Broken
Toys
Random comments about
games and tractors
EA Mythic’s Mark Jacobs Goes And Touches That
Gamasutra has a long interview with Mark Jacobs on pretty much everything.
On competing with World of Warcraft:
So do I think World of Warcraft\’e2\’80\’99s success is repeatable today, of course not. Is it repeatable in the future? Well every time I hear somebody say, \’e2\’80\’9coh, nobody will ever touch that!\’e2\’80\’9d A few years later, somebody touches that.
On being borged by EA:
Have I promised EA that we\’e2\’80\’99d be number one? Was that even part of the deal? No. I\’e2\’80\’99ll let you in on something. Not only did I never say we were not going to be number one, I gave them numbers that were so low, and I said you\’e2\’80\’99re going to have to want to partner with us because you like what we\’e2\’80\’99re doing, you like what we already have, and you like these numbers \’e2\’80\ldblquote because I\’e2\’80\’99m not going to tell you that we\’e2\’80\’99re going to get 10 million subscribers. Because if I\’e2\’80\’99d sat here and really believed that we were going to get 10 million subscribers I would have taken my asking price, and multiplied it by 10.
On RMT:
I think that if a game is designed properly, and can be funded by item transactions in such a way that it does not hurt gameplay, and it doesn\’e2\’80\’99t turn the player into just a credit card, then I\’e2\’80\’99m okay with it. What I\’e2\’80\’99m not okay with are games that are designed to be nothing but quarter suckers in the online space. I think what we\’e2\’80\’99re going to see is some games that are designed well, where item sales can complement the game.
On why almost every MMO has swords and orcs:
It\’e2\’80\’99s easier. Fantasy is easier than sci-fi. Want to know why? It\’e2\’80\’99s simple. A gun. What\’e2\’80\’99s a gun, a gun is impersonal. A gun can shoot somebody from across the room. A gun in the future should be able to shoot a room from a mile away. Part of the challenge we found with Imperator is how do you make a combat system based on lasers and energy weapons, compelling to an RPG audience. That\’e2\’80\’99s one of the challenges. The other challenge with a sci-fi game is that fantasy is very well defined in our minds \’e2\’80\ldblquote we all have a vision of what something like Lord of the Rings should look like, what a basic fantasy world should look like. Sci-fi is very different, because you have all these different planets and environments and creatures, that should be otherworldly. But go into Camelot, go into Warhammer, go into Dungeons & Dragons, go into Lord of the Rings, go into WoW and look at a wolf. It\’e2\’80\’99s a wolf. There\’e2\’80\’99s a difference in the wolf, but you look at it, and you say \’e2\’80\’9cthat\’e2\’80\’99s a wolf.\’e2\’80\’9d Same with a dragon, same with a bear, same with almost any kind of monster you can name. Sci-fi, could be anything. And that\’e2\’80\’99s tougher. You\’e2\’80\’99re now creating very original IP. I think that some day someone\’e2\’80\’99s going to get it right. Nobody has yet \’e2\’80\ldblquote nobody\’e2\’80\’99s even come close to getting it right. But when they do, then I think you\’e2\’80\’99re going to see big numbers come out of sci-fi.
I also think there\’e2\’80\’99s something I can\’e2\’80\’99t explain, which is that people are more willing to play a fantasy game that\’e2\’80\’99s not as good online, than they are willing to play a sci-fi game that\’e2\’80\’99s not as good online. And I\’e2\’80\’99m not sure why that is.
| Print article |
about 4 years ago
I agree that fantasy is “easier” to do than sci-fi, but I’m not convinced that people aren’t as willing to play a sci-fi RPG online. I think we just have fewer examples of good sci-fi games to draw conclusions on.
about 4 years ago
I think sci-fi and social games are harder to accept as MMORPGs since they are more similar to the real world then fantasy. I think this nullifies some of the inherent escapism that needs to exist in a persistent virtual world. Plus the evolution of dungeons and dragons has given a huge advantage to the fantasy genre being translated into online games.
We should get an idea of how much support for the sci-fi genre exists when Huxley and Tabula Rasa come out. Both look well designed and their success might open the market to being less fantasy dominated.
relmstein.blogspot.com
about 4 years ago
Mark Jacobs past: Mythic has no plans to get involved with any such [RMT[ venture in the future, in case you hadn’t guessed, and has already turned down opportunities to do so.
“We remain committed to keeping our games as games and not as opportunities to encourage behavior that runs counter to their spirit of creativity and entertainment.
“We will gladly ‘leave money on the table’ to ensure that whether or not you like our games, that they remain as that, games and not an entertainment version of day-trading,” he concluded.
Mark Jacobs present: I think that if a game is designed properly, and can be funded by item transactions in such a way that it does not hurt gameplay, and it doesn\’e2\’80\’99t turn the player into just a credit card, then I\’e2\’80\’99m okay with it.
Way to stand up to the man, Mark. /disappointed
about 4 years ago
Knowing EA as I do… I doubt Mythic will even exist two years from now. Mark\\’s a good person I\\’m sure, but this is business and he\\’s high profile and he\\’s made a mistake selling to EA.
