Why are MMORPG's so awful (yet I love them so much?)

[Ryan A]

I am officially addicted to MMORPGs. After a several-month-long fling with City of Heroes, I dumped that pretty-but-ultimately-empty-headed diversion for my current game of choice: World of Warcraft (I know, I know - it's not exactly War and Peace either). Like others have mentioned in other threads, I have saved literally hundreds of gaming dollars the past 7 months since I have not purchased any other games since all my gaming time is spent with the mmo.

I really enjoy the way mmo's are set up. I can quest and strive to improve my character if I want (I've always been a character building junkie) and if I'm lucky, I can team up with cool people and have a rip-roaring good time.

My complaint is that I can't think of any other form of entertainment that so frequently DOES NOT WORK.

Take WoW, for example. It's currently just past 8:00 in the evening - prime gaming time, especially since there's nothing on TV during the summer. Yet I and thousands others are unable to login to our servers of choice. Ever since patch 1.6 went live, many servers have been lagpits of hell and several even endured 24+ hours of downtime last week. I pay a monthly cable bill and would cancel immediately if my ability to watch t.v. was as unpredictible as my ability to play my favorite game is.

Yet I keep paying my $15 a month like some kind of crack-addict gerbil. SO maybe I've just answered my own question: mmorpgs suck because we consumers let them.

Then again, maybe it's not just mmorpgs. I've kept buying tickets to watch the Seattle Seahawks play for the past 20 years despite the fact that they continually disapoint... this will be the year they go all the way though! (just like maybe next week will be the week half of WoW's servers don't crap out over and over again).

[dannimal]

Well, in a crummy defense of MMORPGs, they often give "refunds" for long downtimes (WoW gave a 1-day extenstion to accounts affected by the 24 hr downtime).

[Lum]

In a crummier defense, the technical challenges involved dwarf other online games. You're talking about servers that have to routinely handle 3000-4000 people at once, continually (most other online games have the client handle far more logic than it's safe for MMOs to).

As for why we put up with it, well, the short and prosaic version is that you get unique gameplay when you throw that many people together.

[dannimal]

I think the arguement about the technical challenges is crummy (like you said) simply because the ability to do much better is there, it would just eat into the bottom line so companies don't do it. You'd think that something as huge as WoW would be willing to eat some profits in the name of better stability. Though I suppose it may have gotten too big to easily ramp up support (in all phases) at a meaningful rate.

We put up with it because when it works, it's great. When it doesn't, we wish it did.

[Robert Sharp]

We put up with it because when it works, it's great. When it doesn't, we wish it did.

Well put. It's kind of like drugs in that way. We get a big rush out of these games, and then when they aren't pleasing us, we kind of feel like the problem must be in us, not the drug. Next time, it will work again, like it did before. Often we are right, often we are wrong. But that memory of the good times keeps us coming back.

[drdoalots]

I think another part of it would be the reward system in the games. Everything that seems so great is always just out of reach.

"Finally! I got to level 20 and I get great new spell x, but wait, once I get to 22 I get the great new spell y!"

It's like that in most all "RPG's" really, it doesn't HAVE to be an MMO to suck you in like that, even Diablo II does that a lot of people. It's just that MMO's are developed to keep people playing for as many months at a time as possible, so they just make it with some more content, and make it a LOT slower.

I mean, seriously, it's not like making everything give you twice the experiance points would ruin the game balance, it would just mean that you wouldn't play it for as many months, which would mean less money.

[That Strange Girl]

Is it really the game that's like a drug? Notice that even in the original complaint, he mentioned one of the draws was "I can team up with really cool people". I think the draw, the drug factor, of MMO's is definitely the people, rather than the game. The game can add to the experience (or detract from it) but the reason people keep coming back is the other people. There's nothing that draws people like other people. MMO's provide a virtual world and some things to do when there's nobody else around, some vague goals, and some ways in which to interact with other people. But basically, the draw is the community. If WoW were a single-player game, you know it'd go back on the shelf within months, if that long.

[Jasper]

No doubt, but you can't deny the pull of variable reward addiction. How many players do you think would stick around if you took away the loot and the leveling?

[Gourmand]

Is it really the game that's like a drug? Notice that even in the original complaint, he mentioned one of the draws was "I can team up with really cool people". I think the draw, the drug factor, of MMO's is definitely the people, rather than the game. The game can add to the experience (or detract from it) but the reason people keep coming back is the other people. There's nothing that draws people like other people. MMO's provide a virtual world and some things to do when there's nobody else around, some vague goals, and some ways in which to interact with other people. But basically, the draw is the community. If WoW were a single-player game, you know it'd go back on the shelf within months, if that long.

