One Man's opinion: Why Sony can not win the MMORPG war.

[GnR]

For those of you who do not want to read the rest of this, the short answer is lack of emotion.

Please realize this is only my personal opinion and does not reflect on you as an individual playing your Sony Online Entertainment games.

Here is the major problem. Like it or not, Sony's foremost goal is corporate profitability. Well so is every other companies, you say! Of course. But in my personal experience and personal opinion Sony's biggest problem is they lack "emotion" in their games. I have no doubt working for Sony Online Entertainment is nowhere near as fun as working at Blizzard. So what, you say! Picture this, (Easy for those of you who are or have worked in a larger corporate environment) you can come to work ready to create some of the best looking monsters ever to enter the game world using your creativity. Or, you can come to work to create 7 monsters by your supervisors next art deadline next Friday in order to stay within the project timeframe. Emotion! Which would you be more psyched about during your morning coffee.

Sony has triumphed very well in its hardware (Playstations). These things do not stray as far into creativity as game development. Game creation does not fit into the standard corporate mold and I sincerely believe that is what SOE must do to maintain a certain level of profitability for the company. If you look at the playstation you will find the top games are made by specific game development companies. Great games have to come from game developers that encourage creativity and are willing to take risks. I have no doubt SOE messes up the little things in games because they run more as a corporate machine than as a specific game development company. I doubt SOE takes too many risks in its day-to-day operations. It's emotion and risks however that place unheard of developers at the top of the game industry. Search out a little company called "id" that created Wolfenstein 3-D...

Perhaps I am rambling, and I missed the point of my message entirely. In any case, I predict SOE will suffer largely in MMORPG market share after EQ2 while other game companies move in to take larger and larger shares.

[Twiz]

Interesting argument, however having worked at neither Sony or Blizzard I cannot confirm or default your theory. It is easy to predict Sony (EQ2) will lose market share to Blizzard (WoW). Why? Because there are TONS of folks playing (and cheating at) Blizzard games on battle.net who will flock in droves to WoW to see what it's about. These same people probably haven't tried EQ2 because all that *most* of them want to do is exploit bugs, grief others, find ways to cheat the system (my experience with battle.net through WC, WC2, WC3, Starcraft).

It is also easy to predict that SoE will lose MMORPG market share because there are more MMORPGs up and coming. Wish shows great potential. D&D Online will draw the true D&D crowd and also shows great potential (especially since they were smart enough to leave out PvP in a fantasy game based on a tabletop game that was all about cooperation).

I am no SoE fanboy. In fact, I usually could care less who makes a game, if it's fun to me, I play it. If it's flawed and allows cheating and exploiting, I avoid it. What I don't understand is this loathing bubbling just beneath the surface that many here seem to have toward SoE. It's akin to the issues people have with Microsoft when, in fact, Microsoft has advanced computing exponentially. Like SoE or not...the fact is the MMORPG model currently in use by all games started with Everquest 1, developed by Verant, BUT produced (read willing to take a chance) by SoE.

[Raest]

Interesting points there Twiz,

I think your wrong lumping Blizzard games under a cheaters haven. Look at SOE's games - exploits happened there too. It simply comes down to how hard people will want to find a hack for it...look at some of the dupe exploits for SWG you'd have to be searching pretty damn hard for some of those dupes. I already know of certain dupe exploits for EQ2 and I have no doubt they will crop up in WoW.

WoW has a pretty strict TOS as does EQ2 and hopefully in both cases they'll be quick to rectify exploits. Blizzard would have to be stupid to design a MMORPG without trying to find possible exploits during development considering their past history with Battle.net. But now its a whole different kettle of fish - people pay to play and they dont get the $$$ if cheating is rampant. Honestly I never heard of any exploits during the beta test....correction there was one apparently that allowed someone to unbind a soulbound item which was patched quickly.

Just did a google search for Everquest 2 exploits - found one site with 10 posted on the front page already (its a pay site though). Does this mean you'll quit EQ2 as people can exploit the system in that too?

Btw I'm pretty sure that EQ borrowed on alot of UO's features too.

