The Real Cataclysm
Competitors hoping for WOW to decline should be careful what they wish for.
Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.
For a company to organise a huge gaming conference dedicated solely to its own products feels rather like hubris, but this is an indulgence which Blizzard has unquestionably earned. Few developers have had such a profound impact on the games market in recent years - it's with good reason that the eyes of the games industry around the world turned to southern California last week.
The big news, as you are all undoubtedly aware, was the unveiling of the third expansion for World of Warcraft, titled Cataclysm. The expansion has already won plaudits from critics for being both radical and daring, overhauling the now-familiar game in fundamental ways which should, in theory, make the experience fresh even for those who have been playing for five years.
Blizzard's goal, of course, is easy to divine - they want to hold on to their player base, preferably continuing growth (albeit slow compared to the dazzling ascent of the past few years) rather than overseeing a gradual decline in subscriber numbers.
How the rest of the industry feels about that is a little harder to gauge. Of course, the success of World of Warcraft has vastly elevated the whole MMO space, changing it from being a niche interest for a handful of bearded, sandalled types into being a key pillar not only of PC gaming but of videogames as a whole.
WOW has revealed MMOs as an unlikely bridge between casual and hardcore gaming, demonstrating that the right game mechanics and presentation can appeal across this perceived divide in the market. In the process, it has attracted tens of millions of dollars of investment to MMO development and spurred the creation of dozens of pretenders to its throne.
Yet in the view of many within the industry, WOW has also locked up a huge chunk of revenue. Generating over a billion dollars a year, its sheer inertia, some argue, makes the MMO space impossibly hostile for new contenders - while others grumble that WOW players don't invest in other games, meaning that Blizzard's £9 per month is, in theory, depriving other game publishers of a full boxed game sale.
In the eyes of WOW's detractors, a decline in the game's subscriber numbers would be healthy for the games business. It would unlock millions of consumers, expanding the potential audience pool for other MMOs - thus allowing more of them to thrive - and sending more revenue back to both traditional boxed games and new gaming business models. Eroding WOW's monolithic status would, they claim, spur variety, innovation and diversity.
The problem with that theory is that it ignores the underlying reasons for WOW's success. The games business has talked a lot in recent years about "disruptive" products, largely due to the success of the DS and the Wii - low-tech, financially accessible systems which marry a certain degree of innovation with extremely polished design and desirable content. My contention would be that while it isn't a hardware platform, World of Warcraft is every bit as much a disruptive product as anything that Nintendo has created.
It's not hard to see the parallels between WOW and products like the Wii or the iPod. It's certainly low-tech - which allows it to run happily on old hardware, lowering the bar to entry significantly - but it makes up for that with stunning polish and design. While not being amazingly innovative (its designers happily confess to the extent to which they were influenced by games such as Ultima Online, Everquest and Dark Age of Camelot), it took pre-existing ideas and polished, honed and (in some cases) simplified them into a much more marketable state. This is, in many ways, the essence of a disruptive product.
What does a disruptive product do to the market? Firstly, it's a major success within the existing market space. World of Warcraft quickly absorbed the lion's share of the existing MMORPG market, and then started gobbling up large parts of the rest of the PC games market. Next, it consolidates - building a brand identity which makes it extremely hard for competitors to entice consumers out of that ecosystem. Most importantly, though, the disruptive product grows the market. The strong brand and the same values - usability, polish, design - which made it successful within the existing market also reach out to new consumers and new demographics.
This part of the lifecycle of a disruptive product - where it conquers, consolidates and expands the market - is well understood and has been discussed at great length both in the videogames industry and across the media and technology industries. However, there's another side to the lifecycle, one which we've seen far less of - what happens when a disruptive product goes into decline?
