I was reading through Syncaine’s argument of why one MMO dying benefits players of another MMO, and realized that there was something that nagged me about the entire thing – and it wasn’t really what the majority of those commenting on the article were looking at. After all, I have to agree that Syncaine has built up a rather rock-solid position to debate from when you can boil it down to an empirical “if even a single person leaves Aion for Darkfall, then Darkfall benefits” observation. From a certain perspective, that’s entirely correct – after all, more subscribers = more money, period, end of story.
But is that really the end of the story? Or to go a step further, is that even where we should be looking for the story in the first place? Somehow or other, the gaming community as a whole seems to have gotten it into its heads that “more money” implies “better games” – yet recent trends in MMO success/failure seem to show not correlation whatsoever between those two items! After all, three of the largest-budget games to come out in the past couple of years have been those most highly under contention as “failures” (Age of Conan, Warhammer Online, and now Aion), and aside from the monolith of WoW, the most commonly referenced “success” is EVE, which started out as a very small-scale, low-budget game.
Why, then, are we so obsessed with subscriber numbers for games? Do subscriber numbers actually translate to more and higher-quality content? So far the empirical trends don’t seem to support this. Instead, it seems like the highest-quality games are the ones that have relied on the “if you build it, they will come” motto and just tried to make a good game (and in addition, a good community). The funny part? If you succeed in making a good game… the game is still good, regardless of other games on the market. Likewise, if you succeed in creating a good community for a game, that community is still good, even if it’s not 11 million players strong.
And thus I arrived at my realization about what I disliked about Syncaine’s argument: it’s too focused on subs, both from a business and a community standpoint. If a player from Darkfall is focused on Aion subs, instead of Darkfall gameplay, that makes me wonder if the gameplay of Darkfall can’t stand on its own either – regardless of how much I like or dislike Aion gameplay. I figure, if a game is truly good and well-designed, those who play it shouldn’t need to care about other games – they know that their own game can stand on its merits without having to resort to mud slinging… and they also have a good game to play.
I think you bring up some really good points. I would disagree with saying Aion is a failure just yet, I think it’s still too early.
I think Fallen Earth may be in the same category as EVE one day. I think it’s low key release along with a dedicated dev team will make Fallen Earth a success.
I’m not actually saying Aion -is- a failure (after all, I still play and enjoy it!), I’m just noting that it’s one of the MMOs that a lot of people have been bringing up in such a debate.
After re-reading your post, I stand corrected. But you still make some good points!
There’s a handful of games holding really low numbers in subs that just refuse to die, based on that I can’t really accept the notion that subs = life in MMO’s. Aside from the money issue, I think it’s more a developer vs publisher that takes games out. Nothing to really support that theory, but there’s been games with more than enough subs that catch a shutdown notice and really throw the playerbase for a spin. This just reeks of internal problems as opposed to cashflow issues. Really, any amount of cashflow in the green will keep a game living for years beyond it’s time. A few ill mannered words spoken to the wrong guy in suit however…
OT: I just discovered your blog, I absolutely love your work. Big kudos, a small feature, and a spot on my blogroll for ya.
-Cheers!
Thanks Grimnir!
I enjoy doing my work. 
Ahhh, I didn’t know you blogged! (Blame Frank at Overly Positive for linking to you
) +1 on the linkage, per Grim above.
Great article! Seems that the broader issue isn’t just counting-by-subs, it’s the endless “My game is good if it’s better than that game” — which really isn’t much of a logical proposition at all.
I understand that comparison is a natural human process, but as you say: shouldn’t we start judging these games we play on their own merits rather than on endless comparisons with extreme yardsticks (in terms of both success and failure)?
Thanks to Grimnir I see your blog now, thanks for everything you have done for WAR so far Aiiane.
In response to the article, I do agree people seems to think very highly of sub numbers as an indicator of “success” and “failure”, which is strange considering the whole market exploded since days of the first MMOs, and a “failed” game can easily be at top of the chart before .Sure, from a business standpoint sub numbers are important, but it is also a game. As a player I would have thought personal enjoyment is the sole deciding factor, but apparently arguments doesn’t work that way.
To me, every software has its life cycle. As long as I enjoy it, and the company is maintaining it, all is well. If they ask for feedback, I give them. If they change the direction so that I don’t enjoy it anymore, I leave. It’s not that hard right? Why all the agonizing over minute details, numbers and such? Those are the job of the company’s management, my job is go into the world they set up and bash some heads.