Having said the above, he\\’s going to have as much influence on the next big block buster MMRPG as I am.
about 4 years ago
Fantasy is only easier because MMO devs played D&D for decades, and hence, they keep repeating the same metaphors.
about 4 years ago
Don’t bother quoting MJ from the past. People are entitled to change their minds. Especialy when they sell out to EA overlords.
about 4 years ago
What people really want is an engaging tactical experience. Fun, interesting combat absolutely makes the game. We don’t want another raid snoozefest. Wow, EQ, and Trials of Atlantis gave us all we could stand.
If you can deliver that in an SF game, we’ll play it.
about 4 years ago
Who ever heard of a sword in sci-fi, it just doesn’t fit… oh wait, there was that Star Wars thingy… anyway it’s not like someone hasn’t based a game on sci-fi that didn’t draw a huge following… oh wait, that Star Wars thingy again.
I think it’s easier to do a fantasy rpg because you don’t have to pay licensing rights when stealing the content. There are plenty of Sci-fi worlds to use if you wanted.. Star Wars, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, hell use Dr. Who if you want. I don’t think AO failed because it had guns.
about 4 years ago
Actually, what Mark said about Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi is pretty much exactly on target. Fantasy is easier to make an MMO around for a whole host of reasons. My talk at AGC is actually pretty much exactly going to cover this topic.
about 4 years ago
Damion, let me know if you find any research relating to the relative popularity of Pen & Paper gaming. I believe that fantasy RPGs are similarly more popular on tabletop, but I haven’t been able to quantify that in any way. It seems tat the fantasy focus carried over from RPGs to CRPGs to MMORPGs.
I agree with Michael that sci-fi still has strong possibilities, particularly if you’ve got a strong IP brand like Star Trek, Stargate, Battlestar Galactica, etc. But here Mark Jacobs disagrees; he feels that strong IP is usually more trouble than it is worth (SWG, MxO).
about 4 years ago
Is IP really that important? I mean Blizzard pretty much ignores their own IP when they create content.
about 4 years ago
I’d be willing to play well done Sci-Fi game. I played AO for quite a while, but in the end it wasn’t much different from other treadmill games. Of course it’d have to follow one of WoW’s changes, and that is having a Mac client.
about 4 years ago
His comments about fantasy being instantly recognizeable vs. sci-fi being less so ring very true to me. I made the same comparisons at E3 between WW2 shooters and the futuristic shooters like QuakeWar, BF2142, etc.
Maybe it’s just me, but by the end of E3 I was -very- bored with sci-fi shooters.
In a WW2 shooter, if a Panzer is coming towards me, I instantly know its capabilities, weaknesses, which part is going to be shooting at me, etc.
In a futuristic shooter, I don’t have that instant visceral reaction. Are those flanges going to shoot flame, or missles, or energy weapons, or what? Does my shielding protect me against any of those? I guess I’ll have to look it up in the manual…
about 4 years ago
AO was just a fantasy game with a sci-fi skin on it. It was not a sci-fi game.
about 4 years ago
“What people really want” is usually code for “what I really want”. People want different things, different people have different itches to scratch.
Right now we have one really well-developed gameplay package, the “Tank/Nuker/Healer” triad with lots of subtle variations. It works well for fantasy games, not so great for sci-fi games, and really badly for games that step away from a humanoid avatar.
The problem I see is that the “character based” games very quickly wind up running down the same treadmill, not just for the players but for the development team as well. Every new expansion effectively invalidates an equivalent amount of old content, every extension of the level range requires ways be found to reduce the time investment to reach the basline for the new cap. So you don’t move forward in your gameplay, you just replicate it with shinier technology and bigger numbers.
Contrast this with Eve Online: Every bit of content they have ever created is still valid, every bit of gameplay is still accessible, expansions are literally expanding the scope of the game rather than simply changing the scenery. I suspect that I’m going to be using Eve as an example a lot, simply because it’s the first game to break away from the Diku model and succeed in a big way without simply being a casual game writ large.
–Dave
about 4 years ago
Is IP really that important? I mean Blizzard pretty much ignores their own IP when they create content.
I suspect it is not, but only because Blizzard has a band of slobbering fanboys who’ll lap up anything they shit out. If they were working on a real license, like star trek, I think adhereance to canon would be a must to see good numbers.
about 4 years ago
If guns are the problem, then give everyone energy based melee weapons, power armor and stuff like that.
about 4 years ago
Amber,
You missed a couple of interviews I’ve done in-between (prior to EA). I remain 100% against gold/item farming in Mythic’s game, I remain 100% against gold/item farming in games that are not designed for them, I remain 100% against gold/item farming when such activities are against the EULA and the parent company doesn’t partake in them, I remain interested in the idea of people asking us to do special stuff for them (guild items, stuff for housing, etc.) or in extra stuff (as long as it doesn’t affect game balance in any way) as I have been for years. Nothing has changed. The [RMT] quote you referenced had to do with gold/item farming and was in reference to companies such as IGE/Blacksnow/etc. and taking a cut from them.
And not that I think it really matters (until we prove it) but I had this same discussion with EA prior to the deal getting done and they agreed with me. My mind hasn’t changed at all on this subject, pre-EA or now, post-EA.
