A good example of little to no hype:  Fallen Earth

A good example of too much hype and an open beta used as a marketing play to sell Fileplanet accounts:  Champions Online

Take a look at the current status of both of those games.  Which one of this is currently playable and fun and which one is a mess that is constantly getting patched and retcons given out to compensate for the sweeping changes?

Well spoken.

I've said it before... but the last MMORPG-like games I bought were Tabula Rasa and Hellgate: London. Tested both in beta... and both felt like beta garbage on "final release"... that they wanted and expected people to pay for. Hell even Hellgate: London had a kickass LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP option! I know a guy who bought that deal, and I laughed at the thought of remembering him when I found out the game was going to be canceled just ONE YEAR later... and the same damned thing happened to Tabula Rasa too.

Both had SUPER DUPER ULTRA SNAZZY EPIC trailers to them too to help both of those games lash together a massive hype golem. Seriously, go check out the trailers of Tabula Rasa, and the Mini Story of Hellgate:London, right now. They even got Mila Jovovich to do the voice for the main chick in Tabula Rasa. They even did NUDE PICS of the main characters for release in PLAYBOY for fucks sake. But nothing could save them from the biggest problem, themselves.

Early on, there were no major "expectations"  because it was a pioneering field, most of us "(M)MORPG vets" have a lot of game time under our belts and have seen what works and what doesn't... and even despite all our collective differences... Casual/Hardcore, PvE Carebears/PvP Elitists, Persistant Sandbox/Quest driven Themeparks, the BIGGEST thing we're getting sick of are the games are not fully functional or not doing what they "promised" on release, and being fed bullshit ideas that "If you pay us enough in the next coming months, we promise to please you... maybe" bribery pertaining to new games.

Megacorps are going to run what we love about MMO idealism into the goddamned ground like a catapulted condensed ball of flaming shit, just because they all want cash cows like WoW, and they want them as FAST as possible! Because let's face it, executives have expensive taste, and they have a lot of shit they want to buy.

If people want to act like they have some sense... do the genre a favor. STOP... FUCKING... PRE ORDERING. Every one of you know MMO's are fubard the first 30 days+ anyways, and every one of you know that "beta is not a representative of final release".. just ask those who are butthurt about Champions Online. Everyone knows that a CG trailer is not representative of actual game footage, and even if it is you have no idea what your 55 bucks is going to buy you in the end, and you don't know until 3 months later after they sorted some of the gamestopping bugs and fixed some balancing and exploits do you really know what is in store for the long run.

Vote with your dollar (currency) and get execs off of developers backs to make cash cows.

Originally posted by tapeworm00

Originally posted by Babylon9000

It still sucked after launch day.
 

That's why so many people demanded their money back, and why MMORPG.com has it rated so much lower than it's competition. (7.3 vs. 8.5)

The game was simply launched to early period.

Champions is a perfect example of the OPs point of Beta Hype.

Besides this was not supposed to be a "Lets defend Champions" thread. It was supposed to be about how MMOs are currently marketed and how that is affecting the consumers.

The point was that the reviewer on that site used arguments that were not relevant to why the game sucked after launch. He or she (I don't recall) was using a previous experience that the public at large didn't have and couldn't compare by themselves. That's why I agree with MMORPG's review of the game, because it focuses on the actual content and problems of it, instead of building a narrative of tragedy around it to make an evaluation. The people who read MMORPG's review and get the game anyway know what they're going into in a way that is fair to them and to the game, which isn't the case with the other review.

It seems you missed my point entirely, so let me explain: the article could have used some examples, and the Champions release was the first one that came to my mind. The problem with generalizations, "MMOs do that", is that it's a safe place for the writer and for the companies - he's not compromising and at the same time the individual companies are freed from most responsibility. I believe that if the writer took a bunch of examples and pointed them out, the article would be a lot more effective, and people that don't know about the workings of the industry in that sense could become aware of what they're buying into when publishers offer them beta keys, and the publishers themselves could then face the consequences a lot more consciously and maturely than what they're currently doing (remember that interview with one of WAR's designers in which he, in a fit of anger after all the complaints and whines about the game's release, said something like "LET THEIR CREDIT CARDS SPEAK!"? That's just handling the situation in a completely unprofessional manner, thanks to them over-hyping and over-promoting their Beta as a game preview...).

