| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (25)

Posted: Dec 26th 2009 12:08AM Scuffles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Eh seems like a successful MMO usually only survives about five expansions before something sufficiently new and shiny on the horizon consumes most of its playerbase. While some MMO go well beyond that even if their developers have sorta pushed them to the back burner without killing them outright because they have a zealot like fanbase.

For example I feel that WoW will be one of those games that lingers on forever like everquest getting an expansion every now and then even if the company has moved on to greener pastures, because it will probably still make enough money to justify its existence, Most decent MMO tend to linger...
Reply

Posted: Dec 26th 2009 4:12AM J Brad Hicks said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I feel about rumored developer layoffs the way most people feel about server merges. I can imagine good reasons to merge servers (if, for example, server architecture has improved to where servers can support more concurrent users). I can't imagine a good reason to layoff developers on a subscription game. If I'm paying every month, I want new game for my money, every so often.

Posted: Dec 26th 2009 8:17AM Scuffles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can understand planed server mergers especially with new games, the first few weeks are murder with a massive influx of people glomming on to the new and shiny. Then when the first month that comes with the game is up ..... boom... your left with a bunch of underpopulated servers.

Which seems largely due to the WOW tourist phenomenon in which WoW players bored to tears with WoW disend on any new MMO like locusts berating it at every turn causing massive server lag.... then complaining about that same server lag... and at the end of the "free month" they generally go back to WoW because they have much more invested in that game.

Nothing is as un fun as an MMO in which your practically the only person, even if your not talking to people or really interacting its nice to see them at least running around since it is Massive Multiplayer Online (insert game type). Frankly a lack of players to interact with can be just as harmful to an MMO. I also suspect thats why some of the P2P are breaking ranks going to F2P because it bolsters their online base and by proxy their paying users.

Personally I'm more of a fan of the channel server setup in which you can scale servers up and down with ease with mirrors of the world which players can move through as it eases congestion in popular areas and allows them to avoid the "merger" word which instantly sends up red flags these days. Tossing up a few extra channels at the start then being able to simply shave off one or two worlds. Along with being able to have PVE and PVP worlds withing a channel seems to me the best way to go to please as many of your players as possible with a single setup.
Reply

Posted: Dec 26th 2009 8:11AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I am curious. What is the minimum number of employees needed to keep a game running, if you don't do any new development? What will these people be doing? Is this a problem of staying consistent with new hardware? How many players would a game like warcraft need to survive if they switched to in game advertisements rather than subscription fees? I would love to read an article about the numbers involved in this.

BTW: Massively should start making graphs similar to mmorpgcharts. They would be a great asset for the site.

Posted: Dec 27th 2009 11:11AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I disagree. If anything, check out sinking games if you've not given them the chance already. I've had lots of fun with games that have eventually ended up shutting down. Hellgate London, and Tabula Rasa among them.

Featured Stories

Coming soon
Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW