If you aren't blizzard, the subscription, big budget, PC MMO is a very difficult business to succeed in. It's basically impossible - there's such a huge time investment that most players are unlikely to play more than one game at a time. Plus, to compete with WoW head on you have to spend their kind of budgets, which is an arms race you would be very likely to lose. Like competing with google, it's best to take an indirect approach.
I don't get it. The conclusion doesn't follow from the arguments.<p>He writes: <i>"Jennings points to the ballooning costs of MMORPGs-- World of Warcraft is estimated to have cost $40 million to $50 million to develop, and while Age of Conan cost just $25 million, the game is having retention issues, largely because the budget wasn’t big enough, he says. By contrast, he notes, small companies produce low-budget web-based MMOs like Club Penguin and RuneScape that post far higher profits."</i><p>How does the fact that low-budget MMO's are more profitable than high-budget MMO's mean that the subscription model is broken?
“Embracing open source development, crowd-sourcing content, targeting different platforms such as the Web or mobile phones, all of these are valid,”<p>Danger, buzzword level approaching critical. Core meltdown imminent.
yeah articles like this that hit front page annoy me (although i know this comment is helping it stay) .... still it says basically cause x (a person) is leaving the business model is broke
I don't know if the business model is broken NOW, but perhaps the guy he was interviewing (or quoting) was saying in the future it will break from these cracks. He's saying that the huge budget is causing the subscriptions, but there is no true innovation in the actual product. Therefore, the fact that businesses have to charge monthly to post a decent profit margin will be their downfall. Interesting theory :).
Club Penguin and RuneScape post far higher profits than World of Warcraft? Does somebody have a source for that? Based on a quick Google search it's estimated Blizzard makes about $100m a year off WoW after costs. I can't imagine free MMOs matching that unless they have paid memberships that offer all the stuff people actually want, which doesn't really count as a "free MMO" anymore
Mmm, linkbaity title. Tasty.<p>From the outside, the subscription-based business model seems anything but broken. You get your players to pay $15 every month, for many of them over a period of one or two or three years, you get a much longer shelf life than regular games which likely make most of their sales in the few months after release, and in some cases you can have your cake and eat it too - if you manage to get away with the $60 upfront purchase AND the $15 monthly fee.<p>Sure, it's competitive. Sure, some studios end up spending millions on crappy games that no one wants to play. How is any of that different from regular, non-subscription based games?
It's more like the MMORPG game model itself is broken. It's based on imagery and art direction, social dynamics, and variable schedule of reward. The most similar thing in the real world are casino resorts. Second Life is showing us the way, as is Spore. There is a whole lot more scope for emergent, user generated content.
John Galt games? Still, the idea of a MMORPG taking place on (and for) well-known webpages is intriguing.<p>Though it doesn't actually say what his alternative business model is (apart from reducing costs). I'd <i>guess</i> advertising.
Having been an avid gamer ever since the first time I got my hands on a Commodore 64, let me weigh in.<p>The subscription model does have its flaws, yes, but it is far from broken. One reason that gives rise to it is the sheer quality of 'free' MMOs. The games themselves always end up with very little depth, very poor art and style and come across as a game you once played. Five years ago.<p>Now I am not saying that high-budget MMOs (World of Warcraft, Age of Conan, City of Heroes/Villains, etcetera) are the best. But they can and DO use this money to build incredible depth into things.<p>Another thing that always causes strife in free MMOs, is the payoff. Advertising always tends to cause your players to run off, as seeing an ad for "Degree Men! The latest in protection!" or whatever in your medieval hack'n'slash really ruins the atmosphere. So you end up with 'Freemium', in which you give players bonuses for having paid. Which means that you end up having a small group of paying customers, a large group of free ones and a game that is barely worth playing.<p>Now, I'm not saying this model does't work. Far from it. But until the quality of these games gets to where people can't pick huge holes in the weft of their fabric, the traditional models will still win.