So I'm just saying that if the article would be more confrontational, I think it would be a lot more effective than what it currently is.

 

Your right I misinterpreted you completely.

My apologies.

In fact I agree with you 100%.

Garret couldnt have used too many specific examples though for fear of pissing of the publishers that make him privy to inside info about launches that other sites like this might get if he started trashing specific games. After all the marketing departments of these games are what feed industry news sites like this.

I totally agree with you though guess I just read your original post the wrong way. Im still a little feisty over the CO launch fiasco.

sorry dood :)

Well written.

Particulary the part about marketing people who isn't gamers themselves.

He didn't mention the fact that overmarketting your next game years before it releases also can hurt the sales of your current game ("Wgy would I start playing Warquest now when Warquest 2 will be so much better once it releases"?).

And the way the use betatests now really upsets me, it seems like an empty marketing trick where many companies doesn't even want feedback.

Originally posted by Lansid

If people want to act like they have some sense... do the genre a favor. STOP... FUCKING... PRE ORDERING. Every one of you know MMO's are fubard the first 30 days+ anyways, and every one of you know that "beta is not a representative of final release".. just ask those who are butthurt about Champions Online. Everyone knows that a CG trailer is not representative of actual game footage, and even if it is you have no idea what your 55 bucks is going to buy you in the end, and you don't know until 3 months later after they sorted some of the gamestopping bugs and fixed some balancing and exploits do you really know what is in store for the long run.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

In one sense you can’t blame PR, they are just doing there job. If the MMO company decides to set up the PR department side too early, then the people employed in marketing need to justify their existence. They do that by putting out any sort of crap to create a buzz, a buzz which then hits the developers in the face. So it is down to company executives, they initiate the PR staff selection, they know the issues it can cause.

I was surprised about the references to managing expectations and marketing. The two don’t really go together, ME is a tool mostly used by managers with employees or say community liaison staff with the community of a MMO. But marketing wants to put expectation through the roof, that is what they are paid to do. The best way they can do this is to promise a MMO heaven without giving out specifics. Unfortunately what happens is that specifics start to be mentioned, which then bind developers to ideas that are still in a early stage of evolution. So ME and PR do not mix, they are like oil and water.

Yes pre ordering is a joke, come on players wake up and wait till launch at least before you buy. Sorting out the beta's is easy, just review every beta player after their first week. Have they put in two decent tickets? If not there beta account is rescinded.

Oh can I have a "Kill the Hype" hat please! :)

Originally posted by Lansid

If people want to act like they have some sense... do the genre a favor. STOP... FUCKING... PRE ORDERING.

Amen.

Originally posted by Khaunshar

To be frank, you cant un-make this development anymore. Its a one-way street. Or rather, it would take so much time, and a lot of failing MMOs, messy betas and remarkably wise and selfless business decisions for the good of the industry to undo the damage done already, before people change their now-confirmed views.

Which nobody will do.

The best way to fix it is to go ahead, take the current situation, and build on it.

As an example, screw the whole "alpha, beta, open beta, closed beta, internal beta, pre-alpha" terminology, at least for your marketing purposes. Have the current style of "beta" as a free demo, which it already is, and put a lengthy ALPHA before it, where people can join in small numbers to selectively test certain features..... you know, like a beta used to be.

By re-inventing the alpha as a process open to the playerbase, you can set the rules, and test your unfinished, buggy product, without losing the hype of the beta.

Also, about marketing and hype, the problem is that very likely the interest of those putting money on the table are not long-term. They MUCH MUCH MUCH prefer, as anyone with a bit of experience in finance can tell you and probably quickly explain, a big launch, fat payday, and then get the hell out before the ship starts sinking. The shorter the wait for the pay-off, the better. Those who profit from longevity are the company itself (which is just a vehicle to get more money for most investors) and the people working there.

However, reality today demands that its virtually unavoidable to lose a lot of control over your game if you want to make a big MMORPG, simply because you need so much external funding, which comes from people with different aims.

