Thank you Jon Wood for the artical, but I feel it does not go far enough in an very important area.  What are the legal areas involved with all of this.

The mess of legal laws from state to state, federal laws and regulations in the US.   Then the laws of other countries like China, the EU, Germany, Japan, and South Korea.  Each has their own laws on what can and can not be done.

One area that I can think of rigth off the top of my head is Funcon's Age of Conan where the retail box had DX10 printed on the system panel, yet it was many months after the game went live that Funcon put it in the game.  Was this false advertising under the law?  Many other companies say things about what is in thier games durning the PR run up to retail release, then do not put them in because of time or reasons.  How do they stand on legal grounds.

Your part on Cryptic's Star Trek Online close beta access flap is one very sharp point to look at.  Right or wrong, here we have an person acting as an officer for Cryptic on the Champions Online fourm board stating that those that bought lifetime and 6 month subscriptiions to Champions Oline would be the first ones into the Star Trek Online closed beta.   Then it was not until three days later that someone from the Star Trek Online team said no what he said was not correct I think on twitter.  Not on the main web pages or forums.   As it stands right now has any laws been broken?  Who can tail?  Is the way they have been handling it honorable, that is another question.  North Carolina has a law on the books where a person who feels that it is a matter of honor can challange another to meet them face to face on the Field of Honor in real life.  Last I heard if a person kills another on the Field of Honor they will spend four years in prision but nothing else can be done to them.

There are many other strange laws that effect the players as well.  Californa has a law passed in the early 90's about sending spam by the internet.  This is why some games put in an timer before you can send another ingame message.

SoE was going to let rouges pick other players pockets for money till it was pointed out to them that the US had just passed a law about using the internet to steal money.  One point is that the wording of the law makes no differance between real money or ingame money.  Needless to say SoE very quickly dropped the idea.   This law may also be needed to be used on persons who hack into game accounts and steal money from your game account, or the Eve bank account of a couple of years ago.

For those of you that like to PVP gank pepole, mid 90's South Korea passed a law making it illegal to kill the avitar of anyone under 18.  How many games with pvp in them now have player from all over the world playing in them.

All of this mess can give you many articals and keep both you and MMORPGs legal department very bussy digging up out of the way laws to report on.

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Gyrus

But one more thing comes out of the article IMHO:
Jon Wood - what do you actually intend to do about it?

 

As a columnist, I shared my opinion on this.

The bottom line though is that this site doesn't exist so that the staff can use it as our own personal tool to push our own personal agendas. That's not what it's about. What the site is about is players coming together to talk about issues raised in opinion pieces like this one, any of our regular features, news of the day or by other players on our forums. 

My job as a columnist is to present my opinions each week within the confines of this particular space. As a columnist, I don't drive policy for the site. As Managing Editor, my job is to make sure that we are doing the best job that we can to present you with news and information. It would be completely irresponsible of me to use that position to further my personal opinions and agendas.

This week, my opinion appears to be in the majority, at least among the folks replying in this thread. Last week though, my opinion was more in the minority. There were far more people disagreeing with my point of view than agreeing. That, in a nutshell, is why my using whatever influence I may have (and I think you may be over-estimating it a touch) in the way you suggest is probably a bad idea. While you might agree with me on this one, you might find yourself on the other side of the fence next time. Which is ok, that's how it's supposed to work.

The industry shouldn't shift on the weight that I or any other columnist, reviewer or writer on this or any other site can throw around. It should instead change based on what all of us as players, and yes consumers, of these products actually want. Whether we vote with our wallets, or we make our voices heard as you and everyone else here have done today, the result is going to be a lot more favorable if it all doesn't come down to the whims of a single individual.

Anyway, that's a bit of a rant, but you highlighted an interesting aspect of my job and gave me the opportunity to discuss the difference between my responsibilities as a columnist (sharing my opinion and even trying to get others on board with me) and my responsibilities as Managing Editor which require me to try to keep my personal feelings out of it.

Translation:  "Nothing!"

Which is a shame.

Yes, I understand that you serve a role as both a "journalist" and an "editor", and so you must stick the aspects of "fact telling" as opposed to "influencing".

But funny how those roles never seem to be in jeopardy with the GIANT ads on this site for games, beta keys, and give aways.  No questions are raised in the home offices about the ability to be "objective" when you're able to be afloat this week thanks to revenue from some game?  No concerns about giving an open forum, in the form of blogs, to developers under your sites banner?  (developers who you have to interview at times).

Maybe that's harsh, and I certainly don't have anything against this site or Mr. Wood personally.  I just think that this response is naieve. 

OF COURSE THERE ARE THINGS THE REPORTERS ON THIS SITE CAN DO ABOUT CORE ISSUES IN MMO'S!

Language:  How about coming up with a definition for "closed" and "open" "beta", and requiring all your reporters to stick to it.  Heck, do the folks on this site even have a concensus about what a closed beta is?  Define what mmorpg thinks a beta should be, from invite levels, to work being done.  If a game announces a "beta" and it doesn't match your definition, then call it what it is:  free trial, marketing push, revenue generator, etc.  Don't let the press releases dictate that language YOU use in YOUR articles.  Imagine if, from you guys and gals, we were able to generate an industry-wide concensus regarding what beta is, or isn't.  Would help the gamer, wouldn't it?

Questions:  How about more articles and less press releases.  Yes, you need to stay on top of all the news in the mmo world, but, last time I checked, journalists were supposed to ask questions.  The "news" on he front page reads like the ticker on the bottom of the cable news channels:  talking points and marketing speak.  What if, instead, any time a company wanted their "press release" announced on the site, they HAD to submit to detailed questioning? Would some refuse?  Sure....but that would certainly hurt their marketing, right.  Make the company more accountable to YOU with their "news.

Expose':  While articles questioning the shady practices of game companies MONTH'S after it's too late are, I guess, "better late than never", couldn't a bit more be done?  Why not get ahead of the curve, use your contacts and connections, and some good ol' fasioned (mustache and trench coat) "investigative journalism".  How many shady events have occured in the mmo world in the past two years?  How many times was this site AHEAD of those events, or even in the thick of it, and how many times did you report on simply the final result?  How often did a "journalist" from this site get INTO the story, and how many times did they "report" the postings of "forumites" who had pieced things together.  Journalists don't have to be "opinionated" to be investigative...they just have to try to dig at the truth.  And is there any question here about the positive effect investigative journalism can have on an industry, or for the people?

No more ratings:  Instead of posting a rating system for the game's "hype" or its "results", how about you stick to reporting what is, or isn't, going on in the game right now.  Assess the current state of the game, not what it COULD be five years from now.  Don't waste time with "top five" articles.  Heck, how about no more "reviews", as they certainly skirt the line of "opinion", and they happen so infrequently and say so little they put NO PRESSURE on the developers, and therefore, don't HELP the audience.  A year between reviews...what's the point.  Stars, excitement levels, hype meters...they don't really speak to pure "journalism".  So, why not lose them.

There's pleny more to.  The "willy-nilly" linking to reviews/previews of other sites without knowing how much "integrity" the reporter there has. (are you linking us to a "plant" article, or someone who really is investigating the game).  Roundtable discussions amongst the industry "insiders" you have here.  Greater information on the development history of games (how long has it taken, what major changes did it go through, etc) to hold them accountable to a wider audience.  Or just less reliance on "forum reporting" would even be a good start.

I just can't agree that this site isn't ALLOWED to influence the industry because it would mean taking things in a personal level.  Reporters bring down governments without giving away what their political affiiliation is.  Whistle blowers give up great jobs and friendships because of facts they find.

Is there a journalistic standard?  Yes.  But I'm not so sure this site is totally living up to it.

My opinion, of course.

I've been screaming about it this for a very long time.   With my tinfoil hat on or off the reality is that in the end they made their profit, onto the next project.  MMOs are now treated like every other game out there.  Release, get profit, spend a tiny amount of resources for a couple patches and move on. 