The optimistic view of WOW's detractors is that subscribers leaving the game would be absorbed into new and existing products within the videogames space, building audiences for competing games and encouraging more market diversity. The reality, however, is that while the small band of consumers who came to WOW from other MMORPGs (or other relatively hardcore PC gaming backgrounds) would probably jump ship to another service, the majority of the game's players who come from casual or non-gaming backgrounds are extremely unlikely to follow this path.
In fact, the chances are that these consumers will either stick with WOW, or fade out of the high-value gaming market (represented by subscriptions and full-price purchases) entirely. The simple reason is that WOW, in their eyes, has no realistic competitors - there is no brand with similar or greater prestige, or with sufficient inertia and promise, to pull them away from WOW. WOW has lifted a giant audience from being light consumers of free to play web games and other casual gaming experiences, but it's foolish to assume that they'll necessarily remain as more "core" consumers if WOW no longer holds their interest.
Instead, these consumers need an upgrade path - another disruptive product which will do to WOW what WOW did to the games that came before it, and pull the game's once-casual consumers further upstream, rather than letting them slip back into their previous state as largely uninvested, light consumers of games.
Despite the best efforts of other MMORPG companies - and many other companies whose strategy focuses on bridging the casual and hardcore markets - that game (or games) doesn't exist yet. There's every chance that when it does exist, it'll be Blizzard's own next MMORPG - or even a radical change to WOW itself - but the opportunity certainly exists for other companies to disrupt the post-WOW MMO space. Disruptive products aren't like childhood diseases - just because a market has been disrupted by a product like the iPod, the Wii or WOW doesn't mean that another company down the line won't be able to do the same thing again to the new market order.
Until such time as that product exists, however, WOW's rivals should be careful what they wish for. A decline in the market leader won't necessarily release a torrent of new consumers to the game's competitors - instead, it could simply drop millions of consumers back out of the MMO, high-income games sector entirely. The same problem exists with the Wii - were Nintendo's business to decline heavily, the Wii's consumers would not suddenly start buying Xbox consoles. Rather than taking for granted that newly converted game consumers will remain game consumers forever and praying for their wildly successful competitors' businesses to decline, the industry needs to focus its efforts on building upgrade paths to encourage these new gamers to swim further upstream.
For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.
You may also like...
-
NCsoft confirms Guild Wars 2 on console
-
Why Can't Games Do Sex?
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
Retrospective: Star Wars Episode I Racer
-
Game of the Week: Catherine
-
Mobile Controller Group Test
-
The Story Behind XBLA's Biggest Game
-
Warp Review
-
Huge range of PlayStation 2 Classics storm European PlayStation store
-
The Kickstarter Conundrum
-
Bethesda on Skyrim's viewable Morrowind, Cyrodiil: "maybe we'll use it one day"
-
App of the Day: Tongue Tied!
-
Far Cry 3 release date revealed by leaked trailer
-
Dear Esther Review
-
Notch can match Schafer's $13m Psychonauts 2 budget valuation
-
Syndicate launch trailer blasts out the dubstep
-
Assassin's Creed Revelations getting Desmond single-player DLC
-
Indie game Dear Esther profitable in less than six hours
-
Valve selling a virtual Team Fortress 2 ring for $100
-
PS3 exclusive JRPG Ni No Kuni out in Europe Q1 2013
-
Solitaire Blitz Preview: Why PopCap's Approach to Facebook Gaming is Anything But Casual
-
PS2 Classics God Hand, Maximo on PlayStation Store today
-
Fresh Resident Evil 6 details bleed in
-
PC Mass Effect 3 does not support game pads









Comments (28) Latest comment 2 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
As a consumer I'm glad that the MMO market is seeing more competitors because I believe that it will push WoW to better itself. With Cataclysm, I can say they're on their way, but they still haven't achieved everything I've hoped for yet (real Rated BG's, not the abomination they're coming out with). More better MMO games means Blizzard gains access to more what works and what doesn't, and incorporates it into their game.