There have been people who got rich on Age of Conan, who got rich on WAR, and who got out in time. They would do the same thing again with the next game they can jump on, most likely. These games are not failures, financially speaking, for those who got out in time.

+1 to that.

A company that manages MMO's should have a clearly defined "hype" plan for it BEFORE it starts to attract investors. The investors do not care about the company as it is, and do not care if the MMO fails, as long as it sells more then X number of copies.

By redesigning the Alpha/Beta terminology one can actually manage the hype and only release small sneakpeaks in the Alpha rather then the whole game which would contribute to the hype but not overhype it. Then, shortly before release one could test the servers load by an en-masse open Beta demo on a nearly finished product. This way the final release wouldbe tested under maximum strain.

SF
 

 I definitely believe that marketing agency's are going to put people on the front lines for video games that have little to no experience with video games at all. This is because there are so few people with Internet based marketing skills so what inevitably happens is you get someone who has broadcast media experience just spilling out press release after press release via forums and website interviews.

 Internet fans are ravenous and your job as a marketing professional is to generate hype not define each class. The way I see it right now most games have a stream of information about them prior to release. This is very bad. What the Internet consumer needs to truly build HYPE is the ability to speculate and generate considerable conversations on the subject.

Information about a future product needs to be released not in a constant flow or even a trickle but a slow yet steady drip.

As much as I have a loathing for the corporate types over at Funcom you really have to admit their Secret World campaign is awesome.

Nicely written article. I think part of the problem is that too many PR/Marketing Departments (and frankly Company Execs) don't understand basic business rules, nor the basic realities of product design.

The reality of product design (and this goes for most products...not just MMO's) is that is IMPOSSIBLE to design a product that appeals to everyone. That is because people are different and have wildy different and often contradictory perspectives of what makes a product appealing. The broader the category of people you try to reach with your product, the more difficult said product is to design. Smart designers and smart companies recognize this reality and try to pick target audiences for thier products that are broad enough that the product will be profitable to sell but narrow enough that the product can actualy be designed well given the available resources. That is a very difficult tight-rope to walk...and many companies fail right there. Either picking a market that is too small to be profitable given the resources put into the project....or more often trying to design to an audiance that is so broad and widely divergent that the design cannot possibly be made to work well.

However, even when designers/companies pick the scope right for the product...things can still go awry when Marketing/PR departments get involved. Many marketers see it as thier mission to try to sell the product to "as many customers as possible". This is what they see as thier goal....and their metric for success is the simple number of bodies they have managed to cram through the door. Many executives also fall for this lure as well. Unfortunately this actualy can be counter-productive to the LONG TERM health and financial success of the company/product.  It's a pretty standard axiom in business that repeat business is FAR CHEAPER to acquire the new business. Companies obviously need a certain amount of new business to be successfull.... but many companies can go bankrupt by having TOO MUCH new business. That is because new business can be so expensive to acquire that the profit margin on it does not cover the overhead to serve it.

Too many marketers and frankly executive fail to realize this basic reality. They don't see the forest for the trees. The most effecient use of marketing is to gain as much of the TARGET AUDIENCE (i.e. the people who's needs the product is designed to meet well)  as possible....and NO ONE ELSE. Unfortunately too many marketers (and executives) don't understand that important distinction and try to present the product AS IF IT WOULD APPEAL TO EVERYONE (including people who's tastes are contradictory to it's design). This results in wasted resources (too many one time sales), damage to the product/companies brand (in disatisified customers/bad reviews) and the companies future ability to do business (since a company can always release different products designed to meet different target audiences in future....but if that target audience was ALREADY jilted by the purchase of a previous product....they aren't likely to try a new one).

This is the real danger of the hype machine....not talking up the things the product is designed to meet well....but talking up the things it ISN'T.

Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

Nicely written article. I think part of the problem is that too many PR/Marketing Departments (and frankly Company Execs) don't understand basic business rules, nor the basic realities of product design.