It's probably proven to be a better way to make money as a business to pump them out for box sales.  Gamers will buy anything if the marketing hype is good.  Promise a bunch of fantastic features then take a crap in a box and sale it.  Hey if it makes a lot of money and keeps the company paid why should they care about you?  You'll continue to buy it anyways. 

Originally posted by Thorgrimm

Lastly, if anyone has been keeping up with the STO forums and announcements, you would have read that the devs and pro testers have a vested intertest in Star Trek.  Every one of them has been a fan of the franchise for years and years.

The Mythic devs were big Warhammer fans, supposedly.

  Star Trek fans can be evil when it comes to their critical reviews; Cryptic knows they have a HOT hand grenade in their hands.  They have already been receiving volumes of input from fans in regards to gaffs and errors on continuum; they have been making huge efforts to make changes to correct these continuity holes before release.  I believe that this "personal investment" in the product may see a level of quality that we may not have seen before.  If I were working for Cryptic, my family would probably be torqued at me, since I am already a workaholic.  I would get lost in what I was doing to make it a really great game. Watch the video of the tour that is available; these Trekkies and Trekkers have Star Trek memorabilia all over the office and their personal cubicles.

I'm sure that's no accident. Jeebus, people are gullible.

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by Gyrus

Originally posted by rhinok

Along similar lines, what about F2P games that open their cash shops while they're still in beta?  One current example is Earth  Eternal, which is in open beta. Not only is it's cash shop open, but Sparkplay recently offered a discount on credits in an attempt to drum up business.  Why are they taking money during beta when the game isn't really ready for launch?  Considering that open beta characters won't be wiped, nor will items purchased for credits be revoked when the game goes "live", it seems to me that Earth Eternal is actually in a "soft launch" phase rather than a true beta.  I'm ok with that as long as they call it what it is, but it really ain't beta....

~Ripper

Once they start taking money I would say "Open for business.  Released."

This is just companies trying to have the best of both worlds by saying "It's Beta - so if it all goes wrong then you should have expected that."  My guess is their next line would be "We will be unable to give refunds due to the Beta Status..."?

Well, wrong.  Touching on fraud territory here.

Here, MMORPG.com, is a chance to start making a difference.
1/ Check to see if rhinok is correct (he will be I'm sure, but you have to check)

2/ Move Earth Eternal to the released games section.

If Sparkplay are not happy - put it to them that MMORPG.com will not support paid betas or F2P games conducting retail business within a 'Beta' as this is contrary to customer / gamer interest (people can get ripped off).

This is actually our current policy. I will forward this along to the proper people for verification.

Thanks for the tip.

Thanks for taking a look at it.  FYI, you won't have to look too hard.  On this page, you can buy blocks of credits ranging from 500 credits/$5 to 27,500 credits for $250 - yes, that's $250 USD.  I don't know if they're actually making money from selling credits, but they're definitely selling them.

~Ripper

I love rants!! I guess I expect companys to market their product, buyer beware is what comes to mind.  I never preorder or pay ahead of atleast trying a game.  Beta testing has saved me some serious plastic over the years.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Thorgrimm

Lastly, if anyone has been keeping up with the STO forums and announcements, you would have read that the devs and pro testers have a vested intertest in Star Trek.  Every one of them has been a fan of the franchise for years and years.

The Mythic devs were big Warhammer fans, supposedly.

  Star Trek fans can be evil when it comes to their critical reviews; Cryptic knows they have a HOT hand grenade in their hands.  They have already been receiving volumes of input from fans in regards to gaffs and errors on continuum; they have been making huge efforts to make changes to correct these continuity holes before release.  I believe that this "personal investment" in the product may see a level of quality that we may not have seen before.  If I were working for Cryptic, my family would probably be torqued at me, since I am already a workaholic.  I would get lost in what I was doing to make it a really great game. Watch the video of the tour that is available; these Trekkies and Trekkers have Star Trek memorabilia all over the office and their personal cubicles.

I'm sure that's no accident. Jeebus, people are gullible.