Many MMO developers who try to challenge Blizzard seem to look at what there is, what their little niche is going to be, what they're going to do perfect and then they spam the community with it as an awesome feature. They're treating their MMO as if it's a regular PC game. Like Blizzard constantly says, an MMO is an organic experience. You can't treat an MMO as a PC game, you have to treat it as its own entity, constantly absorbing the best features out there. That's what I've enjoyed so far about Aion. They are incorporating, they aren't excluding. Sure, Wings are a great market feature, but it's not like they stopped there and did nothing else, Flyff did that forever ago. An MMO shouldn't have a focus, it should have a vision.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
They really need to finish with the "click monster and wait it to die -> repeat". I understand that an actual action game is hard to do because the lag caused by several players in an area but I have the feel that I have been playing the same gameplay since Ultima Online (Ironically, MMOs seems a step back from the freedom that UO gave you such as being able to craft anything you see and build your house anywhere you (the GMs) want to).
If the cataclysm means the ruin of almost every MMO in existence and thousands of layoffs I'm fine with it.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I also agree with Averice's comment about playing two MMOs - there just seems like little point, especially when the rat race mentality is pushed so heavily. I've recently returned to WoW after another break and decided to play it like an RPG, doing every quest in Northrend and not worrying about being the best of the best of the best.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
My friends are of a similar opinion to me; we've been playing WoW since 2003 and are sick to death of it, but we are trapped in and around it, simply because everyone else is playing it and seems reluctant to leave. We've tried WAR, AoC, Vanguard; most MMOs around, but Heroes of Newerth is about the only thing we can all agree to play together at the moment. And that's a mod of a Blizzard product. Its only a matter of time before Blizzard have taken over the (videogaming) world.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
The problem other MMO developers miss is that WoW is an exception rather than a rule. Like the Wii, it has attracted millions of people into its world with instant gameplay and a good learning curve and actually great depth, but it doesn't mean that the X-Box 360 and the PS3 are any less consoles. Titles like Final Fantasy XI, Lord of the Rings Online and City of Heroes/Villains have survived despite the behemoth of WoW in their industry - they get a smaller chunk of users, sure, but they use what they get wisely. A ready example of this for me is Age of Conan - a title that had delusions of being the WoW killer, but missed a lot of the lessons that they should have learned from not only Blizzard but many other developers. SoE have been just as guilty as well. They argue if you throw money at something it will make the game better - this is a fallacy and one which they seem to assume because Blizzard make so much, they too will make a lot. It's not that simple, and again, plenty of MMO's in the market have survived on a few hundred thousand users.
There is much to learn from WoW and Blizzard, but also there is much to learn from other MMOs who have weathered and survived in the storm that WoW is. Using WoW as a benchmark for how MMO's work is a bit like saying Victoria Beckham has the ideal figure for women today - you can believe it if you want, but the reality is the majority will never achieve that figure, and trying to can only end in pain, misery and starvation. Besides, she didn't get that figure overnight anyway, and there's no way you can buy your way into it either.
Sometimes its best to just do something and do it well than chasing some idealogical dream of being the current trendsetter. But this is the games market, and when they learn this lesson hell will officially have frozen over...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
From a competition perspective this would be tricky. In general the Commission has always stated that it does not punish success. However I have seen WoW apps to try WoW bundled with one pc I bought (many of those "free" trial apps on your pc are paid for by the software supplier in the hope you upgrade). If this became widespread, and blizzard paid more for adds where the pc had no other game onboard then Blizzard might have an issue (would be similar to the Microsoft/IE case)
Comment below viewing threshold Show
WoW is the McDonalds of MMO.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'm sure all 5 of you are very happy
AoC is a good game but it's dead in the water. WoW is just so much better than any MMO out there.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
My point is that there are many different ways to tactical mmo, what wow does it be ok as alot of it but not bad at any as the old addim goes "jack of all trades, master of none" which is why it is so popular.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
The problem for me is that every other developer hasnt really tried hard enough to challenge WoW as they offer more or less the same dull experience albeit with a different gaming world. People dont want to play the same game again, they want something different.
