"If I can do it in WoW, why can't I do it here?: It's a stale comparison and this week Jaime explores why. Each Friday Jaime Skelton pens a column that examines MMOs from the perspective of a player.

Enter a newly launched MMO, or an MMO's beta phase, and there is one game's name you will hear more often than the one you're playing: World of Warcraft. WoW has become the measuring stick by which all other games are rated in the general community. Over the years, the comparison has gotten more stale, while remaining a cinder to light flame wars and draw trolls from beneath their bridges. Even now, the torches are being lit, looking to burn heretics on both sides of the fence.

I alluded to the problem of using WoW as a measuring device for MMOs in my last column. Each MMO should be judged on an individual basis, and not stacked up unfairly against an MMO juggernaut. It's as silly as grading every restaurant you visit based on McDonald's. Certainly comparisons can be made, but you'd laugh at the food critic who used McDonald's to define a restaurant.

Read it all here.

Good points.

I see this happening in Aion right now.

Templars trying to be WoW warriors and Rangers whining because they don't get a pet.

Aggro and the way mobs react is completely different in Aion, but I see groups wipe because they go on WoW auto pilot and then promptly die.

All of us to some point always wish the new game would do things that we were comfortable with in other games.  Change is always a bitter struggle.  It is human nature at work.

That is two good articles, keep up the good work.

Amen.  Great article.  Players coming into a new game need to leave preconceived notions at the door and allow for the dev's to supply you with a product of their vision, blood, sweat and tears.

I remember once when I was listening to podcast on the topic of SWTOR and one of the speakers pointed out seeing land speeders in a screen shot, but referred to them incorrectly as "land-mounts". Then went on to say Oooh dooood, wouldn't that be cool if they had like different land-mounts like in WoW. I wanted to reach through my headphones and punch this guy in the face. At this point he lost all credibility with me and I just shut it off. I later found that the only MMO both these guys had ever played was WOW.

SWG vets also get caught up in this as well by thinking all MMOs should be like, or have similar things to SWG. I just think it’s the more outspoken and vocal players you hear this type of stuff from.
 

Originally posted by tillamook

SWG vets also get caught up in this as well by thinking all MMOs should be like, or have similar things to SWG. I just think it’s the more outspoken and vocal players you hear this type of stuff from.
 

It's not so much thinking that all MMOs should be like SWG, but disappointment that few/no MMOs have reproduced some of the great features present in SWG. Some things put in that game in 2003 almost seem like technical or functionally impossible in today's games which I myself find frustrating.

I do use WOW as a measuring stick. A stick to measure how much wow sucks.

Good usage of comparing McDonalds to WoW. McDonalds is crap, compared to an acutal gourmet resturant, even though it (the gourmet restaurant) dosen't and never will have as many patrons or as much profit as McD's, its still better.

Excellent article, and I agree with the heart of it, but I will say this:

From this point on, it's going to be difficult to impossible to not make the comparison to WoW for the very reason stated - It's a language. And as has been pointed out in the past, we think in language, so changing not just the terminology but changing the very way people think about MMO's is not going to be so simple by just introducing niche games.

The comparison with the McDonald's fails because no critic uses language unique to McDonalds (Or to be more accurate, whatever came before McDonald's to compare to the EQ reference in relation to WoW). They don't say, "The Big Mac in Burger King is the Whopper". They use an entirely different language to make comparisons.

Good article, but somehow I feel that the reason this happens so much is rooted in the way we categorize MMOs.  Just like that, we can't identify these games past MMORPG.  And the most prevalent MMORPG is WoW, so it comes as no surprise this has been the basis for comparison for every other MMO on the market. 

Perhaps categorizing our MMOs a little better will both instill understanding and quite possibly cause developers to see open spots in game variety. 

These games aren't like RTS games or FPS games that have a pretty difinitive formula, MMORPGs have a wide range of playstyles, Fallen Earth, DDO, WoW, EVE, Champions Online, Darkfall, Chronicles of Spellborn.  All of those games are vastly unique, but we call them MMORPGs and people will always complain one way or another what is best about each game and they feel the perfect MMO has elements of every single one, which just doesn't work.

I think the MMO community needs to not only split into it's different categories, but recognize the differences as no pros and cons, but simply differences.  We can't compare Half-Life to Command and Conquer, why has Champions online, Fallen Earth, and Aion all been compared to each other? MMORPG is not a genre, it's a mechanic.