The reality of product design (and this goes for most products...not just MMO's) is that is IMPOSSIBLE to design a product that appeals to everyone. That is because people are different and have wildy different and often contradictory perspectives of what makes a product appealing. The broader the category of people you try to reach with your product, the more difficult said product is to design. Smart designers and smart companies recognize this reality and try to pick target audiences for thier products that are broad enough that the product will be profitable to sell but narrow enough that the product can actualy be designed well given the available resources. That is a very difficult tight-rope to walk...and many companies fail right there. Either picking a market that is too small to be profitable given the resources put into the project....or more often trying to design to an audiance that is so broad and widely divergent that the design cannot possibly be made to work well.

However, even when designers/companies pick the scope right for the product...things can still go awry when Marketing/PR departments get involved. Many marketers see it as thier mission to try to sell the product to "as many customers as possible". This is what they see as thier goal....and their metric for success is the simple number of bodies they have managed to cram through the door. Many executives also fall for this lure as well. Unfortunately this actualy can be counter-productive to the LONG TERM health and financial success of the company/product.  It's a pretty standard axiom in business that repeat business is FAR CHEAPER to acquire the new business. Companies obviously need a certain amount of new business to be successfull.... but many companies can go bankrupt by having TOO MUCH new business. That is because new business can be so expensive to acquire that the profit margin on it does not cover the overhead to serve it.

Too many marketers and frankly executive fail to realize this basic reality. They don't see the forest for the trees. The most effecient use of marketing is to gain as much of the TARGET AUDIENCE (i.e. the people who's needs the product is designed to meet well)  as possible....and NO ONE ELSE. Unfortunately too many marketers (and executives) don't understand that important distinction and try to present the product AS IF IT WOULD APPEAL TO EVERYONE (including people who's tastes are contradictory to it's design). This results in wasted resources (too many one time sales), damage to the product/companies brand (in disatisified customers/bad reviews) and the companies future ability to do business (since a company can always release different products designed to meet different target audiences in future....but if that target audience was ALREADY jilted by the purchase of a previous product....they aren't likely to try a new one).

This is the real danger of the hype machine....not talking up the things the product is designed to meet well....but talking up the things it ISN'T.

 

 

 

VERY VERY TRUE!  

Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

Nicely written article. I think part of the problem is that too many PR/Marketing Departments (and frankly Company Execs) don't understand basic business rules, nor the basic realities of product design.

The reality of product design (and this goes for most products...not just MMO's) is that is IMPOSSIBLE to design a product that appeals to everyone. That is because people are different and have wildy different and often contradictory perspectives of what makes a product appealing. The broader the category of people you try to reach with your product, the more difficult said product is to design. Smart designers and smart companies recognize this reality and try to pick target audiences for thier products that are broad enough that the product will be profitable to sell but narrow enough that the product can actualy be designed well given the available resources. That is a very difficult tight-rope to walk...and many companies fail right there. Either picking a market that is too small to be profitable given the resources put into the project....or more often trying to design to an audiance that is so broad and widely divergent that the design cannot possibly be made to work well.

However, even when designers/companies pick the scope right for the product...things can still go awry when Marketing/PR departments get involved. Many marketers see it as thier mission to try to sell the product to "as many customers as possible". This is what they see as thier goal....and their metric for success is the simple number of bodies they have managed to cram through the door. Many executives also fall for this lure as well. Unfortunately this actualy can be counter-productive to the LONG TERM health and financial success of the company/product.  It's a pretty standard axiom in business that repeat business is FAR CHEAPER to acquire the new business. Companies obviously need a certain amount of new business to be successfull.... but many companies can go bankrupt by having TOO MUCH new business. That is because new business can be so expensive to acquire that the profit margin on it does not cover the overhead to serve it.

Too many marketers and frankly executive fail to realize this basic reality. They don't see the forest for the trees. The most effecient use of marketing is to gain as much of the TARGET AUDIENCE (i.e. the people who's needs the product is designed to meet well)  as possible....and NO ONE ELSE. Unfortunately too many marketers (and executives) don't understand that important distinction and try to present the product AS IF IT WOULD APPEAL TO EVERYONE (including people who's tastes are contradictory to it's design). This results in wasted resources (too many one time sales), damage to the product/companies brand (in disatisified customers/bad reviews) and the companies future ability to do business (since a company can always release different products designed to meet different target audiences in future....but if that target audience was ALREADY jilted by the purchase of a previous product....they aren't likely to try a new one).

