Collective Amnesia

My grandmother used to say "to move house three times is as good as a fire."  She meant it in the sense of getting rid of the detritus that accumulates as we move through life.   I doubt she meant to include the virtual realms, but perhaps she should have...

...The February 3 Boston Globe reports that the Star Trek franchise is going off the air in May, it quotes Ron Moore, author of a number of the screenplays (emphasis mine):

'The franchise is a strong idea. The character concepts are great. It just isn't being written in a fashion that is grabbing the audience anymore," he said. ''In some ways, the continuity of the show is starting to work against it. There is such a complete universe with so many characters that it's a bit daunting for new audiences.

Should virtual worlds be permanent places where new content can be poured in from time to time to appease the old timers.  Perhaps a bit of fresh paint (e.g. reconfiguration of zones) to help with nostalgia and cirulation.  What about the  newbies - do they find the social network and memory stitched together by the old timers a deterrent?  Do they demand a reset and a level playing field?

The lesson in slow-motion from the Star Trek experience might just be that sometimes even a good franchise, a proven idea, and an enduring world, needs to rest fallow, if only for a while, once in a while.  Burning down the house for the sake of a new start, a fresh tomorrow.

Comments

[Jefferson Washburn]

1.

In its early days, Dark Sun Online used to periodically do player wipes. There was always a lot of complaining about this from existing players, but after the wipes many new players would join, and many players who had left the game would come back. Overall the population in-game grew tremedously after wipes. I'm not sure if this would work as well with most games today however, as the time invested to get to high level is much greater, so a character wipe might drive more current players away than Dark Sun's wipes did.

[David Reim]

2.

A few decades ago I used to be in a play-by-mail game that had about a two year game length. The interesting thing though (other than the fact that I was frigg'n playing by mail!), was that every month they would kick off a new game, from scratch, often with some major or minor rule adjustment. This allowed you to join a game when everyone was at the same level and use your latest knowledge and skill to start the thrill of the chase again. Therefore the company always had about 24 games in progress and many people played in more than one. I’ve never been quite sure why mmogs don’t do more of this: “New shard opening in 11 days. No Orcs this time!”

[Benjamin Gimpert]

3.

The very successful, paper role-playing game Vampire: The Masquerade is undergoing a simliar wipe. (See "http://www.white-wolf.com/vampire/index.php?line=intro") It seems a similar scenario occured -- the previous world got too big, too convoluted, too outdated ("punk"). An apocalyptic storyline (quite literally) destroyed the world, and now a new set of parallel games is being published.

[Randal]

4.

Marvel comics have tried to do this many times with their universe and failed each time up until the "Ultimate" line which seems to have finally gelled with new readers.

[Nick Douglas]

5.

Marvel and DC ran a house-cleaning miniseries called "Crisis of Infinite Earths." The biggest event in mainstream action comics, "Crisis" killed off longstanding characters, reintroduced others, and shifted around the whole continuity.

Consider also the possibility of subletting part of a universe. DC, for example, lets its Vertigo line eschew continuity. This freedom allowed Neil Gaiman's "Sandman" series to flourish and become one of DC's best-selling titles -- a decade later, the collections are still healthy sellers.

Maybe Rodenberry's universe could spin off some more adventurous titles that play with the world more freely.

[Dan S]

6.

ATITD has this built it. I like wipes, as long as they aren't TOO common.

I'd like to see a model where the biggies staggered the launch of servers. I like a tabula rasa enough that I often start new characters on fresh servers, and I certainly try out new games (a different level of "fresh"), so there would be a special appeal to starting with an extensive pool of experience in a fresh world with at least mostly the same rules. It would keep me playing a game I might be stale on and ready to move on from.

An example, SWG is completely revamping combat. Some of us will love it, a lot will hate it. (I know it would be a maintenance burden but...) it would be interesting to have the option to stay in the existing system, or start over in a new server with the new system. I don't just mean a new character (which is possible now), I mean in a world where everyone starts back at zero and we all learn to deal with the new "rules" as we are also devloping characters again.

[Richard Bartle]

7.

So, let's say that someone creates a large-scale virtual world with a 2-year reset. After 2 years, the database is wiped and everything is reinitialised. Newbies are accommodated by having new shards starting up in a staggered fashion.

What would this do to the eBay market for goods and characters?

Richard

[weasel]

8.

Very little.

Ebaying is predicated on those willing to pay real money for goods of already-quite-precarious value. Mudflation already makes last week's ebay'd gold worth almost nothing in a few months time. So to say that last week's ebay'd gold will simply not exist in a year - that's not much of a difference.

[Richard Bartle]

9.

Weasel>So to say that last week's ebay'd gold will simply not exist in a year - that's not much of a difference

What if it were characters rather than gold? There would almost certainly be screams from the player base to allow their characters to transfer to new servers when the old one was about to be closed down, and I can easily envisage companies caving in over such demands ("it's permanent death!").

