(Back to TOC)
17 November 2004
by Mike Rozak
A few days ago I tried to imagine what virtual worlds would be like in 10 to 20 years. Of course, they'll have better graphics, better network connections, better AI, and better everything.
However, my mental wanderings chanced upon a few aspects of virtual worlds that may change:
-
The lifecycle of future virtual worlds will shorten.
-
The amount of time a typical player spends in a virtual world will shorten.
Let me explain...
Lifecycle of a virtual world
Historically, the lifecycle of a virtual world has been very long, even among MMORPGs. Some MUDs have been running for 15+ years. Meridian 59 (though resurrected), Ultima Online, and Everquest are still running after 6+ years.
I don't think this longevity will continue in the future. In fact, I suspect it has already stopped, even though people haven't realised the fact. UO, M59, and EQ won't necessarily die right away, but they will fade away.
To explain why, I want to describe three different categories of players and what cycle of a virtual world they are attracted to:
-
Early adopters want to experience something new and innovative, and they want to be the first ones to experience it... at any price. They have the latest hardware, are willing to pay full price for retail boxes, and will even put up with bugs and incomplete content. Stereotypically, they are young males. (In movie terms, early adopters stand in line on opening night to see movies.)
-
Mature players are those that want to visit a middle-aged virtual world. They don't need to be first. In fact, they put off being first just so they can avoid the crowds of early adopters, bugs, and incomplete content. They want a complete and stable world. (In movie terms, mature players see the movie a couple months after release, or rent it on DVD.)
-
Bargain hunters are players that don't have enough money for the latest computer, full-priced retail box, and premium monthly payments. Alternatively, they may just be unwilling to pay full price for an experience when they can get it cheaper elsewhere. (In movie terms, bargain hunters wait for the movie to be out on DVD or cable.)
Part of the reason there are three types of customers for a virtual world is that virtual worlds can only support a limited number of players at any one time. Publishers need to limit a VW's population because, while adding new servers is relatively easy, getting new product-support staff up to speed is much more difficult. As a result, publishers will encourage a consistent playerbase population rather than a burst of activity followed by a quick VW death.
For the the last seven years, a major virtual world has come out about once a year. Meridian 59 was first, the Ultima Online, Everquest, Asheron's Call, Dark Age of Camelot, Anarchy Online, etc., all about a year apart.
In the last 24 months, major virtual worlds have been coming out once every six months. These include Asheron's Call 2, Star Wars Galaxies, Lineage II, Finaly Fantasy, etc.
Over the next 12 months, a major virtual world will be out once every 3 months. These releases include Everquest II, World of Warcraft, Dungeons & Dragons online, Middle-Earth online, Dark & Light, etc.
If this trend continues, even at the rate of a major world every 6 months (let alone every 3 months), the playing field will be swamped with virtual worlds. Not only will the new ones be contending for players, so too will the old ones, keeping up-to-date with semi-annual add-on releases.
So many virtual worlds provides players with lots of choices. What will each category of player do?
-
Early adopters will buy a newly-released virtual world sometime in the first 6 months. They will stay another 3 to 6 months until they get bored, and then go onto the next new virtual world. In fact, early adopters don't even need to buy the virtual world; they can just become beta testers and play for free. (World of Warcraft and Everquest II are the latest early-adopter worlds.)
-
Mature players will appear 6-18 months after the virtual world appears. Because they are not driven by new-ness, if they find a virtual world they like, they will stick with it for longer than early adopters, perhaps 6 to 18 months. When they get bored they move onto another world.
-
Bargain hunters wait until the world is discounted in stores, free in DVD magazines, or starts cutting its monthly fees. They appear 24+ months after the world's release. (Ultima Online, Everquest I, and Anarchy Online are currently in bargain-hunter mode. Runequest and other free games also are.)
"Yes," you might be saying, "but a virtual world can keep putting out expansion packs and stay up-to-date with the latest technology so that it never dies?"
Expansion packs increase a product's longevity, but they only go so far:
"Yes, but MUDs have been running for 15 years, sometimes with the same players sticking around, mostly for social reasons." I agree that happened in the past, but I expect future behaviour to change:
-
Mass-migration of guilds - Although mass-migration of guilds is already a common occurrence, guilds will probably become more expert at jumping from one virtual world to another.
-
Corporate control - Most of the MUDs that are 15 years old are non-commercial ventures, or are at least not run by large corporations. They are kept alive by the good-will of their owners. A large corporation has no good will. It will kill a product even if it is making money. If the product isn't making enough money per head (which old virtual worlds won't) or if the UI tarnishes the corporate image (which old virtual worlds will) then the product will be dropped. Occasionally, a corporation will release the source code for free/cheap to hobbyists, but only occasionally. They generally don't want to risk the slight chance that the 5-year old code has any important intellectual property.