This is the real danger of the hype machine....not talking up the things the product is designed to meet well....but talking up the things it ISN'T.

 

 

 

I happen to be in marketing, and am an account executive and would have to agree with you.

Our company unlike many, focuses on what a customer needs vs. what we think we can get away with pushing out the door.

If more companies listened to their customers and filled the needs of majority groups rather than creating "the everything for everyone product" they would find themselves with very sustainable growth, happy customers and long time repeat business.

Couple this idea with good customer service and you have a successful business.

Originally posted by Babylon9000

Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

Nicely written article. I think part of the problem is that too many PR/Marketing Departments (and frankly Company Execs) don't understand basic business rules, nor the basic realities of product design.

The reality of product design (and this goes for most products...not just MMO's) is that is IMPOSSIBLE to design a product that appeals to everyone. That is because people are different and have wildy different and often contradictory perspectives of what makes a product appealing. The broader the category of people you try to reach with your product, the more difficult said product is to design. Smart designers and smart companies recognize this reality and try to pick target audiences for thier products that are broad enough that the product will be profitable to sell but narrow enough that the product can actualy be designed well given the available resources. That is a very difficult tight-rope to walk...and many companies fail right there. Either picking a market that is too small to be profitable given the resources put into the project....or more often trying to design to an audiance that is so broad and widely divergent that the design cannot possibly be made to work well.

However, even when designers/companies pick the scope right for the product...things can still go awry when Marketing/PR departments get involved. Many marketers see it as thier mission to try to sell the product to "as many customers as possible". This is what they see as thier goal....and their metric for success is the simple number of bodies they have managed to cram through the door. Many executives also fall for this lure as well. Unfortunately this actualy can be counter-productive to the LONG TERM health and financial success of the company/product.  It's a pretty standard axiom in business that repeat business is FAR CHEAPER to acquire the new business. Companies obviously need a certain amount of new business to be successfull.... but many companies can go bankrupt by having TOO MUCH new business. That is because new business can be so expensive to acquire that the profit margin on it does not cover the overhead to serve it.

Too many marketers and frankly executive fail to realize this basic reality. They don't see the forest for the trees. The most effecient use of marketing is to gain as much of the TARGET AUDIENCE (i.e. the people who's needs the product is designed to meet well)  as possible....and NO ONE ELSE. Unfortunately too many marketers (and executives) don't understand that important distinction and try to present the product AS IF IT WOULD APPEAL TO EVERYONE (including people who's tastes are contradictory to it's design). This results in wasted resources (too many one time sales), damage to the product/companies brand (in disatisified customers/bad reviews) and the companies future ability to do business (since a company can always release different products designed to meet different target audiences in future....but if that target audience was ALREADY jilted by the purchase of a previous product....they aren't likely to try a new one).

This is the real danger of the hype machine....not talking up the things the product is designed to meet well....but talking up the things it ISN'T.

 

 

 

 

I happen to be in marketing, and am an account executive and would have to agree with you.

Our company unlike many, focuses on what a customer needs vs. what we think we can get away with pushing out the door.

If more companies listened to their customers and filled the needs of majority groups rather than creating "the everything for everyone product" they would find themselves with very sustainable growth, happy customers and long time repeat business.

Couple this idea with good customer service and you have a successful business.

Well put on both accounts. This applies to gaming as well as other areas. It is a basic that all companies should follow and it would improve their sales and repeats.

Customer Service is another touchy area as well. The customer is not always right, however, it is important to find a happy medium that soothes it over as much as possible without costing the company too much or loosing too many customers. Again You Can Not Please Everyone No Matter What You Do! This is a fact and even giving a customer everything they think they should have is no guarantee they will return or they will leave happy.

Solution for the 'useless beta' problem: call it an alpha test.

Solution for overhyped marketing: corporate attitude that focuses on long term (>2 months) revenue, actually has people in it who read game forums and realises that sometimes it takes investing €1 to get back €2. So many games were released with critical bugs that killed revenue, when all it would have taken was 2 months to fix everything.

Solution for developers having to explain every € they spend and facing budget cuts on pesky stuff like bugtesting that can't be advertised: your fault for burning so much money. Games can be made for cheaper than you've been doing. You only need 500,000 square km of landmass because you failed to make the gameplay interesting enough to attract people without the biggest ingame universe in history.