Having worked at Games Workshop for a while at an official retail store and having been involved in the table-top wargaming hobby for over a decade...I've yet to figure out how they were fans of the Warhammer IP. Maybe in a sense of this company is going to let us used an established IP to make a game that very loosely lives up to the spirit of what the game's lore entails? I certainly don't believe the game they created is an effort by true fans of the game who have played it in any great detail for a number of years.

In fact, the unknown company that Games Workshop first engaged with making a Warhammer based MMO had a better compass on what to do with the IP in my opinion. I can't remember the name of that company, but their ideas were and visual design hit the mark when talking about conveying a dark, gritty Olde World.

Originally posted by Khalathwyr

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Thorgrimm

Lastly, if anyone has been keeping up with the STO forums and announcements, you would have read that the devs and pro testers have a vested intertest in Star Trek.  Every one of them has been a fan of the franchise for years and years.

The Mythic devs were big Warhammer fans, supposedly.

  Star Trek fans can be evil when it comes to their critical reviews; Cryptic knows they have a HOT hand grenade in their hands.  They have already been receiving volumes of input from fans in regards to gaffs and errors on continuum; they have been making huge efforts to make changes to correct these continuity holes before release.  I believe that this "personal investment" in the product may see a level of quality that we may not have seen before.  If I were working for Cryptic, my family would probably be torqued at me, since I am already a workaholic.  I would get lost in what I was doing to make it a really great game. Watch the video of the tour that is available; these Trekkies and Trekkers have Star Trek memorabilia all over the office and their personal cubicles.

I'm sure that's no accident. Jeebus, people are gullible.

Having worked at Games Workshop for a while at an official retail store and having been involved in the table-top wargaming hobby for over a decade...I've yet to figure out how they were fans of the Warhammer IP. Maybe in a sense of this company is going to let us used an established IP to make a game that very loosely lives up to the spirit of what the game's lore entails? I certainly don't believe the game they created is an effort by true fans of the game who have played it in any great detail for a number of years.

The same way the developers at Cryptic are "hardcore Star Trek fans who do in-depth analysis of the episodes and movies to decide what design decisions to make to ensure an authentic Star Trek experience".

If I had to guess, I would say that initial box sales is the #1 most important thing to todays MMORPG investors. I agree with you that it seems completely ass backwards, but that's just the way Hollywood works, baby.

I think players sould vote with their feet, but not staff writers or MMO sites. They should say the truth as they see it but running ads for what they feel is dubous is fine. It is for us to make are minds up and not to join the game.

Originally posted by Scot

I think players sould vote with their feet, but not staff writers or MMO sites. They should say the truth as they see it but running ads for what they feel is dubous is fine. It is for us to make are minds up and not to join the game.

I just don't see the "grassroots" infrastructure to mobilize gamers to vote with there feet. What's needed for that to happen is for a core group of dedicated people to come together and build a Gamer's Union and build a significant member base to which course of action can easily be communicated and that the members actually carry out. As it is putting up a post on one of many gaming forums and expecting a large, significant turnout is ineffective.

Originally posted by Scot

Another article from Mr Wood having a go at MMO marketing. He is really not going to get that invite to the MMO PR Christmas party is he? :)

I think a lot of MMO’s now have their main focus on initial sales. They are being conceived and built like solo games, which only need to last a player one to two months. In the solo game market you don’t need the content to keep a player subbing. The strategy is that as long as enough initial sales are made it does not matter if the MMO is a long term success, a profit has been made already.

Well, I don't know what the "cut" is for the company on box sales.   Its quite possible they only make $10 a box ... or they might make $30 (I'd really like to know what that number is).

But even if its $30 a box and they sell a million copies, that's only $30M ... when you hear bonuses of $20M for early release thrown around (like we're hearing for STO) then the box sales don't cover development, deployment, PR costs, servers, etc.

I'm thinking they rely heavily on the people that buy the box, tinker with the game for a couple of months, stop playing and don't cancel their monthly ... heck I have plenty of friends that subscribe to games they aren't playing for months before they get around to canceling the subscription.