Mark
about 4 years ago
I suspect it is not, but only because Blizzard has a band of slobbering fanboys who\’e2\’80\’99ll lap up anything they shit out. If they were working on a real license, like star trek, I think adhereance to canon would be a must to see good numbers.
This didn’t stop the writers of Enterprise from breaking canon horribly, multiple times. (Although they did manage to come up with a good explanation to the human-looking Klingon issue.)
about 4 years ago
True, but they only lasted 4 seasons. The show didn’t get enough “good numbers” and the cost to produce it became unprofitable. I’d like to think the downfall in viewership was because of poor writing (due to ruining canon, among other things), but it could also be no one really likes star trek right now.
But in the end, Enterprise is television. MMOs are different. Lum got it down in the other post about a BSG MMO.
about 4 years ago
Eve may become one of the unique business cases out there because aside from personal burnout, there is no real way to exhaust the game. CCP just has to keep physically expanding its universe, while fixing things and adding new features for retention. But that basic ability to increase the play-space suits both veterans and newbs, since the newbs don’t have to contend for vital new shinehs if the veterans move on to those new pastures. The old sectors are new to new players.
The real-time skill advancement and tipping point you pass sometime for making money means that’s the horizon for churn must be really long. In fact, I bet CCP loses far more subs in its first few days/weeks/months than most MMO’s because the game is pretty punitive on solo, isolated newb casuals. But it makes up for it by having amazing retention, like Dave suggested.
And re. RMT’s… the one thing I truly can’t cope with is organized collusion in a game, such that if one person is being unfair you can always hope to reason or argue with them, and that way get some kind of feedback and personal satisfaction (or more info about them). But when they’re on the job you know pretty quickly there’s no way you’ll ever be able to influence them. Being unfair to other players isn’t their choice or sport or playstyle, its their *job* and they will not move from that spot or let you have a chance at that boss. That’s what professional farming is to me (and why I’m trying to do Playerep) — organized, out-of-game collusive abuse.
about 4 years ago
“What I\’e2\’80\’99m not okay with are games that are designed to be nothing but quarter suckers in the online space. “
The whole buffbot thing was a quarter sucker, wasn’t it?
about 4 years ago
I know for example with women, there\’e2\’80\’99s an even lower attraction rate to the game if all they get to play is just a car.
So what exactly explains my playing AutoAssault?
And what’s less attractive about playing a car than playing a tauren warrior? Except it’s pretty hard to spin out a tauren on hard cornering.
about 4 years ago
What Mist said, times 10. AO was just reskinned EQ with magic called nano.
They even had pet classes and shapechangers (a la EQ druid wolf form). Not sure how you transform into a wolf or bird with nano. They had a buffer/debuffer that was *very* close to an EQ shaman. Etc.
about 4 years ago
2006 and Mark Jacobs is still my god.
Who would have guessed it?
about 4 years ago
“Who ever heard of a sword in sci-fi, it just doesn\’e2\’80\’99t fit\’e2\’80\’a6 oh wait, there was that Star Wars thingy\’e2\’80\’a6″
Star Wars isn’t science fiction. Star Wars is fantasy. It has swordfighting and magic, after all. There’s very little science.
about 4 years ago
Female Gamer you are one of the proud, one of the few… one Auto Assault (the game written off by its sugar daddy as a complete loss) player. Shut up already.
about 4 years ago
One thing I’ve long thought on fantasy being “easier” than sci-fi is that it’s a matter of scale, not just cultural familiarity. High fantasy is all about your avatar being up close and personal with everything that they do. Fighting, socializing, crafting, you name it it’s all very intimate b/c it has to be. The further up the tech tree you go, the more distance, and therefor impersonal, the interactions become. The problem with the gun compared to a bow is a matter of distance, or scale. Getting shot by someone far enough away that you never saw them makes for a poor game. Add to that the accepted thought that sci-fi = “in space” and you are automatically dealing with large scale things like planets, moons, stars and up.
So, the real question is, how to do sci-fi without losing the small scale personal interaction that makes fantasy “easier”?
Plus, for some reason people really want to explore space themed games, which is a whole nother kettle of game design.
(And as already mentioned, Star wars is NOT sci-fi. It’s fantasy in a future disguise. The most sci-fi part of it is the space battles which are still full of fantasy placeholders like blasters (aka colored lightning bolts) and shields (aka magic defense) and the absence of physics.)
about 4 years ago
Part of the draw for fantasy over sci-fi is the ability to view the game from a third person, while sci-fi and the necessity for more ranged combat is so limited in 3rd person. Not only that, people are used to 1st person when shooting a gun in a game.
Two ways to address this issue would be:
1. A quick key solution to change from 3rd to 1st person (possibly even automatic) with a crosshair where you have to actually aim at your target like an FPS.
2. Longer range shots have a much higher percentage to miss than close range. Or, depending on the weapon itself (pistol for short range, rifle for long range).
Both of these would lower the advantage of ranged combat over melee. This same system could be implemented for Fantasy as well…imagine casters and archers that have to actually aim at their targets.