General Discussion

Found this off the AoC official forums,

This was someones response to LordOrion ( Project Manager of AoC ) After he stated the AoC has more content then WoW did at release....The following statement is true to ALL new MMORPGs I believe.

LordOrion,

Here is what you and others in the industry miss:

You aren't competing with WoW in 2004. You're competing against WoW in 2008 (and forward). Many new MMO players don't care that AoC may have launched with more content than WoW did at launch - they only know WoW as it is now - not what it was (or rather, wasn't). You aren't competing with WoW polish circa '04, you're competing against WoW circa '08.

If you build a game for 2008, you have to compete with games as they stand in 2008. Not as they stood in 2004.

What happened then does not matter; it's only what happens now and moving forward. However, if you don't learn from the past, you're doomed to repeat it in the future.

I 100% agree that new mmorpg's "should" have as much content as any game on the market. But...is it possible?

I don't agree at all that new games should have as much content as older games. Why? Because they'd never be released. While game B struggles to put in as much content as game A, game A still has four years of development time on them and will continue to develop new things while game B struggles to catch up (which it won't).

MMOs aren't books where you can slap some words down on a page and publish it. They require a LOT of time and effort from a large group of people, and you simply can't include as much content as an older game because there isn't the time for it.

Plus, if a player goes "OMG why don't you have as much content as WoW?!" all you can say to them is "then go play WoW, because it will take us more time to get that much content included."

What I do agree with though is that it doesn't matter that AoC had more content at release than WoW did, but not for the reason your quoted poster stated. AoC and WoW are two different games that focus on different things. So who cares if one has more than the other? It's the quality that matters.

Originally posted by Shadowhand

Found this off the AoC official forums,

This was someones response to LordOrion ( Project Manager of AoC ) After he stated the AoC has more content then WoW did at release....The following statement is true to ALL new MMORPGs I believe.

 

 

 

LordOrion,

Here is what you and others in the industry miss:

You aren't competing with WoW in 2004. You're competing against WoW in 2008 (and forward). Many new MMO players don't care that AoC may have launched with more content than WoW did at launch - they only know WoW as it is now - not what it was (or rather, wasn't). You aren't competing with WoW polish circa '04, you're competing against WoW circa '08.

If you build a game for 2008, you have to compete with games as they stand in 2008. Not as they stood in 2004.

What happened then does not matter; it's only what happens now and moving forward. However, if you don't learn from the past, you're doomed to repeat it in the future.

 

 

I 100% agree that new mmorpg's "should" have as much content as any game on the market. But...is it possible?

I'll use the same reply I did in another thread about this.

He's got a good point but I don't fully agree with it . Yes it's irrelevant whether WOW had less content at launch , however it's unfair to compare the state of a game with 4 years of added content and polish to a recently released game.

A better comparison to make would be the quality of patches both games have received since their launch . Which company has the more stable releases and which company truly uses feedback and quality assurance to please their fans.

Saying their game should be as good as wow in 08 is just as irrelevant as saying wow had less at launch , Given 4 years of live development it very well may be , We'll know in about 4 years.

I don't agree DAoC had many many years of polish with literally dozens of features that were pretty new to MMOs, that others didn't even have yet, and it still got overlooked and left behind.

Originally posted by streea

I don't agree at all that new games should have as much content as older games. Why? Because they'd never be released. While game B struggles to put in as much content as game A, game A still has four years of development time on them and will continue to develop new things while game B struggles to catch up (which it won't).

MMOs aren't books where you can slap some words down on a page and publish it. They require a LOT of time and effort from a large group of people, and you simply can't include as much content as an older game because there isn't the time for it.

Plus, if a player goes "OMG why don't you have as much content as WoW?!" all you can say to them is "then go play WoW, because it will take us more time to get that much content included."

What I do agree with though is that it doesn't matter that AoC had more content at release than WoW did, but not for the reason your quoted poster stated. AoC and WoW are two different games that focus on different things. So who cares if one has more than the other? It's the quality that matters.

And crappy clones never being released is bad because?

It is certainly a good point but still, I'm on the fence a bit on this one.

I think players are willing to concede that a game needn't match game content of established titles such as WoW, EQ2, Lineage2 and so one.

What I do think players want, and rightfully deserve, is at the very least a game that is [somewhat] complete, has some measure of clarity, has decent amount of content throughout all levels and keep them occupied as new features/content rolls in.

Naturally all needs to be paired with a relatively stable client and if the feature sets, story and game itself are decent, you're pretty much good to go.

Unfortunately, from what I've seen and experienced, AoC has some fundamental flaws throughout and as much as they would like to tout that they have more content than WoW at Launch (by and by numbers that may be so) they simply don't have the pace and range that WoW had at Launch and this is what Blizzard did so well.

Covering your ears and singning "lalalalalalalalalala", "we're better, we're better, we're better" simply does not take away the facts.

I agree with the OP

I was one of the many dissapointed with AoC's release and moved on back to CoH shortly, the reason because it didn't stack up to it for me. And it didn't stack up for alot of people compared to other games that are out right now.

People aren't gonna play something they don't enjoy because "it could get better" thats just a waste of time and money.

Comparing AoC's release to WoW's release rather than its present state doesnt prove anything, cept that WoW has come a long way. AoC could do the same, but then again maybe not.

It is hard to release a new game when their are more polished ones out there like WoW, but thats just the way it is. It is not impossible though if they can get the ball rolling and start fixing up and adding new stuff to the game.

It is not really possible for a new game to have the content that older games have. EQ1 has been out for almost 9 years, and while much of the content is now outdated and empty, it is still "content".

I think it is more important to deliver a polished product that can be rapidly expanded (at least in the 3-9 month future).

But the point still remains as the OP pointed out that new games are not competing with other games when they launched - it is competing with what they are NOW.

So though they will probably have more content than say EQ2 (or any other mmo) did at launch, that is not really the point. If they don't have the "content", then they have to have something else, such as gameplay - and judging from the feedback on AoC, that game had neither.

IMO, Conan spent far too much of it's hype and development on it's (mostly failed) "unique combat system" (which even in early alpha was proven not to work due to lag/ping issues).  Far too much of the hype centered around "boobs and gore", so not enough people were paying attention to the actual gameplay and content. The whole fiasco reminds me a lot of the first launch of VG - too many fanboi's, not enough critics (or the critics were drowned out).

People who dont agree with the original poster need to seriously look at the state of MMO today. Trying to rationalize why New MMOs dont have what old mmo have is ridiculous. There is no reason why New MMOs arent coming ful