[Twiz]

Well, the SWG expoits, EQ exploits, and if there are any EQ2 exploits (not easter eggs, but exploits), haven't affected me in the least. However the battle.net exploits and cheating negatively affected me enough that I will never do battle.net again. It kind of sucked playing fair and never winning then finding out why . Not that I could win anyway, but the rampant cheating and hacking was enough for me to never trust battle.net again...especially as long as Blizzard let it go on.

I'm not sure why I would quit EQ2 over bugs that may or may not be there after the first two weeks. I wonder how many leet players will fall for the "EQ2 exploits here...pay us $10.99 and we'll tell you what they are" scam, when some of them have likely been fixed already and some probably aren't bugs, just legitimate stuff folks haven't found yet. I never suggested anyone should quit WoW, I just relayed Blizzards on-line gaming history...and even your comment confirms it. I absolutely enjoy ALL Blizzard games solo versus computer where I don't have to deal with the battle.net crowd. I absolutely LOVE Starcraft and wish they would do a SC2 for single player.

As for the UO features...UO and EQ don't compare...there was no rampant PKing in EQ1. EQ1 was the first 3d MMORPG model. EQ had a vast and detailed lore right from the very beginning. I have no idea what UO has now. Played the first couple of months and got fed up with the griefing. I wasn't referring to the "fantasy" model which goes back to tabletop gaming...I was referring to the advanced state of the game when released...and it was light years beyond UO, at least at the time I tried UO.

Finally, you avoided my SoE loathing comment. Why do WoW players have a need to attack SoE over and over? The comments I've made were based on my WoW gameplay experience (graphics, PvP, too linear, no teamwork, lack of customization). Now I could interpret all that to mean Blizzard lacks creativy, as GnR levied on SoE. After all, if Blizzard is so creative, why aren't there groundbreaking aspects to their new game? It really just rehashes EQ1 and 2, provides some different races, and adds PvP which many MMORPGs already have. At least EQ2 added the new idea of iPvP, and I found more quests just in my hometown in EQ2 than I did for the two weeks I played the WoW beta. WoW has some great aspects (loved the Night Elf I played), but in the end is just a rinse, repeat of what is out there, albeit in cartoon fashion.

I don't think I have ever started a WoW vs EQ2 thread in any of these forums. Seems to me most of those type threads are started by folks wanting to bash EQ2 for whatever reason, as if folks playing EQ2 are gonna kill WoW by not playing it. I wish all of you playing WoW well...it will never be a game for me when there is a better alternative (to my play style) available. I enjoy grouping, I enjoy non-linear questing, I enjoy having an avatar visibly unlike anyone elses (unless or until someone makes a concerted effort to copy it exactly)...but this thread started as an SoE vs Blizzard post and allegations that SoE has no creative developers...most anyone spending an hour or two in EQ2 will find just the opposite...a world full of creativity, challenge, in-depth lore covering over 500+ years of the game world, tons of different looking character models. Of course, if you go into it finding ways to hate it, you will likely hate it...but then why would anyone try something intent on hating it!

[GnR]

Originally Posted by Twiz

I am no SoE fanboy. In fact, I usually could care less who makes a game, if it's fun to me, I play it. If it's flawed and allows cheating and exploiting, I avoid it. What I don't understand is this loathing bubbling just beneath the surface that many here seem to have toward SoE. It's akin to the issues people have with Microsoft when, in fact, Microsoft has advanced computing exponentially. Like SoE or not...the fact is the MMORPG model currently in use by all games started with Everquest 1, developed by Verant, BUT produced (read willing to take a chance) by SoE.

Realistically all my comments are just feelings I get from SOE. I could be floating out in space with my comments, and they could easily prove me wrong in many ways.

I agree that SOE is the pioneer in this field. I think, as with any pioneer, someone else inevitably comes along, takes the idea, and makes it better. Also with any success comes a change of attitude. Whereas Verant was once young and eager to prove their abilities, I think they may have moved on to a more corporate-like business model with SOE taking over. And in any corporation, internal politics can get nasty and cause unneccesary tension in a company.