-
Different players - Virtual worlds used to (and still do) attract a niche player. In the future, virtual worlds will go mainstream and attract different player personalities, ones that may not want to stick around in an old-technology virtual world for 15 years.
Scale of virtual worlds
Speaking of mass-market players: As virtual worlds become more popular, the number of hours that a player stays in a virtual world (before they get bored and leave) will shrink.
Contemporary virtual worlds are designed to keep a player around for 500 to 1000 hours. (40 hours/month x 12-24 months) For brevity, I'll just call this "1000" hours of gameplay.
Now for the obvious question that I've never heard asked: What percentage of the potential game-playing population would be willing to commit 1000 hours to a game? 100 hours to a game? 10 hours? How do these players differ?
Personally, I last between 25 and 75 hours on a game. When I play a 1000-hour virtual world, I don't expect to stay any longer than 25-75 hours, not just because I get bored, but because I'd rather experience the variety of ten different games than one really long one. I suspect most game players are the same. Most people, those whose computer game-playing experience is limited to solitaire, might even find a 10-hour game to be a stretch.
|
Profile of users
|
1000 hours
| -
People with lots of time on their hands (teenagers, unemployed, under-employed, retirees) and die-hard fans.
-
5-10% of the potential game-playing population.
|
100 hours
| -
Singles and occasional couples. Childless.
-
15-30% of the potential game-playing population.
|
10 hours
| -
Couples. People with children. People not interested in a really long game. First-time players.
-
60-80% of the potential game-playing population.
|
You might argue that someone with only 100 hours of time could play a 1000 hour game; they just wouldn't get to the end. While this is possible, I don't think it will be common. There are a few reasons:
-
In a MMORPG designed to last 1000 hours, players start out killing rats (at hour 0), advance to small goblins (at hour 100), then to orcs (200 hours in), and finally to really big dragons (1000 hours). A CRPG designed to last 100 hours has the player killing goblins by hour 10, orcs after 20 hours, and dragons at 100 hours. A player who only wants to play 100 hours will only get to killing small goblins in a 1000-hour game before running out of time. He knows this, so he will chose a 100-hour game that will let him get to the really big dragon in his allotted time. Of course, the gradations won't always be based on what monsters a player kills, especially if the virtual world has no monsters to slaughter.
-
Players only willing to commit 100 hours are at a disadvantage to those willing to commit 1000. After all, a player with 100 hours can achieve level 30, but one with 1000 can get to level 100. Level 100 almost always beats level 30 in a fight. The same disparity goes for money acquisition, as opposed to experience points acquisition.
-
The personalities and interests of players attracted to 1000-hour games is different than the personalities and interests of 100-hour game players. Since the other players in a virtual world factor greatly into its enjoyability, a personality match amongst players is vital.
I haven't tried to convince you that a 100-hour virtual world can exist, let alone a 10-hour experience; I try to do so in this document. However, if one can exist, then the experience will be radically different from the 1000-hour game. Here's why:
|
What players do...
|
1000 hours
|
1000-hour virtual worlds are very similar to contemporary MMORPGs:
-
1000 hours is a long time. It's enough that players can meet and befriend other players, as well as become enemies. Players may play with their real-life friends, but they are bound to meet new ones in the world.
-
Players are encouraged to make friends and enemies. Much (if not all) of the action involves other players. Game AI is a distant second.
-
Players are encouraged to join guilds.
-
Because the experience is all about interacting with players, shards will be large, on the order of 10,000+ players each.
|
100 hours
|
100-hour virtual worlds are similar to CRPGs and adventure games, except that they're online:
-
100 hours is enough time for players to meet and adventure with other players, but not enough for close relationships or to make enemies. Players are likely to play with their real-life friends.
-
Players may group, but they're more likely to interact with game AI than fight/compete amongst themselves.
-
Players are encouraged to join parties. They can also play alone.
-
Since the expectation is for players to join a party and then explore game content, shards will be small, about 100-1000 players per shard. Of course, a designer could create a 100,000-player shard with private dungeons, but then what's the difference? (Except for crowded cities.)
|
10 hours
|
10-hour virtual worlds aren't similar to any marketed game, because at the moment, 10-hour games cannot survive financially. My best guesstimate is that they'd be like short adventure games, perhaps interactive stories not that different in feel from Choose Your Own Adventure books, except with much more sophisticated branching.
-
10 hours isn't enough time to socialise. These virtual worlds will most likely be played by a group of real-life friends, or by individuals.
-
Players may group, but they're really in the game to interact with game's content.
-
Players may play with known friends or alone. The VW might provide a "dating service" that allows strangers to meet up for a game.