The social aspect might be your draw to the game, but I think it's just a facet, not the entire package.

I like what this guy (http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/gateway_motivations.html) says about it.

[LarryLard]

My complaint is that I can't think of any other form of entertainment that so frequently DOES NOT WORK.

Take WoW, for example. It's currently just past 8:00 in the evening - prime gaming time, especially since there's nothing on TV during the summer. Yet I and thousands others are unable to login to our servers of choice. Ever since patch 1.6 went live, many servers have been lagpits of hell and several even endured 24+ hours of downtime last week. I pay a monthly cable bill and would cancel immediately if my ability to watch t.v. was as unpredictible as my ability to play my favorite game is.


When you say 'for example'... I'm not sure there's any other current MMOG that you could refer to instead. Do you remember problems of a similar scale with CoH, which you also played? I don't. Similarly, EQ and EQ2 don't have this problem. Even when EQ did have 3-4 thousand people on a server, the problem would be lag in crowded areas, rather than people just not being able to log in.

[Mark Asher]

I think the arguement about the technical challenges is crummy (like you said) simply because the ability to do much better is there, it would just eat into the bottom line so companies don't do it. You'd think that something as huge as WoW would be willing to eat some profits in the name of better stability. Though I suppose it may have gotten too big to easily ramp up support (in all phases) at a meaningful rate.

We put up with it because when it works, it's great. When it doesn't, we wish it did.

I don't think the problem is an unwillingness to spend money. I'd bet Blizzard has state-of-the-art servers from a hardware perspective. I think it's just like Lum said, difficult, and it's also something that is difficult to design just right. And if there are design flaws you may not be able to readily fix them with patching.

Server problems cost Blizzard an enormous amount of money in lost revenue from cancelled accounts and in increased customer service costs. They know this. If it was just a matter of flinging money at the problem I don't think they'd hesitate. Blizzard's track record has never been that they skimped on quality.

[Alan Dunkin]

Chances are at this point it's not a hardware issue; throwing money at it won't help at all.

--- Alan

[Robert Sharp]

If WoW were a single-player game, you know it'd go back on the shelf within months, if that long.

Maybe. But a lot of people solo in these games, or just play with one or two other people (which they could do on network with games like Diablo). The social thing is the draw for many people, but hardly all. In fact, I bet over half the people playing WoW would still play it if there were only NPCs instead of actual players in the world with them. As for how long they would do so, I can't say. I don't play most MMORPGs more than a few months anyway, and I have never kept with one for a year.

[Flowers]

You'll like them when they adequately integrate twitch gameplay and strategy elements. (More so than walking up to a creature whilst invisible and the paper-rock-scissors pvp.)

[Gordon Cameron]

If WoW were a single-player game, you know it'd go back on the shelf within months, if that long.

Maybe. But a lot of people solo in these games, or just play with one or two other people (which they could do on network with games like Diablo). The social thing is the draw for many people, but hardly all. In fact, I bet over half the people playing WoW would still play it if there were only NPCs instead of actual players in the world with them. As for how long they would do so, I can't say. I don't play most MMORPGs more than a few months anyway, and I have never kept with one for a year.

Even soloing I'd probably have dumped 200 hours into WoW at least, but not 600 as I have done. The social aspect extends longevity in a couple of ways. I might roll a toon on a new server to duo up with a buddy, or in other cases I will feel a sense of obligation to my guild or to other people online ("hey we should try to do an LBRS run next week!" "When I send you 20 mithril can you make me such-and-such armor?"). You also feel the need to keep "checking in" with your character because, unlike single player RPGs, the gameworld doesn't freeze when you log out (or at least its other denizens don't).

But if the core gameplay weren't there, forget it.

[That Strange Girl]

But if the core gameplay weren't there, forget it.
Agreed, I didn't mean to suggest that the social aspect was the ONLY draw, if the game itself is crappy then forget it. And if there were no other players, people would still enjoy it for a while. I just think that the social aspect is what makes MMO's much more long-lived than a single player game, and keeps people coming back that much longer. Even if you're soloing (which I usually do), there's still the ability to compare yourself against others, to profit from others, to compete with others.

[Gordon Cameron]

Yes, it's certainly a factor in added longevity.