employment, church attendance and participation, and interpersonal relationships, trips to see family, and even playing other games, watching movies, reading books, and playing sports. Oh, and we still manage to get a good amount of sleep every night too.
The problem isn't that WoW allows you to play for more than 3 hours ( from time to time, my friends and I have been known to play the game all day long ). The problem is that your friends have decided that they like the game enough to play for long periods of time every day ( or most days ). They made a choice as to what was most important to them - in this case, it was the enjoyment they get out of playing WoW.
Personally, I'd be pissed if this ever were to happen - when I want to play WoW for a long time, I like having the choice to do so.
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How do people have time for this? (Score:2, Insightful)
I wager that, in fact, it isn't.
I had the opportunity to get a beta copy of WoW at DefCon a few years ago and I passed on it because I didn't want to get sucked in. A couple of weeks ago I went out and bought two copies of the game so that I can play it with my girlfriend. I play for a couple of hours a week and it is something else for us to do when we want to hang out. I still manage to make it to the temple to stay ontop of my kung fu training, I still make it to work, I still hang out at the bar with my friends.
The point I'm getting at that it is possible. It's as possible as it is to do ANYTHING else if you want to. If doing things besides playing an MMO is important to you then you will find a way to do it. If you want to get lost in an MMO, you will do that. Just because most people have problems balancing their lives doesn't mean that it can't be done.
If that were true, wouldn't there be a surge ? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure there are a lot of others like me who didn't feel like raiding another dungeon yet again for that one piece of armor
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's the thing: he's not complaining. He's simply observing that WoW is dominating the PC game market at present. As such, he's probably right.
If you actually read the article, you'll see that he's making a candid and respectful comment about a competitor. I'm sure he's not happy that there's such a potent competitor drawing attention away from his game, but there isn't a trace of sour grapes in his actual comments as quoted. He's not saying WoW is a shitty game, in fact he's quoted saying WoW is "...such a compelling MMO game."
In response to such refreshing candor, you start casting wild and unsupported apersions, that he is a complainer, that he considers himself above casual gamers (despite designing a game specifically for them), that he doesn't understand WoW's success. What's your beef with the poor guy?
Re:I was ... (Score:1, Insightful)
> about with my guildmates.
Exactly. Who cares if you get some l3wt at the end of it or not, raids are fun just for the socialization factor.
Would you rather spend four hours watching television or listening to your tank getting drunker and drunker and drunker as the raid goes on into the evening? "I'm puh-hulling aggro as fash has I can here, wasnhuff wonee fight me??? AH DAMNNT! Who hitten me? BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASHURDS!!!!!"
Re:How do people have time for this? (Score:3, Insightful)
We raid four or five nights a week. It's scheduled during the evenings and we try to keep our raids to a maximum of four hours. I get home from work, eat dinner, then raid in the evening. I'd rather be doing that then watching mindless television or something. I'd say I play around 12 to 20 hours of WoW a week and quite enjoy it. Sure, that's more than a casual player who plays it a couple hours a week, but I'm not putting 80 to 100 hours a week into the game.
I can definately see this occuring. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How do people have time for this? (Score:1, Insightful)
It's not WoW. (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't help that the cost of a high-end video card has become absurd - I used to get a nice midrange card for $250-$300, with prices in the $400-$500 range, I'd be better off to buy an Xbox and not go through the hassle of upgrading my mainboard, video card, RAM, and CPU just to be able to play games that are just going to give me deja vu.
If PC game developers want to woo back gamers, they need to start making games that are worth the costs. Right now I just don't think they're doing that.
Re:WoW can be played casually (Score:3, Insightful)
(assuming you mean 8pm?) 5.5 hrs twice a week = 11 hrs per week
I'm sorry, but that's not "casual gaming". 2hrs/week at a push is what I'd call casual gaming. The type of thing you can pick up and play when you feel like it, not when it's scheduled.
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not that people are buying WoW instead of his game (most long term wow players have written off that monthly cost and it no longer fits into their available spending money...just goes in witht he other bills) its that wow is so involving that it takes an amazing game to so much as pull someone away from it.
I took off from wow during my first year of college but now during the summer I picked it back up. During school though I didnt have enough time to devote to WoW, there were tiems I still wanted gaming so I played a fair amount of other games (and had times for things like multiplayer CS:s). Now that I have picked wow back up, the only time I have touched other games is to briefly try the prey demo and to play at a lan party I went to. There is simply too much to do in WoW to play other games and have time for work/life (I could cut out work and still not do everything I want in WoW). It would take something enthralling to pull me away...I was still in school (finals week actually...) when HL2 Episode 1 came out and while I hadnt picked up WoW again yet, it probobly would have pulled me away from wow long enough to beat it but, it cost less than $20 and was a short game, I would'nt pull myself away from my wow subscription to pay $60 and play a longer game when I could have just as much fun in WoW.
