Mhantra
- "Bought me a house!"
- Male
- 38 Years Old
- St. Louis, MO
- US
- Quote "Without first looking inward, looking outward..."
- Plays: DA:O, Alganon; "House"
- Interests: Video games, psychology
- Offline
Hello!
I was playing in my Vanguard trio Sunday and we got to talking about this game. They liked a lot of what I talked about, but one thing really turned them off: the limited keys at release. What I am curious about is other people's thoughts on this.
While discussing this, we all agree that it is a fantastic concept in principle; it is similar to the business principle called "Disciplined Growth." Basically, if you grow too fast without a steady foundation, you are quite apt to crash late. We've seen this countless times in other MMOs, Conan especially seems to fit this bill.
I guess what bothered us is this: for a game that is incredibly under the radar and isn't talked about much, reported much, or given much hype, it seems that the potential client base is quite small. A restaurant might try to establish itself in one city, then take the profits from that city to build the next one in another city.
So we are curious. Does this game have enough of a potential client base to turn around and limit it? If a restaurant opened up in one city, but then only allowed 50 people in per night, could it survive?
There is actually successful cases of this in the restaurant business. If the food is great, and the service great (because of lack of crowding and over-selling "table space"), the people will wait. They will call for reservations. They will plan their lives around the restaurant's schedule because it is worth it to them.
But wait...is the gaming population the same as the fine dining population? I, for one, hardly think so. I think the competition is fierce, and the populace so fickle, that if someone buys the game, tries to get on and is told that they have to wait 30-90 days, most will be gone and not return.
They may have loved this game, and they may have been loyal, but once they couldn't get in to try it right away, they may just go put their attention elsewhere, and find a new game to be loyal to.
I love this idea for the long run of this MMO, but a lot of me is skeptical because of the nature of people. They can take it as being sleighted, they can take it as a closed door. They can take it as a sign that this isn't the game for them. They can take it to the media and slam it, and people will believe them without even trying the game! (aka see Conan/Vanguard)
So, is this game designed to have a limited growth potential? Is it a BETTER game with fewer people? Was it created to cater to a small number of people, but give a more quality service?
I think these are questions that are imperative to examined.
Thanks for your comments, Jergis.
Some of me wants to believe that a quality gamer population exists that is large enough to support this game in its original incarnation (quality over quantity). I am having trouble with that though, given my last 10 years of gaming (and watching the trends of the online population over that time period).
Perhaps, though, even if the percentage of gamers who are quality appreciating (and delayed-gratification oriented) is low, maybe, if they could all gather in one place, then this can work out in that small percentage's benefit.
Perhaps I am looking at this wrong, maybe this business model is about attracting the "right" clients, rather than the "lot of" clients. I know in a restaurant, you need your stable, every day clientele to build a foundation, then you can try to expand. But without your appreciative and regular attending customers, it is tough to stay afloat.
I may be a pessimist, but I don't think that the 'quality over quantity' way of thinking will work in the mmorpg world today. I wish it would, though. :)
People quit games for the smallest reasons and they don't even bother waiting for the monthly bug fix etc. so having to wait to be able to play a game would only make people annoyed. Starting late in a mmorpg just isn't fun so I think it would lead to fewer people.. And that leads to less money from subscribtions. I just can't see it working for a mmorpg.
I took the limited release to be a way of finding a group of members that would be understanding of teething problems and would almost help quest iron out any last few glitches before pushing the game out to the mass market...
if they went for a major release and the game opened with glitches they would lose huge numbers that may never return a the average gamer would just go back to the previous mmo they were playing. I joined wow at launch and it had lots of teething problems but we put up with it as most people either knew no different or had no where else to go.
The market now has lots of alternatives so I assume quest want to ensure there product is high quality before promoting to the masses and yes I know Beta should be used for this kind of thing but I'm also pretty sure that they need to start bringing in a few pennies. Thus the release to the more dedicated to the idea and more likely to hang on in there if things don't run perfectly from day 1.
Just a thought, now just hope they see that I'm more than happy to be a guinee pig :)
Hmm, that's a fascinating hypothesis, Argento, and it really makes sense to me.
So, in essence, they may need to keep their marketing and "hype" down, too? Otherwise the demand will far, far outweight the demand, thus creating a bunch of angry "have-nots."
I think about Conan in that regard. To me, it was the hype that killed it. Too many people, too much expectation, too many glitches that, if people would have waited out, definitely would have been fixed, but they got angry and fled, leaving a wake of bad press in its path.
Well, I am certainly happy to be the guinea pig, too. I just hope my brother and brother-in-law can both get in also, otherwise, my expereince will be lacking my favorite part of MMOs...
That's what I mean it seems that many new gamers and to some extent press expect all new mmo's to be as polished as wow as soon as they go alpha which personally I find totally unfair, there is a big new world out there it will have glitches all I ask from any designer is that as long as they acknowledge any problems and keep the community aware of the fact they are trying to deal with them. This is where I have already found Alganon to be impressive, feedback has been good and more importantly honest :)
I guess this brings me to my pet peave, when people use the, "I pay my $15.00 a month" excuse to give themselves the authority to be unreasonable, demanding and downright ugly.
I understand we are paying customers, but expecting perfection just because you are a paying customer isn't realistic.
That being said, I definitely beleive in good communication from the company (honesty, even periodic "Free periods"), and also in the ultimate form of communication: quitting the game or continuing to play. I mean, when it comes down to it, that's the only real control that we have.
Will we continue to pay and play?
-Quite frankly, all groups of people are better in terms of consistency, manageability and resource output in smaller portions. For business, sure you want max subs, but people are by and large not bright, moreso in groups. Who knows, but i think to not recognize what the lack of a limited release does (darkfall, PotBS, Conan) is to not learn from the mistakes of others.
Good read, look forward to reading more from you.
Jergis