Found out a little something interesting while scouring the USPTO database today on my weekly search for all things MMO.  Apparantly SOE’s trademarked the name “Legends of Norrath” for use as a collectible card game. 

I posted the full story over at Warcry.  Take a look and tell me what you think. 

World of Warcraft has over 8,000,000 subscribers.

I say that because it’s possible that you may not know this.  You may be one of the few people remaining on the planet that has no idea that Blizzard has more than 8,000,000 people paying for the priviledge to log in and play World of Warcraft.

Seriously, to hear most people tell the tale, would seem to indicate that Blizzard is infalliable due to this inpenetrable juggernaut of monthly income that insulates them from any possible outside influence or undue harm.  Truly, Blizzard executives sit upon golden thrones and mete out virtual justice through their servers, all the while thinking of new things to do with the piles of money which is inevitably piling up around their offices.  Now, I don’t know what truly happens behind Blizzard’s closed doors, but I like to sometimes imagine Rob Pardo sitting down to a light lunch of raw 20 dollar bills, and then noshing a bit on a salad of baby arugula topped with hundred dollar bills.

To hear many reports on the subject, one would think that only Blizzard has the resources to truly end the war on terror.  All they need is a government contract, and then the Vivendi/Blizzard design team gets to work on the most efficient way to inflitrate and destroy terror cells from the inside.  In fact, my sources indicate this is what really happened to the “Ghost” project. 

Seriously, I think I get it.  World of Warcraft has a lot of subscribers.  It’s a good game.  This doesn’t make it the only good game. 

I think we’ve come to this place where we rely on subscriber numbers too much to gauge a game’s health.  Certainly, too many people seem to rely upon the numbers to gauge a game’s worth or design, too.  These type of discussions really seem to bring out the Monday morning quarterbacks though - myself included.  It incites passion and definately seems to generate site traffic as players (again, myself included) crawl out of the woodwork to comment on cited reason #135,234 “Why “World of Warcraft is Dominating the Industry” or “Why Only Blizzard Can Defeat Blizzard” or any number of repeated arguments that have been appearing for the past 2 years on the subject.  Panels at E3 or GDC exist for the purpose, and many a barroom has seen many a conversation on the subject.  It’s fodder for the blog-o-sphere, and almost always results in a massive influx of new comments and debate.

Why?

The “my game can beat up your game” argument gets old, doesn’t it?  Or does it?  Brand loyalty is built into the American psyche.  Think of the number of cars on the road you see with “Friends don’t let friends drive Fords” or “Chevy Sucks!” stickers on them (I don’t buy American).  Think of how many people you know who won’t touch Coke or Pepsi (Coke, here).  Don’t get me started on PC’s and Macs (PC’s) or Windows vs. Linux (Windows).

In this MMO industry, we seem to define ourselves not only in what type of play we prefer (casual, hardcore, tradeskilling, soloing, raiding,etc.), but also by which games we play.  Think of the stereotypes we hold about “B-Net kiddies” or “SOE fanbois” or even the old Vanguard “vanbois”.  Peer pressure is most certainly alive and kicking, and our tribal instincts definately steer us toward everything from a favorite console maker (Playstation here) to a favored coffee shop (Caribou for me). 

Naturally, we apply these same preferences toward MMO’s, and transfer that loyalty toward the studios which make them.  It’s not enough to dislike Everquest - you have to hate SOE.  It’s not enough to dislike World of Warcraft - you have to tell others how immature WoW players are. 

We cover ourselves not only in the comfortable anonymity of the internet during most of these discussions, but we also place our heads on a fluffy pillow of brand loyalty before saying our final prayers to our favored design lead before finally drifting off to a satisfied slumber. 

Metaphors aside, we rely upon stereotypes to comfort ourselves - to remind ourselves that we’ve made the “right” choice in where to send our checks every month.  It’s not enough that we be right, though, because everyone else must be wrong.

In a way, it’s like choosing our own religions.  These aren’t just games to many players, but ways of life.  I’m not going to say that MMO gamers are hiding in their parents’ basements, without girlfriends or jobs (itself, another stereotype, mind you), but I will say that we can get pretty passionate about our choice of games.  Much like religion, we emotionally self-invest pretty heavily into our choice of games.  Like religion, many players are drawn to a game for it’s structure and features, but then find themselves molded after the fact as well, finding that the game shapes their view on what is and is not a “good” game forever more.

We used to see this in the 80’s with pen and paper RPG’s.  Anyone who started with Traveller tended to prefer that system.  If you played GURPS, then Steve Jackson’s was the true path.  If you rolled your first 10 sided dice during a Dungeons and Dragons sesson, chances are Gary Gygax was the only real designer (myself, I’m a FASA geek, through and through). 

Later, we saw this same preference and worldview shaped by NES vs. Sega Master systems…then Super NES vs. Genesis…and later by Playstation vs. xBox or Gamecube.  Today, may players would even claim that they can almost tell what sort of person someone is by whether or not they own a 360 or a Wii. 