Sure for people who enjoy WoW, he is right...it stops them from buying his game. But the same could have been said about everquest (hence "evercrack"). Back when I played Starsiege in an active clan (and later in some other games like tribes/diablo2/planetarion) we lost many a player to the evercrack but there were still plenty of us who werent into the MMORPG thing (or couldnt pay for it like me) who played plenty of normal games. I know WoW is immensely popular but all they have to do is make sure their game targets more than just the exact group of people who play WoW. You can even advertise with snide remarks about wow to attract other gamers ("tired of not having anything to do because all of your friends are playingWoW?")
Re:What about those of who DON'T play? (Score:1, Insightful)
That doesn't mean a game with a lame plot can't be enjoyable: GTA Vice City was enjoyable, even though the underlying plot was completely inane. Scarface, from which VC borrowed heavily, was a decent movie because it showed character development, whereas in VC, crime does pay while the protagonist remains essentially unchanged by what's going on around him. But I could even live with all that if there was a way to influence the plot somewhat, or to interact with the non-player characters. But instead, the plot is usually static and relegated entirely to cutscenes.
Recently I got interested in interactive fiction, which I recommend to anyone tired of the lack of good stories in mainstream games. Interactive fiction has grown considerably, compared with the old text adventure games from the '80s, to the point that people will be offended if one equates interactive fiction with text adventures. Good, new adventure games can still be found, though. Besides, interactive fiction is the only game-like medium that has managed to induce a serious brain-fuck, at least for me. Check out http://wurb.com/if/ [wurb.com] and play Shade, 9:05, or Spider and Web, to see what I mean.
WoW is to PC Games what Magic was to P&P RPGs (Score:4, Insightful)
I have the feeling WoW is doing the same. It's the only game that's still selling well that runs well on my box. Guild Wars only means of success is being not like WoW and cheaper (free) to play.
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because you would rather spend your $180 dollars buying the latest shooter/sports game every month, and pretending you're a Counter-terrorist/Quarterback makes you no more intelligent than someone playing World of Warcraft.
$180 dollars gets you 3-4 brand new video games, and I certainly spend more on games than that each year. Hell I spend $720 on internet access each year.
Of course....I have one of them "job" thingies too.
Troll.
15 years ago... (Score:4, Insightful)
What is popular is determined by what is available and what is available is determined by what is popular. It's a vicious cycle which ends up homogenizing the prime shelves of the stores. An addicting fun game can still sell, but unfortunately game companies (and more importantly investors) see a direct correlation between funds re-cooped in development cost and cost of development. It's the "Hollywood" effect happening to games. Big special effects, star power, etc are banked on to get BIG sales. Software retailers have become like grocery stores where they only make decent money if BIG volume sells.
As a result, the store has BIG name games, with BIG development costs, BIG advertising and what investors hope will be BIG returns.
I've often thought about how Richard Garriot sold Akalabeth at a Game store. That just couldn't happen today. Not because games arent good, but because there is no way for games like his to get the exposure they need.
Somebody needs to come up with a way to get the independent game market back into the minds of consumers. Get the best games (independant) packaged with Dell, or Apple. I don't know..but there needs to be some creativity in thinking about how to get the word out.
Easy Test (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:3, Insightful)
Judging from the ways people play WoW where I am, it's a bit less a casual game and a bit more of a life style.
I know people who no longer leave the house except to go to work or class or to eat, just so they can play the game.
It also definitly feeds on peoples wallets a lot more than any other type of game on the market.
At 16 bucks a month, people are blowing shy of $200 a year, which is more than I've ever spent on a console system and all the games I have for a given one. That's almost a new computer every 3 years, for WoW.
Just for fun, lets say a pack of cigarettes costs $5, and you smoke a pack a week. There's about 50 weeks in a year, so that's $250 annually. Both result in changes in lifestyle, changes in how you smell, and changes in how much other people who don't do what you're doing want to be around you for it. I think it's safe to consider WoW an equally controlling addiction.
I'm certain he's right, MMOs in general leave a player feeling like they've paid for a time share on the game, and if they don't play the game, they've wasted the money. The issue is once people start, they feel they owe it to the cash they've paid to play more.
Reason for decline is... (Score:2, Insightful)
As with many things the industry get's TOO GREEDY and keep going until they price the customer out of buying it.
Re:Cash (Score:3, Insightful)
From the several MMORPGs i've played (WoW included), the only one that doesn't push you by design into one or more "time-sinks" is Guild Wars - which is also the only one where you don't pay a monthly fee.
