Gaming Signal: MMO, Solo Content, and longevity...

MMO, Solo Content, and longevity...

Massively is a relatively new blog in the Weblogs Inc network, and focuses on MMOs. At this point (since it is very new), it is an excellent resource for all things MMO. It covers older and newer games which is something I am interested in since I am still intrigued by these games.

Alas, I digress from my main point here which is sparked by a post titled "Is single player content hurting MMORPGs?" by Kevin Stallard. In this post, Kevin indicates that perhaps the changes in the market to add things like instances and solo content maybe causing more harm than good. Now we should clarify that the harm that he is referring to is in the "community" or social elements that games like Everquest produced. He claims that the whole spawn camping, forced grouping, and non-instanced content helped to create a community since they really had to interact much more due to negotiating camps and finding groups. I don't agree with him, but I will get to that later. He points to the forums for a server where there is still activity after seven years, and claims that maybe that mentality has increased the staying power for these older games. And this is where I wonder what he was trying to say, is the point that some of these crappy design elements and un-fun gaming elements were what make these games continue to exist while newer titles have fallen by the wayside?

Now I won't deny that there were some great communities that sprung up during my time in Everquest, but the whole forced grouping and lack of solo content did not create those. These communities exist in other games such as the community over at Texas Teamplayers. See my feeling is that much of this community that Mr. Stallard talks about is a byproduct of the market situation at the time where EQ, UO and DAOC were first released. For many folks, these were the first games of this type they ever saw, and when you add the fact that this was also a time of huge growth in the web - then you have a formula for community building.

Another factor is that drove this community building at that time was the fact that the game required effort to level. Having a level 50 character in EQ for a long time was something to be awed by. This avatar was an extension of that person, and for me my avatar was that. Furthermore, voice chat was not all that available unless you dialed up your guildmates on a conference call. To help facilitate communication and to allow guilds to communicate, folks started building communities. As EQ started to fade (not disappear and I doubt it will every truly go away), the communities continued to exist. These folks still maintain contact on forums no matter what game they play.

I do not agree with Mr. Stallard on the topic that the strength of the community that forms around a given title will give it staying power alone. I would also disagree with the statement that UO and EQ are "going strong", but they do have pretty stable populations. The reason some of the newer MMOs failed have more to do with the "me too" mentality and the fact that the property was not all that impressive. Take one look at Vanguard and it's early claims to bring back the hard core MMO game. The game pretty much has fizzled and while has expanded Sony's library of games - it has not been elevated to the levels that Everquest and World of Warcraft have.