You are also right about players loathing SOE. I personally am dissastified with Sony because of the games I have played from them. Tanarus, Planetside and Star Wars Galaxies. With all of the games I have played from SOE, they have taken a game with unlimited potential and missed the mark. Tanarus is the grandfather of all SOE 3d games, again created by Verant. It has been played daily by some individuals since for 5-7 years straight. Planetside was another risk from SOE as the first MMOFPS. It's threatening to become outdated before its time. Star Wars Galaxies I am not sure of its current status, because I left over a year ago. Still, the greatest franchise on earth, not well-executed by SOE in my opinion.

I only air my comments because of my dissatisfaction with Sony. I think if Verant had stayed a seperate entity and not become SOE, they would still be making hit games with extreme staying power. As it stands I don't think that is the norm and I believe Sony will one day close this chapter in their life by selling or splitting their SOE division away from the Parent. It certainly won't be tommorrow but I'm curious to see what the future holds for this company.

In short, I think Sony should stick to their excellent producing skills and leave the programming to the hungry young minds...

[Twiz]

/concur with SWG comments. Played at launch till 30 days up, then again after I found TOG, awaiting EQ2 launch. I think the recent interaction between Lucas Arts and SoE confirms that SoE was going in the wrong direction (and I don't think they'll ever be able to fix the debacle they created when they allowed everyone to be Jedi).

As for Verant selling EQ to SoE. That argument will play out over the next couple of years as Brad McQuaid (sp), the brain child of EQ1, launches his new baby named "Vanguard". If there will ever be an EQ killer, that will be the one with the most potential to do it since EQ is McQuaid's model, and EQ1 was most fun and challenging when McQuaid was at the helm...before the mass expansion treadmill, after SoE bought him out.

I suppose in the end, I am just not one to hold an entire corporation accountable for the successes or shortcomings of individuals within that organization. When a CS does not give me the answer or resolution I want, I blame that CS, not the president of SoE. Heck, he probably doesn't even know who his CS' are. Granted, if they are espousing written company policy, that falls back on leadership, however most negative interactions folks have with CS come down to a person who should never have been hired to do CS work in the first place.

Never tried Tanarus or Planetside so can't speak to them. But I absolutely agree SoE will lose MMORPG marketshare...it has to...there are just too many appealing MMORPGs on the horizon!

[GnR]

Originally Posted by Twiz

As for Verant selling EQ to SoE. That argument will play out over the next couple of years as Brad McQuaid (sp), the brain child of EQ1, launches his new baby named "Vanguard". If there will ever be an EQ killer, that will be the one with the most potential to do it since EQ is McQuaid's model, and EQ1 was most fun and challenging when McQuaid was at the helm...before the mass expansion treadmill, after SoE bought him out.

A Microsoft MMORPG! This is news to me and I have no doubt it will be a success. As Microsoft has proven in the past, they have the money to buy any share of the computer market place they choose. What Microsoft lacks in abilities they make up for by bringing in the most talented people. I guess Microsoft's new plan is to take over the MMORPG market!

Thanks for the info.

[Ijs]

From what I've read, there is more grouping in EQ2 than WoW. Now SWG, that's a different story.

Galaxies is a game of solo groups. For money or exp, fly to Dant or Dath or Endor, join a "group", then go off somewhere to do your own solo missions. Limited chatting amongst up to 20 group members -- 80% of them might as well be afk. And absolutely NO teamwork, unless someone was on a jedi grind.

People actually got upset when you came within "sharing loot" range.

Just seemed like the exact opposite of how I wanted to play an MMO. Their rallying call is, "Be alone in a universe of thousands."
Bleh, I grouped more in one day in WoW (working co-operatively) than I did in a month's worth of SWG.

JTL might have changed things a bit, but doubtful.

[Raest]

Originally Posted by Twiz

Well, the SWG expoits, EQ exploits, and if there are any EQ2 exploits (not easter eggs, but exploits), haven't affected me in the least. However the battle.net exploits and cheating negatively affected me enough that I will never do battle.net again. It kind of sucked playing fair and never winning then finding out why . Not that I could win anyway, but the rampant cheating and hacking was enough for me to never trust battle.net again...especially as long as Blizzard let it go on.