Good article, but I have to disagree with you. I have played a number of MMOs, everything from DAOC to SWG to WoW. I still compare any game I play to WoW in many respects. To me, WoW has a lot going for it. It's so simple and to the point that you can figure it out within 10 minutes of playing and actually have a decent chance of being good. The graphics are nice, but don't kill older machines. The sound is fairly well done. The fact that it allows addons is a huge plus.

I liked other games for different reasons. I loved DAOC (my first mmo), but in the end the playability of WoW won me over. I hated WoW when it came out, I actually didn't start playing it regularly until about 4 months before wrath came out.

Like it or not, WoW is THE gold standard to which other games NEED to be measured in things like playability, aesthetics, compatibility and customization. Not only measured on, but all these things need to be improved on as well. I see many games that focus on one or two of these issues, but none have captured all 4 of these very basic reasons why WoW is such a success.

Its fairly hard not to make comparisons, I mean WoW is huge.. it isn't necessarily to everyones tastes, but it is certainly a benchamrk in many ways as far as the MMO genre is concerned.

It was one of the earlier MMO's for me, but eventually I moved on feeling I had taken everything from the game it had to offer and was wanting something, well... "more".  I feel I outgrew its limitations... and sought something that built on its positives without including its negatives.

even so i still find myself on occasion thinking "well if they do what WoW did and then add this or that..".

I just think comparisons as previously noted are pretty much inevitable because of the role it has played in this genre of gaming.

In regards to the article:

Yes, absolutely right.  Anytime I go into an MMO I hear WoW this and WoW that, it is a turn off.  It automatically makes me think the person talking about has a limited perspective, that all they can relate to is WoW.  And more often then not I end up with the reply, "This isn't WoW," or "If you want WoW go play WoW!"  It infuriates me that some people have such a limited perspective on games that they can't relate to any other game with out their WoW Crutch.

Each game is different, yes there will be parallels between different games, but that's true of all games.  But each game is designed to be unique, and games that purely throw themselves at competing with WoW don't do well.  The game needs to be true to itself, when it is it can be the best game it can be.  And if it is the best game it can be then it can succeed, not because it relates to WoW, but because it is a great game.

After playing WOW for three years, I think I've transcended it. I'm not looking for a WOW killer.

Good article, I think a point that wasn't brought up is the difference between the older players that didn't start with WOW and the new gamers that don't know anything but WOW. For the older gamers I know, WOW was never the beginning or the end and we move on.

For the older gamers that have already moved on, let me ask this question. Do you want the game your playing now to change and become more like WOW?

Sorry to go a little off topic but,

Personally I am finding that more often by far, I am hearing WoW brought up whenever anyone complains about something they want changed in another game, but it is coming from other players attacking the one making suggestions. Typically if someone says they want something changed in a public place (game forums, global chats etc.) you will immediately get the, "Go back to WoW" and "We don't want no WoW clone" comments. I find this elitist anti-WoW attitude infuriating. Nobody should rag on others for liking something different, and nobody should be using WoW as an insult either. It isn't as if only WoW players make suggestions. It has become trendy to hate WoW.

I do think I understand what you are saying, and no, I am not saying that you are being elitist, but I do think we all need to remember that one person's "McDonalds" is another person's "Gourmet restaraunt" that has all their favorite dishes.  For the record, no, I am not currently playing WoW, but I have, and I do think it's a decent game. I understand why it is a hit with many people. I have simply moved on, same way I don't keep playing console or single player games if they become stale to me. It's just a hobby. I think people take WoW entirely too seriously. It has become a measuring stick, an insult, and a behemoth, but why do we continue to propagate this in other games? I don't think that comparisons, wild accusations, or critique for other games should have anything to do with WoW whatsoever.

Good article which highlights the contradictions players trap themselves in.

I didn't like WoW very much and for a couple of reasons.

I enjoyed UO & EQ because they made a solid (for the times) attempt at building a alternative world, EQ I felt was mistaken by going with the level based gameplay, but aside from that was a good game.

When WoW came along it altered the landscape, some for the better some for the worse, but it took away that sense of being in a world and made more of a game, and whilst it did a lot right, it lost something fundemental for me, and that was the sense of achievement.

I'm hoping one day to find an MMO that goes back to trying to build a world as it's core.

 This is a sorely needed article that should be required reading for anyone entering MMOs. I have grown so sick, tired, and jaded from the constant bashing and debasing of anything different purely BECAUSE it's different than what they're used to, and then the following DEMANDS that the developers change it to be like what they're used to, or they'll leave. 

Finally someone on Mmorpg.com that agrees on how similar alganon is to wow, i would continue to read your articles!

