Will the MMORPG market be flooded?

[Pythagoras]

So there's a gazillion MMORPG games coming out. On CNN newsnight they cite costs of millions of dollars. That sounds like a lot for a PC game. The fact that they require such continued support with servers content etc.

So
Tons of MMORPGS
and tons of cost each
=
loss of money on each MMORPG cause there are too many.
=
bad for already beleagured gaming comps

This is assuming demand stays/grows relatively stable.

[Dis]

this bothers me because the market for stand alone RPG's might dwindle. But so far it is doing good, and I think Icewind Dale 2 is going to sell decently.

But then you wonder if the companies would release a game with a editor/toolset or just make a mmorpg. So far the case with NWN seems promising. Sure it costs $60 on average, but at least that is the only cost we have to endure. The same with Diablo2.

I don't like the thought of paying monthly fees. I can't get that much playtime in a month to make it worthwhile.

But so far, so good. There are still plenty of regular games in development.

[Tuberski]

I think for a lot of games to survive, they will HAVE to have single player capability. And they ability to edit or modify the game.

[Zkribbler]

There are only a certain number of people who have the inclination to play MMORPGS. That number is further limited because players also need to have lots of free time and lots of extra money--both of which are rarities.

I think the MMORPGS market has already been sufficiently saturated. Except for games like Star Wars Galaxies which bring their own unique audience, for most part, MMORPGS will just end up stealing players from each other.

[Urban Ranger]

Depends on the region. MMORPG's are strong in some countries such as South Korea, maybe Japan and Taiwan. I am not sure about the US though.

[General Ludd]

The majority of the MMORPGs are all clones of each other, anyways - it's just the latest fad... like all of the C&C/Warcraft clones we where getting a little while ago.

I bet they will shoot themselves in the foot this time around, though. MMORPGs require them to actually keep a player base - they can't get away with making some ****ty clone and conning people into buying it to make a quick buck... atleast, not aswell as they could with 'standard' games.

[tniem]

Originally posted by Osweld
they can't get away with making some ****ty clone and conning people into buying it to make a quick buck... atleast, not aswell as they could with 'standard' games.

Well why not?

They are still charging for the game. Then on top of that they are charging a monthly fee. That is why these games are the fad in the industry.

You get someone to spend $50 on the game which fules your production costs just like any other game and then your subscription cost is all profit. So lets say as a producer it costs four million to produce a game. Now, if you make 40 a copy and you can sell 100,000 copies you have broken even on what you paid the developer. Any more on subscription is profit. So even if you can con people into buying the game and then playing an average of three months before deciding its not worth the money, you have made 3 million. If the game succeeds - even more.

Now of course I am not saying that these are the actual numbers, but what I am saying is that even if the MMORPG market is not that large long term, it may be apealing enough to producers because they believe they can cover costs with sales and that any subscriptions will fund profit. That seems to me why it is such a good bet right now in the industry.

[Pythagoras]

I think its a viable market, just with slow and gradual growth. I dont think people are going to be jumping into this in droves right away. Even the average serious computer gamer I think has second thoughts about diving into an MMORPG. Civ 3 sucks enough of my life away. There also exists a prevaling prejudice towards these games that they take over your lives (hence the monicor Evercrack). Also, how many gamers under 18 are going to be able to pay (or convince there parents to pay) the subscription fee? Isnt that sector a big part of the PC gaming market?

This saturation is bad. Think of all the money being thrown into the toilet from sometimes already beleagured gaming companies. It certainly cant bode well for other developers. And we've seen some of the "WE NEED THIS GAME OUT NOW OR WE WILL BE BANKRUPT!!" mentality increasingly. I would hate to have that become a regular feature of the industry because gaming companies were dumping their money into these MMORPGs.

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by Tuberski
I think for a lot of games to survive, they will HAVE to have single player capability. And they ability to edit or modify the game.

Replayability is a key feature of PC gaming. Civilization (especially Civ2) being the ultimate example in strategy, and perhaps Half Life in the FPS world. Games that have large fan bases thrive, and more players will become attracted to that fan base and its resources to enhance the replayability of a game (through mods, humans to play, encouraging new XP). Nothing is more 'replayable' than opposing another sentient human being.

However this has a downside. As semi serious to serious PC gamers, most of us will buy a handful of games a year. Maybe no more than one a month for those of us that are hardcore enough. The console gamer will need more games to get the same amount of play time, and hence will spend more dough at the store. Hence the PC gaming industry tends to make fewer bucks, but makes the most on the most replayable and popular games.

I think that a gradual shift toward complete replayabitily at a subscription fee is best for the gaming industry.(where developers are paid a fee to continually enhance a single game constantly). Hence civ4 would be the last and only civ and every patch and expansion would be released continously by Firaxis who got paid monthly by millions of loyal fans. Hence I am fairly interested in the business model that the MMORPGs implement. But its going to ruin such progress in that direction if the market for MMORPGs are saturated and fail. So in a time when the economy is down and demand for these games is constant, keep it steady and dont jeopardize the progressive evolution of the gaming industry.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by tniem

Well why not?

They are still charging for the game. Then on top of that they are charging a monthly fee.

Exactly. When they flood the market with MMORPGs, and there are a hundred different ones to choose from, each one of them is going to have a hell of a hard time keeping anyone subscribed.

[Victor Galis]

But this is good. The crap games will die, and we will be left with the best MMORPGs

[tniem]

Originally posted by Osweld
Exactly. When they flood the market with MMORPGs, and there are a hundred different ones to choose from, each one of them is going to have a hell of a hard time keeping anyone subscribed.

Read my entire post, not just the first sentence. I argue that the market will be able to handle it because they are charging a game's full price up front in box. That can make the money back off the game easily. Then subscription will mostly be profit. Now, if they gave away the game for free and then charged subscription, I would agree that they might not be able to make it but they do not and herein lays how they feel they can make money out of it and have the market support it.

[Victor Galis]

Read my entire post, not just the first sentence. I argue that the market will be able to handle it because they are charging a game's full price up front in box.

-The $25 or so I paid for Dark Age of Camelot is hardly a full price, not to mention it included the first month of subscription. Additionally, there 's people selling their copies of these games on eBay, which the company is not trying to stop.

Then subscription will mostly be profit.

- They won't keep their customers that way. DAoC has nearly a full team of programmers making almost biweekly patches to the game. These don't only fix bugs and correct imbalances in different classes, they also add new features to the game that weren't there before. At least DAoC is expanding dramatically, and that combined with server maintenence can't be too cheap.

Now, if they gave away the game for free and then charged subscription, I would agree that they might not be able to make it but they do not and herein lays how they feel they can make money out of it and have the market support it.

-If they just made the game available for download and didn't put out a physical copy, then made the download free, I don't think this would impact their profitability at all.

[FrustratedPoet]

tniem:
But if you are already subscribed to a couple of MMORPG's (in a flooded market), why would you even bother to purchase the box of another one?

The company will make no money if the market is dominated by a couple of big games (for next year probably Everquest 2 and Star Wars Galaxies) and most people are already paying a subscription for a game they enjoy.

If I'm addicted to EQ2 and SWG, why would I want to pay more money to buy another MMORPG?
I know up front that in order to play the game properly I will have to buy a 6 month subscription, so I would be aware that the price of the box and CD is only the beginning.
I might be interested in the game, but not want to give up the time, friends, and invested effort I have in the other games I play in order to experiment with something else.

[Victor Galis]

I know up front that in order to play the game properly I will have to buy a 6 month subscription, so I would be aware that the price of the box and CD is only the beginning.

-Some games like DAoC also have monthly and 3 month subscriptions.