Category Archives: Marketing / PR

Star Wars Galaxies Community Unravelling

Wired looks into the apparent unravelling of Star Wars Galaxies (SWG) following the so-called New Game Enhancements (NGE) which fundamentally changed the game and offended many of the MMO’s remaining customers (estimated at about 200K, pre-update.)

LucasArts released the NGE with little notice and without soliciting much feedback from current customers on the full scope of the upgrade. SWG producer Julio Torres claimed that an earlier announcement might have gotten “lost” amongst others. (He seems really defensive, in general.)

Sony Online Entertainment President, John Smedley, posted an explanation/apology on the SWG message board. (It was conspicuously deleted — I’ve linked to a copy.)

Key quote: With the game the way it was we knew we would never be able to attract enough people to really keep SWG viable as a business… it wouldn’t have appealed to the really large Star Wars fanbase out there.. and frankly over time the existing userbase would have churned out as happens in any game like this… The real purpose of this post is to ask for your help. In this thread, could you please list the top issues you see needing to be addressed in the short term. — better late than never?

Smedley also gave a (more tame) interview to Gamespot.

Only time will tell if LucasArts/Sony made the right call here, but it seems unlikely. MMOGs, like all other social constructs (i.e. neighborhoods, companies, etc) develop a fixed culture. Changing that culture is very hard; changing it without a major, extended socialization effort is near impossible. People get married in SWG … think they might get a little attached to the existing system?

VUG Permits Unofficial King’s Quest Sequel

Recognizing the value of active fan participation in media, Vivendi Universal Games has granted a group of dedicated volunteers the right to complete and distribute a sequel to the much-beloved (but discontinued) King’s Quest game franchise, so long as they do not use the King’s Quest name.

The volunteer group, calling itself Phoenix Online Studios, was initially ordered by Vivendi to cease and desist all activity. A movement to save the sequel was started, and apparently VUG took notice.

First: many congratulations to VUG for making this rare move. The vast majority of entertainment companies would never have relented.

Question: was it necessary to prevent the group from using the “King’s Quest” name, as opposed to simply requiring them to put “Unofficial” in the title? Perhaps, in exchange for use of the name, the developers could have been asked to require players to purchase the “King’s Quest Compilation”, which VUG is releasing in early 2006. Counter-Strike drove sales of Half Life in large part because you needed to buy Half Life to play.

Bioware: Geniuses? Or Just Really Smart?

This fit of admiration was inspired by two articles I read yesterday. One announced a writing contest; entrants must create a Neverwinter Nights module via which to tell their story, and the winners get a job working for Bioware. Good (free) content and good employees in one fell swoop. Nice.

The second article summarized a recent lecture by Bioware’s web community manager. The whole thing is worth reading if you care about learning from your customers, fostering a fan base, creating “super-fans”, and/or grooming an audience for future sales.

Bioware really understands the value of social engagement and user-generated content, two of the differentiators that make games so much more interesting (and potentially lucrative) than other forms of media.

They’re also smart recruiters. It isn’t cost-effective to build a team entirely from “experienced” talent in a rapidly-growing industry that lacks supply of qualified personnel. Plus, new people bring new ideas and fresh perspectives! (Then again, that might take all the fun out of bemoaning the industry’s lack of innovation. I can’t imagine going one week without reading another five articles on the subject…) Anyway, no surprise that Bioware was one of the few game companies attending the MIT career fair this year.

Consumers Losing Interest in Game Sequels?

Wedbush Morgan Securities predicts a less-than-cheery Christmas for the game industry, blaming their forecast (in part) on consumer indifference to sequels. Analyst Michael Pachter was also quoted in Smartmoney as saying “When [retailers are] scared, they revert to what they know. And they know what sold last year, so they buy sequels.”

Hard to comment on the reliability of this “consumer indifference” estimate. (How’d they gauge sentiment? What was the sample size? How was potential bias accounted for?) It’s also notable that Pachter has been complaining about sequels for some time now. That said, I’m pretty sick of sequels myself, and my gut tells me that consumers will ultimately exhibit fatigue.

What’s interesting is that in the Smartmoney article, Pachter implies that EA’s sequels will do really well (and says “Harry Potter still kicks butt.”) So what’s a little contradiction between friends?

How to Indulge the “Low Playtime” MMO Gamer?

There’s an interesting discussion taking place on Slashdot… a user of A Tale in the Desert says he cancelled his account because he wasn’t playing enough to justify the monthly fee, and asks “where is the metered model for the casual gamer?” The lead designer of Tale responded that he might set up a server especially for casual gamers that limits playtime to a few hours a month, but costs the same amount. His rationale: most casual gamers complain that they can’t “compete” with hardcore players who give the game more time; they don’t complain (at least outwardly) about cost.

First, I think it’s really important not to lump “low playtime” users into the larger category of “casual gamers.” Someone who wants to play WoW for eight hours a week is not a casual gamer; a dedicated user of Pogo.com probably is. That said, I think a “casual” server is a compelling idea, but I doubt you can charge all players the same amount. People feel very strongly about fairness, and as a game developer, you violate those feelings at your own peril. If a casual server is identical to a “hardcore” server but has limits on playtime, gamers will probably expect a discount (and I see no reason why not to indulge them.)

Of course, there are other pricing models that remove emphasis from playtime altogether. Second Life’s “play for free, pay monthly fees for land ownership” model, for example. This could be extended to MMOs like World of Warcraft by, for example, charging a small monthly fee for ownership of a mount, a guild hall, etc. Ultimately, hardcore players would still end up paying a fair amount.

Pricing solutions aside, I’d love to see an MMO that makes both “low-playtime” and “high-playtime” gamers happy by truly addressing the problem of competitive disadvantage. WoW tried to do this via rest experience bonuses (the longer you’re offline, the easier it is to gain experience while online) — but it only helps so much. How about designing an MMO in which “important” functions only require a limited amount of time (say, one hour a day) but “less important” functions can be enjoyed endlessly? For example, a space trading game that limits crucial mercantile functions to a given number per day, but places no limits on exploration, combat, etc?

The game industry is currently underserving two markets: people who would love a casual MMO (like Yo Ho Ho Puzzle Pirates), and “low playtime” gamers who enjoy hardcore games but hate to be left behind by high playtime friends and/or enemies. Going after those markets would probably entail less risk than making the next traditional hardcore MMORPG, too.