Well I never really played too much battle.net - perhaps Diablo 2 for a week. Never came across any exploits there that affected my game time either.

Originally Posted by Twiz

I'm not sure why I would quit EQ2 over bugs that may or may not be there after the first two weeks. I wonder how many leet players will fall for the "EQ2 exploits here...pay us $10.99 and we'll tell you what they are" scam, when some of them have likely been fixed already and some probably aren't bugs, just legitimate stuff folks haven't found yet. I never suggested anyone should quit WoW, I just relayed Blizzards on-line gaming history...and even your comment confirms it. I absolutely enjoy ALL Blizzard games solo versus computer where I don't have to deal with the battle.net crowd. I absolutely LOVE Starcraft and wish they would do a SC2 for single player.

True but your argument is flawed there. I never saw anyone exploiting in WoW either....you have to remember this isnt battle.net. This is a whole new setup so the odds of exploits occuring are much less. Its now a server-client configuration with all the important stuff residing on the server and hence untouchable. The same as most other MMORPGs. So the odds of exploits happening are the same as EQ2/SWG. Face it, every MMORPG has exploits and all that can be done is not use them if you know what they are and wait for the developer to patch them.

Originally Posted by Twiz

Finally, you avoided my SoE loathing comment. Why do WoW players have a need to attack SoE over and over? The comments I've made were based on my WoW gameplay experience (graphics, PvP, too linear, no teamwork, lack of customization). Now I could interpret all that to mean Blizzard lacks creativy, as GnR levied on SoE. After all, if Blizzard is so creative, why aren't there groundbreaking aspects to their new game? It really just rehashes EQ1 and 2, provides some different races, and adds PvP which many MMORPGs already have. At least EQ2 added the new idea of iPvP, and I found more quests just in my hometown in EQ2 than I did for the two weeks I played the WoW beta. WoW has some great aspects (loved the Night Elf I played), but in the end is just a rinse, repeat of what is out there, albeit in cartoon fashion.

To me EQ2 was uncreative. Sounds like you didnt give WoW a fair go because in 2 weeks I've completed countless quests (WoW has 1600 quests in already) with some variety. EQ2 quests are either a) Go deliver this to person X in this zone and then run all the way back here b) Go kill 40 gnolls and come back. Theres lore in WoW just as much as EQ2. I like being able to run thru a huge zone and go to a city without being dropped to a loading screen. I love being able to roam a huge city whilst the city zones in EQ2 feel like a shoebox. And its just fun! EQ2 whilst I tried to get into it, just felt like a chore.

As for not responding to the SOE loathing comment - I don't have anything to contribute or its already been said.

Originally Posted by Twiz

I don't think I have ever started a WoW vs EQ2 thread in any of these forums. Seems to me most of those type threads are started by folks wanting to bash EQ2 for whatever reason, as if folks playing EQ2 are gonna kill WoW by not playing it. I wish all of you playing WoW well...it will never be a game for me when there is a better alternative (to my play style) available. I enjoy grouping, I enjoy non-linear questing, I enjoy having an avatar visibly unlike anyone elses (unless or until someone makes a concerted effort to copy it exactly)...but this thread started as an SoE vs Blizzard post and allegations that SoE has no creative developers...most anyone spending an hour or two in EQ2 will find just the opposite...a world full of creativity, challenge, in-depth lore covering over 500+ years of the game world, tons of different looking character models. Of course, if you go into it finding ways to hate it, you will likely hate it...but then why would anyone try something intent on hating it!

Same, I wish the EQ2 players the best. I don't hate EQ2 but it could've been done so much better especially for non-EQ veterans. I'm not trying to piss off the EQ2 TOG crowd but I do get frustrated when they lump people who are going to play WoW under a cheater label or l33t d3wd label.

[Raest]

[quote="GnRA Microsoft MMORPG! This is news to me and I have no doubt it will be a success. As Microsoft has proven in the past, they have the money to buy any share of the computer market place they choose. What Microsoft lacks in abilities they make up for by bringing in the most talented people. I guess Microsoft's new plan is to take over the MMORPG market!

Thanks for the info.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure Asherons Call is the MS MMORPG.