----
Back to the overall theme of the thread
----
The threat posed by WoW to games such as Titan Quest is much more basic than it being a time-sink for hardcore gamers:
- It simply is one of the best RPGs out there.
If you concentrate on the basic RPG aspects of WoW and forget about the whole end-level content stuff (which indeed are just time sinks for hardcore gamers) and PvP aspects (some of the major problems with the game have to do with griefing by high-level players), it turns out that WoW is very much a voyage of wonder and discovery, way up there amongst the best such as Neverwinter Nights (beter than Oblivion IMHO).
At the same time, Titan Quest sucks (starting with the view point never going high enough to allow you to see enough around you no nor low enough to allow you to play in 1st person view and feel like you're the hero).
The time sink problem is only an issue for game publishers targetting the hardcore gamer market segment - as yesterday's teenage (hardcore) gamers age and turn into today's adult (casual) gamers, more and more of the gamer population consists of gamers which don't have the time to seriously go into online RPGs and would rather just have games which you can just pick up and have fun for half-an-hour.
Maybe the industry should start targetting the part of the gaming market that's actually growing???
Re:Wrong argument? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think the elimination of strong negative feedback (i.e. losses) does help with that as well. Negative feedback gets you down so you might decide to stop playing for now. If there is no such strong negative feedback you won't see a point where to interrupt your flow of playing.
Not money, gamer time (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say that I play games 25 hours a month, a fairly casual gamer. Each traditional PC or console game (Civs aside) take about that long per game, plus or minus 10 hours. So let's say I'll buy 8 games a year - at $40-$60 per new game, that's $400/year. That's compared to $50 startup plus $15/month the first year of WoW, or $230/year. So even if you buy a couple of other games (the only other game I've bought in the last year was Civ IV, which has a shorter-but-similar "long playtime" effect), you're still ahead of the game.
If you game more than that per month, MMOs are even more economical. Clearly, less money is being spent in total on games in that scenario, which I contend is a lighter-than-usual gamer.
The issue isn't the money that's being taken in by WoW, it's the player time. People aren't not buying other games because they can't afford them, they're not buying them because they don't have the time to play them.
MMO's impact on your TIME and WALLET (Score:3, Insightful)
Next is the issue of time in cooperative gameplay. I don't know about you guys, but most gamers have a day job and a life outside of gaming. An MMO cuts into the latter immediately, and in extreme cases it can cut into you day job. For people that enjoy a good social life, a book, a movie, their significant other, their children, their parents, and so forth, it's a tall order to take much time away from any of those. To commit the time to play in a cooperative environment, especially in a clan structure, can literally be impossible for working people with a family. To justify that monthly cost of an MMO, you need to play it. To play it, you need time you don't have. So, if you can possibly squeeze in time to play 10 hours a week at particular clan-coordinated times, you're only doing it for one MMO.
This is why I won't buy a game like WOW. It's going to suck me in. It's going to take me away from a lot of other things. So, I buy single player games that I can pick up at any time and put down at any given length later. I even like games like Guild Wars, where there is no monthly fee but simply episodic content releases.
Re:Not money, gamer time (Score:3, Insightful)
You bought a house / condo / winnebago, didn't you? Or, at least, you're paying rent on one. That's required to play WoW too. ($1500 / month). Plus, you need electricity to power your computer, plus climate control like light and air conditioning to keep the environment conducive to play. ($200/mo, including depreciation on your air conditioner) Not to mention, you need 2000 calories a day worth of nutrition to keep yourself in fighting trim. ($600 at least-- for many it's more. If you cook, cut that number a bit, but don't forget to cost in cooking gear).
OK seriously now, economists don't measure the total costs of all required stuff all the way back to first principles for precisely this reason. You need to ask a few questions before you add these costs in. First, are these costs you would incur anyway, whether or not you play WoW? For most of the Slashdot crowd, the answer is yes. I had broadband before WoW, and I'll have it after WoW is over. Second, what is your utilization of these resources for WoW-related use relative to everything else?
The article makes a good point. Frankly, I haven't bought a new computer game since the summer of 2004 (when I started playing in the open stress test, then open beta, then release), precisely because all my gaming goes through WoW. (I haven't been on
Some thoughts on WoW:
So what's it all mean? Well it boils down to this: when I get home, I log in. When I wake up in the AM, I log in (to check auctions and try for an early morning arena trinket). I play solitaire when the servers are down, and sometimes that little pinball game that comes with XP. But that's my gaming life.
Before WoW, I played Battlefield 1942, Unreal Tournament, Civilization (in all its incarnations) and more. Now, I'm not playing even the games I own much, let alone buying them. It's not because starcraft or Civ got less fun. It's because WoW has an amazing degree of stickiness through the social obligations it creates and the grinding it encourages.