 Abrahmm: Since I've yet to touch SWG (maybe one day, to be fair to it), I'm curious what appeals to SWG gamers? What did the game do right? (I'd like to hear more on this front in general, as I've been sent an interesting read on SWG and would like to hear more.)

stormina: I notice that too, quite a bit. There are fanbois on both sides of the fence, and players who like new games (or maybe don't, but just hate WoW) are quick to scream and yell and flame anyone who mentions the game's name. With all the new games/betas I play on a regular basis, it's gotten predictable. And as someone mentioned, some games are still struggling with it - like Aion.

To all:

I know the question is going to come up sooner or later (since some will read that I hate WoW, some will think I love it), so let me give a little background on my opinion of WoW:

First of all, yes, I still play WoW. I have subscribed on and off for the past five years, usually enough to start feeling stale in the content, then disappear for months until the next expansion comes out. I am currently playing, reaching that stale point, but holding in for three reasons: 1) I enjoy my current raiding group, 2) I have some dear friends that play WoW and do not want to move on, and 3) I want to see the Icecrown content before I take a break. That said, most of my time in the game is spent logging in to raid, or do dailies to restock my cash supply. Otherwise, I only log in at the request of my friends to play, or when I'm truly bored.

I have mixed opinions of WoW, and I am not a fangirl of WoW nor am I a hater. I find it fun (in moderate amounts), and think the game has done many things well, and many things poorly. It is a good game - not a bad game, but not a great game either. I could go into a great thesis on why I think WoW's gone wrong, and equally go over things it's done right.

I think the industry does owe some to WoW, just as it owed to EQ and UO, its predecessors. There's no denying WoW has made the MMO industry explode (for better and for worse.) But it is not "all good," it is not the holy grail of MMOs, and there never will be one of those. It's good for gamers and developers to learn lessons from WoW, but those lessons need to be thoughtful and in context of a bigger picture. 

Tharkis, you say that WoW is the gold standard when it comes to "playability, aesthetics, compatibility and customization." But aren't those four things a little too general? What I see in that statement is "WoW is king because it's accessible to many players, visually pleasing, and has good UI customization." That certainly lends to its popularity, but popularity doesn't mean the game is good. McD's is popular because it's cheap, accessible, and has decent food; does that make it the "best" fast food restaurant? Should I start making comparisons to "pop music" next, and point out that just because a boy band has millions of screaming fangirls and albums sold doesn't mean that their music is good. It's a false analogy.

This is one of the best written articles I have ever read here on mmorpg.com. And its rare that I feel the need to reply, but with this one I do :)

I see the comparision all to often i mmo's. I have tried to move games several times with different guilds. Its always 100% sure to fail. As you say the players will always complain that XX game does not have YY feature. It really sucks as I often grow tired with games after awhile, and really like to move around alittle with the people I like to play with.

I tried in EQ 2 to move to both Vanguard (which I think is a awsome game) and to age of conan. Even with vanguard it failed, although its very similar to eq2. But even the small things bothered people. It was even worse with the move to AoC. People left after just a couple of days and went straith back to eq2.

I have also tried to move a guild from SWG, to various new games. Also failed each time for the same reasons as above.

But you asked what people liked about Pre CU swg.. I can only speak for myself, but swg had something most other games don't. A good skilled based system. A realistic world (well, more so then most games) a really really really good crafting system. But one of the real killer features that I think many people leave out when talking about swg was the social aspect. People could create a entire character that would newer see combat, but still have all the fun in the world. Dancers, Musicians, Hairdressers, tailors, cooks and the list goes on. There was huge social parties, and people could create a entire town anywhere, with mayors and everything else that comes with a town. Sure alot of towns felt empty. But cities that worked for it, had a thriving community. It was just fun. On and it had some fun pve and pvp. And pets was fun and usefull. The games had tons of flaws, no doubt. But it was also unique in so many ways and allowed people the freedom to do almost anything they wanted.

But all in all. Good article :)

All I have to say is that this is one of the best written articles I've seen on here in a LONG time. Nice to see some new blood actually bring some useful to the table, especially since the dipping of standards in certain writer's articles.

I regretfully have to admit that I make this "stale comparison" often, albeit somewhat subconsciously.  This article was pleasantly eye-opening and for once encourages me to think rather than immediately categorize the author of the article as someone who is close-minded, ignorant, or even just plan stupid.  You make a lot of good points in your article.

Obviously, any new MMO is going to pale in comparison to WoW -- the MMO juggernaut, tyrant even. 