From my experiences, I find WoW totally inspiring, where doing very little sees you being rewarded. I play WoW from time to time when I want to play something that requires zero brain power but lately, I simply login to sell stuff rather than take on the tedious grind that WoW is.
But with the arrival of Star Wars: The Old Republic next year, things need to change because here comes a game that certainly could attract players away and lets not forget Diablo - another title that could see its player base reduce, if they ever announce it as an MMO.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I'm a major WoW player, love it, and spend a lot of time on it, but that doesn't stop me trying new MMo's to see if they can be as good. What i've found, with games like City of Hero's, Conan, and ost recently WAR, is that the opening levels and zones are always fantastic, but the end game is never properly finished, or worse, properly conceptualized. Its this lack of goal and drive in the end zone which is killing of the competition.
The fun part of any RPG is getting to the end. Sadly, only Blizzard have seemed capable of KEEPING us there.
I imagine their next gen MMO will be the only thing to break WoW, barring some sort of black swan event
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Firstly, of course cross-server instances. So instead of having 3x groups looking for tanks/healers so they can grind the same instance they did yesterday (unlike old-style WoW or Everquest which had you going into instances to finish epic long quests, which is in the nature of a RPG) for a daily, you'll have 3x[number of servers in battlegroup]. Why? Well, cross-server BGs helped because some servers had more Alliance then Horde and vise versa. Where the difference with instances is that the problem is a game one, on every server there is a tank/healer shortage.
And of course, like cross-server BGs it will completely kill community. Question to those playing from the very beginning, which battleground games do you remember the most, ones done against people you know with friends you know or ones where you face random players from a large pocket of servers?
Ya, the answer is obvious. Waiting for the pops was a small price to pay in the long run. And the core issue will only spread to PVE as a result.
And the Cataclysm itself... Worse then a JRPG (have nothing against JRPGs, but know of their very linear story). Oh why? Well, players have nothing to do with it. It just happens. Even in JRPGs you get to decide how much time you take but here you are powerless in the affects of the event.
Compare that to the AQ event. That event was an amazing step up for MMORPGs. Not only does a server progress if they want to and at their own pace (see RPG), but they have to progress as a COMMUNITY (see MMO).
Having a game one way and then patching it up and it changing the next day (Rome wasn't built in a day, but hell WoW was) is far from amazing.
MMORPGs were made to imitate life, your actions as a group meant something. Hence you entered, you made friends, forced to group together, made to make friends (ninjas were made into outcasts), go on epic journeys together to advance, and so forth.
Now WoW is solely a glorified social networt program (where you can chat with your friends! instead of MAKE friends in the game) with built in mini-games (that don't require action from anyone else).
And Blizzard will die. The players made Blizzard what they are and Blizzard is now taking that for granted, they have new colours people. The milking machine of WoW (you'd think with millions/billions of dollars they could change the genre around, instead they charge for the most tiny things and only kill the genre) + no LAN and three part SC2 show this, they are going downhill ever so slowly. In five years there will be no Blizzcon.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Competing products have no problem selling their boxed copies and hooking an individual subscriber for around 3-6 months. After that, no game can really offer anything besides grinding away the same things over and over. Why should a WAR or AoC player invest in that grind, when he already has time invested in an incomplete WoW grind? The player was fine with grinding WoW, what made him switch temporarily was the non-grinding content of the other MMOs. After that content is depleted it is a whole new choice of which game the player will select for grinding. In that department WoW proves to be the most addictive, so naturally, Blizzard will get the people subscribing months 8-24 and beyond. WoW is not disrupting AoC, WAR or others after the first six months, those other games simply stop being competitive! WoW grind appears to be better somehow, the social pressure to grind in WoW bigger, the virtual genitalia received from grinding WoW perceived bigger. Nobody so far tried to attack that with their MMO in the least.