-
Private regions will be used for each player or group of friends.
|
|
User interface...
|
1000 hours
| -
Because the player will use the same character for 1000 hours (unless there's permanent death), the game must allow for total customization of the character. Similarly, with 10,000 players in each world, characters' visuals must be unique.
-
Since the player has plenty time to learn the user interface, on average, the UI is more complex than the 100-hour and 10-hour games. However, because these games are mass-market, there won't be as much variation in the UI complexity.
|
100 hours
| -
Since the character will be used for 100 hours, the character can be customised, but not as much as the 1000-hour game. Characters may be limited to specific classes or other archetypes.
-
On average, the user interface is simpler than the 1000-hour game. However, because so many 100-hour VWs are produced, some 100-hour VWs will be targeted at niche markets, and have complex UI and functionality.
|
10 hours
| -
Because the game is so short, players will only be able to chose a template from a menu, such as the ability to play "Batman", "Robin", "Bat-girl", or "Cat-woman".
-
The user interface for all 10-hour VWs will be almost identical, just as the UI for all movies, television shows, and books is almost identical. Each VW will have one or two "special features" like a magnifying glass for a detective VW, or a sword for a fantasy VW.
|
|
Business model...
|
1000 hours
| -
Due to content-creation in bulk, content is 1/4(?) as expensive as a 10-hour virtual world, but there's 100x as much. Therefore, the world costs 25x more to create than a 10-hour virtual world.
-
The virtual world can charge a monthly fee or make money by selling virtual goods.
-
Since content data will be so enormous, a DVD retail package will be needed for distribution. (Contemporary MMORPGs are 2.5GB+, which is downloadable by only the very patient.)
-
Because of the enourmous download size, a 1000-hour virtual world doesn't really need an online component for piracy protection. However, a single-player 1000-hour game is a bit unlikely due to the costs and low number of players.
-
A player only goes through 1.5 games per year.
|
100 hours
| -
Content is 1/2 as expensive to create as a 10-hour VW, but there's 10x as much. A 100-hour VW costs 5x as much as a 10-hour VW to create.
-
Because a die-hard player can get through the content in a month, while a less committed player may take six, the VW cannot charge a monthly fee. It must either charge up-front fee, or make money through advertising. (A large company could group several 100-hour VWs into a package and charge a monthly fee.)
-
The package can be sold on a DVD, but is most likely a download since retail shelf-space is difficult to get.
-
The VW is small enough to download, so it needs an online component for piracy protection. The game might still be played by a single player in a private online instance.
-
A player can play through 15 games per year.
|
10 hours
| -
Requires much less money to create than either the 1000-hour or 100-hour VW.
-
The game company must earn $1-$3 per game (which is too small to charge on a credit card) or be supported by advertising. (A large company could sell a "subscription" that includes a new game every month. Smaller games could also be bundled with 100-hour and 1000-hour games.)
-
10-hour games are either downloaded or included in DVD game magazines.
-
They require an online component for piracy protection. The game might still be played by a single player in their own private instance.
-
A player can go through up to 150 games per year.
|
Hours of content vs. number of players
Notice the correlation between the number of hours it takes to complete a virtual world and the number of players in a shard. If there are 100 players in a 100-hour virtual world, then statistically, each player will be 1 hour away from the other in terms of content. At this density, players will occasionally run into one another by accident, or if they go to a focal-point like a village. If 1000 players are in a 100-hour virtual world then players will only be 6 minutes apart, and will be running into each other all the time.
Graphing the hours-of-content vs. the number of players (online at a given time) produces an interesting table:
|
10 hours
|
100 hours
|
1000 hours
|
0 players
|
Book, TV mini-series
|
Book series, TV series
|
Long-running TV series
|
1 player
|
Short single-player game. I have only seen amateur text-adventures that are this short.
|
Single-player game, such as CRPG or adventure game.
|
Very long-running single-player game. This category is unlikely due to the expense.
|
10 players
|
10-hour VW that I described above... Interactive storytelling with friends, like "Host a Murder".
|
Multiplayer CRPG like Neverwinter Nights.
|
Players will never run into one-another unless they pre-arrange it. This category is unlikely.
|
100 players
|
Chat
|
100-hour VW that I described above
|
MUD-like
|
1000 players
|
1000-hour VW that I described above... MMORPG-like
|
10,000 players
|
Chat
|
I put chat into the lower-left corner because a virtual world with far more players than content just turns into a large chat room.
If you don't quite get what I mean by "0 players" then see Virtual World Spectrum.
Conclusion
Producing a 100-hour virtual world results in a significantly different experience that the contemporary 1000-hour virtual world, as well as a different user base. Likewise, a 10-hour VW even more different and caters to a different set of players.
Are 100-hour and 10-hour VWs financially feasible? I don't know.
Share with your friends: |