I agree on all counts with the O.P..  It's nice to see these issues highlighted in the columns.  Players have said similar things in forums, but game companies usually just dismiss good forum feedback, calling it the useless rants of the vocal minority.

A lot of the gaming houses that have taken this position are now in the toilet, or heading there too btw.  Makes me wonder what it takes to actually get them to recognize important feedback.

Beta hype is another angle that might be considered as well to boost box sales. I think for most people a new game that does things a bit differently  from what has been seen is refreshing  and instills hope in people which translates into good word of mouth.  Of course we all know that after the "honeymoon" things look a bit different but thats after the millions of boxes have been sold. Aion was a stroke of genius with their beta weekends, allowing only a portion to be seen and promising revolutionary PVP to come later.So was the beta for testing or to generate hype?

They are awarding bonuses of $20M to STO for early release, is that for real? You are creating a situation where designers will say ‘job done’ when they know it is not.

The idea of a Gamers Union is a fascinating one, it would give a coherence to our issues, someone might actually take notice then. There are many gamer sites, if they could come together to have one voice you could get the industry to wake up. You are going to get many opinions about the way MMO’s should go, that’s fine as long as it is not the one way they are all headed currently.

Originally posted by Scot

...

The idea of a Gamers Union is a fascinating one, it would give a coherence to our issues, someone might actually take notice then. There are many gamer sites, if they could come together to have one voice you could get the industry to wake up. You are going to get many opinions about the way MMO’s should go, that’s fine as long as it is not the one way they are all headed currently.

I thought the Stardock Gamer's Bill of Rights was a good start... not much came of it though?

Originally posted by Gyrus

Originally posted by Scot

...

The idea of a Gamers Union is a fascinating one, it would give a coherence to our issues, someone might actually take notice then. There are many gamer sites, if they could come together to have one voice you could get the industry to wake up. You are going to get many opinions about the way MMO’s should go, that’s fine as long as it is not the one way they are all headed currently.

 

I thought the Stardock Gamer's Bill of Rights was a good start... not much came of it though?

At the very least, if some gaming companies ever ask themselves, "Hey why are the masses avoiding our games like the plague?"  work like this should give them some helpful information, if they're willing to listen.

Originally posted by Scot

They are awarding bonuses of $20M to STO for early release, is that for real? You are creating a situation where designers will say ‘job done’ when they know it is not.

The idea of a Gamers Union is a fascinating one, it would give a coherence to our issues, someone might actually take notice then. There are many gamer sites, if they could come together to have one voice you could get the industry to wake up. You are going to get many opinions about the way MMO’s should go, that’s fine as long as it is not the one way they are all headed currently.

Actually, I think the industry woke up. Gamers of mmos are pretty much extremely disloyal and impatient, pretty quick to pass judgement and move to next game. I have seen many post in games saying that "I am only playing game X until game Y release". Company would have to be dumb to not restrain their investments considering that the boom of mmo players is pretty much over with the addition of the economic crisis. Well established games already recover their investments and they are pretty comfortable, with their current player base. 

I think the mmo industry will be reduced to a few well established p2p games and some f2p ones. It is pretty much sad that probably the innovation will take a big hit because it is easy to try innovate in single player games, going to multiplayer options. Saving money of servers and avoiding dealing with moody players is a winner.

I got lured into CO due to friends and access to the STO BETA.  Luckily, I didnt purchase the lifetime membership.  I am quite happy about my LOTRO lifetime membership. 

I am a bit dissappointed with the process of getting in STO as it is a game I have looking forward to.   Wont be suckered again as they really got me in my weakspot for a need of a good SCI FI game.   Tried EVE and Fallen Earth.  Both are good games, but didnt have the staying power for me.

I tryout BETAs for two reasons... help the game become better and see if the game will be able to keep my interest. 

Good article btw

Aion's getting rap3d by bots at the moment. I don't think it'll live long enough to see a worthwhile investment in those "one million boxes sold" subscriptions.