And so it is today with Blizzard vs. SOE vs. Turbine vs. EA Mythic. 

Fanbois unite!  The battlelines are drawn.  Prove the worth of your game by quoting subscriber numbers - and by doing so, prove your own worth.  Obviously if you choose to play a popular game, you yourself must be popular, right?  After all, you’re doing what more people are doing, and as we all know, popular opinion is the only correct opinion, right?

Inspired by a discussion I’m having with Potshot in the comments of his “It’s the Economy, Stupid” post, I took to thinking about the idea of dynamic vendor economies in MMO’s. 

It’s a subject dear to my heart, as I made my first fortune in old Everquest by a mysterious and arcane rite known as “merchant mining”.  It was a bit like antiquing online, as I’d go to various merchants around the lands looking for whatever cast-offs someone decided to sell, to see if I might find some treasures among other players’ trash. 

I loved the idea that the merchants themselves were dynamic in that way, that they held on to items other players sold, and then would resell them.  I loved that having a higher reputation with a particular city or political faction might better your prices.  Even “charisma” (that black sheep of RPG statistics) greatly enchanced my chances at getting a good deal (I used to carry around a set of Charisma gear just for selling to vendors). 

Fast-forward 500 years and apparantly Wal-Mart has taken over Norrath in the aftermath of The Shattering.  Everywhere I go I generally tend to find the same prices - and everyone buys everything, but nothing you sell is for sale. 

Collect item X which is apparantly worth something to NPC vendors (but worthless to player characters), sell the item, and then watch in amazement as the item disappears forever!  *poof*

It’s a little something I like to call “Black Hole Economics”. Those 1’s and 0’s are now gone from the world as we know it.  They’ve been eaten by a quantum singularity of epic x4 proportions. 

Well, that’s certainly not very fun, now is it?  How “alive” does that make the NPC’s feel? 

I think the immersion would be better served by having merchants who are a tad more discerning in what it is they buy, and by having descriptions on “vendor trash” items that make sense.

Bear with me a bit here. Imagine the following:

I’m a new adventurer in a big, big world. I go out and kill a heebyjeeby that was about to attack me (it’s coming right for us!). When it’s dead, I start ripping the carcass apart in case I find it’s liver or what?

Ideally, I have some idea that the liver of a heebyjeeby (in good shape) is a prized delicacy. I also remember hearing once that heebyjeeby teeth are pretty symmetrical, and are prized as arrow heads. I might even recall hearing once that heebyjeeby horns are made of a substance that, when ground to a powder and mixed with the appropriate agents, makes a pretty good detoxifier.

In game terms, these items have a chance to “drop” from heebyjeeby’s and when looked at (i.e., examined, moused-over, right clicked, etc), give a descriptive text which either hints at the above uses or just flat out explains it.

Now, when I get back to town, the local blacksmith isn’t interested in the heebyjeeby liver at all. He’s not interested in the horn, either. There’s even a pretty good chance he’s not interested in the teeth (unless he happens to make/sell arrows). No, he passes on it all.

However, when you wander by the local butcher shop, that liver nets you a cool 50 silver, and the horn manages to bring in a nice 2 shiny gold pieces down at the apothecary’s shop. Try selling the teeth to bowyer or hunter and you might get different prices.

The idea isn’t to just hand over X coin for Y product no matter which vendor you speak to. The idea is to build a metagame based on vendor selling, which could even result in players who know where the really good prices are (or who have worked faction up to get even better prices) going out in the world offering to buy up raw materials direct from other players at a lower price (to still make a profit at the appropriate vendors).

In other words, smart players who learn the local econonmies are rewarded more than average players, you keep an immersive time/space sink in the game, and the game makes more sense.

Here’s a different angle to the idea: have the potions only exist on apothecaries as players provide the ingredients necessary. If no one’s turning in horns, or if players are buying up the potions quickly, then the potions increase in cost.

To further add a layer of immersive complexity, restrict NPC merchants/crafters to certain levels of quality on products. These are retailers, not necessarily master level crafters (much as city guards aren’t master level adventurers).

Have these lower quality items as supplies or fodder that can be used as a base for more refined, higher quality goods by PC crafters.

In this example, heebyjeeby horns can be sold to NPC apothecaries. The apothecary sells “heebyjeeby horn poultices” which sell for a base of 1 gold each. Turning in more horns reduces the price of the poultices for you (think of it as a suppliers discount). Eventually, you work the price down to half a gold per poultice.

These poultices would be useful, but not nearly as useful as “Refined Detoxifying Agents”, which can be made from several different methods, including (you guessed it), heebyjeeby horn poultices.

I think that this idea has some good merits to it, and it certainly touches on several issues close to my heart.  I made fortunes in old Everquest just by “playing the markets”, and indeed I felt that working the Bazaar was oftentimes more fun than adventuring.