What about the video game media? They are innocent in this?

Originally posted by MindTrigger

I think the inevitable cleanup of the hype and industry is already happening naturally.  There are only going to be so many multimillion dollar MMO's that tank before moronic investors start being more careful with their money in this industry.  Today, they see the kind of money WoW pulls down, and they think anyone can do it. It seriously freaks me out how ignorant some investors and corporations are about the people they are selling these games to and what we expect from a modern MMO. In the case of MMOs, more competition has not caused better value or quality to emerge. All we are seeing here is garbage game after garbage game.

MMOs are evolving at a snail's pace both visually and in game play. When was the last time we saw a significant jump in the complexity of AI or any other game feature?  It's no wonder so many of us are bored.  These lame companies continue to just play it safe and crank out clones using the same old ideas and 'standards'.

 

 

I don't think the investors are as moronic as many would think. They invest short-term, that's why companies like Funcom already had MMOs in development while another one was being released. The market has become "Quantity > Quality". Why should I, as an investor, wait (say) 5yrs to see profit when I can see it in 3months (or when ever the company starts pre-orders). I can, with 80% certainty, say the major investors in any MMO  have their money AND profit within the first month of the game going live.

Unfortunantly, the investors are constantly looking for a new source since due to the rushed nature of the game the Primary Company (i.e Funcom, Blizzard, & NCsoft) ends up with a bad rap. Raise your hands if you will buy Secret World (Funcom's next MMO); very few will raise their hands because of how AoC was handled.  This is probably the reason mega-MMO Companies like Blizzard and NCsoft still release high(er) quality MMOs; Aion was a hit in the Asian market, NCsoft just wanted to see how much more they could get in the Western Market. They generally don't bother/want out-side investment that will be demanding on release dates.

On a side note, the reason so many MMOs are tanking is the fact that so many are being made. Car accidents have gone up since the 'Car' was created...does that mean drivers have gotten clumsy? or is it just that now there's more cars in existence and so statistically there are more accidents. We didn't see many MMOs in the early 20xx because there wasn't that many out: EQ/EQ2, WoW, Lineage/Lineage2 (maybe 4 more that i can't think of)

-The MMO Industry has become a game of Russian Roulette; feeling lucky?

I completely agree with most of the points stated in this article. Very dissapointing how MMORPG's are overhyped now-a-days. I recently CBTed for warhammer BEFORE they let the zerg of people in and generally the community was very active, healthy, and helpful to the developing team. I believe they had every intention of making the game into this awesome huge battle game, like something you would see in the movies, but i think they weren't able to deliver the end-game content  in-time with the demands of the publisher(EA).

Now that being said i believe that the MMO's need to get back into the process of player created end-game content. Most every single MMO game i have played in a while has consisted of good leveling content, good story line, and good class makeup. The only thing they are lacking really is end-game content that they do not have time to squeeze in before release. Remember back in the good 'ol days when pvp was just bragging rights? I am mainly talking about ultima online and other general early FPS games (quake, ut2004, etc..)

I am very excited though because global agenda is basing their end-game system off of this "player created end-game content" idea and looks very promising. I won't over shoot my expectations like i did for warhammer because as this article has preached, stop the hype!

The question we should be asking ourselves is, "What needs to change so our hopes aren't dashed with every single release?"

What titles slated for release in the next year are already over hyped?

Originally posted by Books

The question we should be asking ourselves is, "What needs to change so our hopes aren't dashed with every single release?"

What titles slated for release in the next year are already over hyped?

I think the new start wars/star trek mmos are going to be waaaaaaaay over hyped. One reason why i didnt touch aion was because of the huge expectations everyone had for it to be the "next WoW"

I agree with the OP. Furthermore, what I think the mmo genre needs is a small but solid base with not too many features and build up from there.

Still we will always have WoW, as a blessing and as a curse. Blessing, because it expanded the genre in numbers. Curse, because of the large influx of players into every new mmo, expecting alot of content and good polish.

Then again, games like Fallen Earth and Lord of the Rings Online seem to have managed to keep expectations in check and improve their game from a solid base.