A game such a Lotro offered lifetime subscriptions for around 160, which tells me one thing: Lotro does not really expect the average hardcore user to ever spend more than that in the first place. No game is forever, it would be childish to think we would only watch on TV show and play one game until the end of our days. The userbase WILL be in constant flux!
No surprise that a lot of MMO publishers struggle or close, but you can't expect to run a full development team for eternity if you can only capitalize around 90 from each costumer. That is naive. But that is the reality, the concurrent subscriber is an illusion. You have to get new people to buy your product, not just upon release but during each day you are live! Blizzard knows this and they assaulted the public with advertising campaign after advertising campaign. They did not hope on subscription numbers to handle themselves, they tried to win customers any chance they got. Blizzard is advertising new patches more aggressively than most MMOs advertise their expansions.
WoW is only disruptive because the rest is letting them be disruptive. All the other MMOs we have seen over the years did a good job being competitive around release, but after that they all vanished from the front pages, while Blizzard still knew how to get there post-release. It is a war of attrition and Blizzard are masters at that. But eventually even WoW and its longterm motivator the grind will go down. They are prone to loose against clever technologies who provide entertainment without repetition of content. New technologies able to create variation on the fly will bring down the old grinder.
Not that WoW was in any danger of not being profitable because of that. There will always be the option to release a new expansion every year and sell a few millions of that. Ask EA about it, works just fine, even without the grinding content. All the money that will be lost are a few months of subscription per user really.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Funcom's big problem with AoC is that there was NO way they were going to attain great numbers of subscribers for a game with insane machine requirements (compared to WoW) that consumes an f-ton of disk space for what is in effect a sequel to the Anarchy Online engine with content that puts a market-dwindling high age rating on the box.
Tip to companies out there: The ONLY company that can create a WoW killer is Blizzard, because only they can turn off the servers for WoW.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I do feel that other MMO developers lack both original vision and the ability to execute on it. Tabula Rasa probably came closest for me to offering something genuinely new, shame that the execution was short of the mark. MMOs are all about the player interactions and communities that you create, but most mmo-developers still seem to be trying to create the perfect gamer-crack combination of economy, progression and story content.
It will be interesting to see how Aion does - it follows the WoW formula to a T, but has a new setting, new story, and better eye-candy, with a very strong execution and testing methodology. This should be where we find out what matters: setting freshness and minor innovation vs established community and vast amounts of polish.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
amen
You only have to go to a big LAN like the iseries to see how much WoW is dominating the PC side of things, too, which is otherwise floundering.
And averice is right, alls the competitors seem to be doing at the minute is pushing WoW further and further onwards, as they do the Blizzard: Take it, polish it up and sell it thing
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Age of Conan = WoW Killa
Lord of the rings Online = WoW Killa
And the winner is ... suprisingly ... World of Warcraft ^^
Comment below viewing threshold Show
WoW was my first ever MMO and it will be much likely my last MMO.
I'm merely a single player and WoW was the first MMO that you could play single player only if you wanted.
I do raid but mainly because I'm in a guild with people I know close to 5 years now which of course created some bonds.
Also I only started WoW because of Blizzard's track record (I was never disappointed in a Blizzard game ever) so I gave them the benefit of doubt and took the plunge. WoW lured me in with the Warcraft lore pouring out everywhere which is a universe I loved / love.
A MMO without lore I like will have no chance with me.
If WoW would be stopped tomorrow I would go back to play singler player only with the occasional fragging in UT or TF2 on public server for 1-2 hours and then log off again.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
i think i just swapped sides from being a gamespot fan to being a eurogamer fan
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Why is this a good thing? The wider audience of a product, the more middle of a road it has to become. It dumbs down. Look at how theatreland is now swamped with musicals based on bands and movies instead of real art. You'd like to think that this is a springboard for serious theatre, but it isn't. It's just more of what people have already.
A growing market means only one thing: More money, and the creation of meaningful art is at odds with that.