If we were all to go back in time to November 2004, let's remember when Blizzard was solely in the RTS / Action-RPG industry and was trying to expand into new genres.  Starcraft: Ghost and WoW (FPS and MMORPG).  I'm pretty sure most people back then didn't see WoW rising above and beyond all other MMO's at that point, but they decided to give WoW a chance to prove itself.  WoW stepped up to the challenge and that is how we know World of Warcraft today.

I think other MMO's deserve the same chance as WoW did.  Hell, I remember when WoW had no content and grinding was pretty much necessary from 35-40 and 45-50.  This is not a troll post but WoW definitely has become some sort of idealized, virtuous, almighty entity that is entirely perfect in all aspects.  This fact simply wasn't the case upon it's first release.

For any MMO to really compete with WoW, it will need to be popular enough to stay on the market for 2-3 years; for a game to be released and then kill WoW immediately would be absolutely and completely ridiculous.  In fact, I don't think that it will ever happen.  It will likely be some smaller game that explodes into popularity with the general MMO public.  (Example: aspiring indie bands that hit the big time [The Killers, Kings of Leon, etc]  Stupid comparison, I know, but it does apply in this case).

---

Originally posted by MissyShade
Tharkis, you say that WoW is the gold standard when it comes to "playability, aesthetics, compatibility and customization." But aren't those four things a little too general? What I see in that statement is "WoW is king because it's accessible to many players, visually pleasing, and has good UI customization." That certainly lends to its popularity, but popularity doesn't mean the game is good. McD's is popular because it's cheap, accessible, and has decent food; does that make it the "best" fast food restaurant? Should I start making comparisons to "pop music" next, and point out that just because a boy band has millions of screaming fangirls and albums sold doesn't mean that their music is good. It's a false analogy.
 

---

Originally posted by MissyShade

 <snip>

McD's is popular because it's cheap, accessible, and has decent food; does that make it the "best" fast food restaurant? Should I start making comparisons to "pop music" next, and point out that just because a boy band has millions of screaming fangirls and albums sold doesn't mean that their music is good. It's a false analogy.

 

Not replying directly to this, but to the way the McDonald's analogy gets thrown around. In most cases where this analogy is used, there's this "steak" or "gourmet restaurant" thrown in as counterpoint. In this thread, I see Airphel has done it.

Well, that analogy doesn't work, because McDonald's is cheap whereas the gourmet restaurant is not, so the gourmet restaurant of course has to have higher quality food! (Which some do not, which is really annoying when put in perspective, but I digress). If McDonald's had the prices of a Gourmet restaurant, it'd not be as popular as it is now. So the Gourmet vs. McD's analogy is not fair and would only work with a comparison like the old Neverwinter Nights (which was expensive!) vs WOW...

Anyway, consequently that angle is pretty superficial and overdone, so how about a new one that's related to a point the author has touched upon?

On having a choice, I've seen many westerners gladly take refuge in McDonald's rather than try the "strange stuff" served in foreign gourmet restaurants... And they were not regular McDonald's customers and not that tight with money, either. No, it was all about familiarity, all about playing it safe. Now, of course that's narrow-minded, but it also shows the basic accessability and usability of McDonald's. It's the point quantity becomes sort of a quality - you find McD's everywhere in the world, and it's generally acceptable stuff if not brilliant, so it saves you from taking a chance on those fishy looking fishies...

Which were delicious, by the way, you should have tried them :)

MissyShade: About your questions on SWG:

For me, the things that made SWG special (before the big change) were the flexibility it gave players. You weren't locked into a rigid class system, but could develop a mix of skills that you liked (I was Animal Trainer/Bioengineer). While there was still levels, you skill development was the focus. The next huge thing was the crafting. You didn't have cookie-cutter crafting where everyone made identical items. There was item quality and attributes based on material quality, crafting skill and crafting options. And raw materials weren't fixed nodes, there were areas of verying richness where you could construct automated harvesting equipment that would collect materials over time, even while offline.

But probably one of the biggest things for guilds is that not only could people construct houses in a wide variety of places, that could group them into new towns and build their own facilities, even electing their own mayor to run it. You could not only decorate your house, but also build your own store to buy and sell things. Player housing is a whole area that is missing in WoW.

About the article:

Its a good article and I agree that too many people thing WoW is the only good way to make a game. However, because WoW dominates the whole market, its only natural to use it as the standard of comparison. It also make it easier to discuss features because most people have at least tried it and thus have a common experience that they can make a comparison to.