I can also see that if they didn't cave in, players would start muttering about taking the company to court to get them either to effect a transfer or keep the old server running "because otherwise you're destroying my property".

Richard

[Darniaq]

10.

I think a fair amount of game veterans might favor a 2-year wipe. It would need to be packaged in a way that doesn't ignore their prior achievements though. That could be as simple as keeping the old servers live but forever unchanging once new servers are launched and rewarding (as per Richard's "loss of property" point). However, the company could also incentify adoption of the new server by rewarding those who voluntarily delete their old world characters.

There'd need to be enough of a "new" experience to entice both existing players who know the game to stick around and bring back previous players who did. Re-experiencing the same game is already boring unless someone can bypass "teh suk".

What would this do to the eBay market for goods and characters?

I think that depends on the new version of the game. If the new version is the same as the old one, then veterans who know the tricks will have advantage over the newbs compelled to check out the "new" game. If the new version is marginally or significantly different, then it's like any new game that rewards the power achievers who can create marketable characters or goods listings first.

[Nick Douglas]

11.

A game that wipes in two years should have a plot and resolution. When you finish a novel, you're usually satisfied with the characters' ending points.

Note that a sequel "resets" the characters in a book or movie. In "The Empire Strikes Back," characters that were at Resolution State at "A New Hope"'s end were reset to Opening Conflict State. Their situation was adapted, and the achievements of the first film were adjusted or made irrelevant to the new danger.

To carry over user stats is to waste a chance to redefine the game and allow new players a fair shot. Make old stats irrelevant to the new game, leaving only slight benefits to pacify them. If each game's plot is satisfying, when players finish a game, they'll be ready for a new challenge in the next.

[Richard Bartle]

12.

Darniaq>I think a fair amount of game veterans might favor a 2-year wipe. It would need to be packaged in a way that doesn't ignore their prior achievements though.

In that case, what would be the point of a wipe?

Richard

[magicback]

13.

Richard> In that case, what would be the point of a wipe?

Skipping the newbie zone and starting with a mid-career character would be a possible option :)

[AFFA]

14.

Personally, I'd rather have a statue in my honor or a "child" with some special powers than a static character that can advance no further. Given the current market, though, I expect this is another minority opinion.

[Lee Delarm]

15.

A long long time ago, Anarchy Online said the world and storyline would last 4 years. I haven't heard anything about it since release but maybe they're still kicking this idea around somewhere...

[Darniaq]

16.

Richard Bartle wrote: In that case, what would be the point of a wipe?

I didn't mention how to package it :)

The game's existing playerbase would need a reason to stick around after a wipe. They won't just want to repeat the same game. Longtime veterans may roll on a completely new server, to try and get back some of that "new car smell" they've long since forgotten. But I don't know that enough players are like that to justify wiping an entire game every two years.

Nick's earlier example implies a reset I don't entirely agree with. While Luke and Han were previously heroes in ANH and then just combatants again, ESB established that Yavin was just a single battle, not the war itself (though if the money wasn't gotten to make ESB, then it would have been that war ;) ). Both of them took their skills and contacts forward to Hoth though. Luke had the Force to help with the Wompa and AT-AT, and Han was established as a leader among men. Both learned these in the first movie.

I feel that could be translated to ingame benefits between wipes. Perhaps players are allowed to take forward with them a family heirloom (item based game) or a genetic memory that provides a unique skill (skills-based game). Maybe they are part of a family lineage within the same house. None of these would allow the player to decimate any content after the wipe, but it would be a point of distinction that would separate the game newbies from the veterans who were there during prior epochs of the game.

[douglast]

17.

Isn't this exactly what happens though in the MMOG world? If you think of the MMOG universe as encompasing all the games that come (and go), there are a series of shifts as player bases jump to the Next Big Thing. (Richard's book does a good job of spelling that process out).

So, in some ways City of Heroes was a wipe for SWG and WoW was a wipe for SWG. (At least that is one of he progression I saw happening, undoubtedly there were others).

Granted this isn't all players, but it seems that there is an impulse among hardcore gamers to do precisely that. While there is significant carry over in terms of guilds, friends, culture, etc., the characters are new.

Isn't this what game companies already do with their own game sequels?

d

[Richard Bartle]

18.

magicback>Skipping the newbie zone and starting with a mid-career character would be a possible option

Why does that need a wipe? You already skipped the newbie zone in your current game.

A wipe means you have to start afresh. That's its attraction. If you don't start afresh, what good is a wipe?

Richard

[Richard Bartle]

19.

Darniaq>The game's existing playerbase would need a reason to stick around after a wipe. They won't just want to repeat the same game.

Why not? They missed out on content before because they were too high a level to waste time on it, or because they were the wrong class, or the wrong race, or didn't know about it.

>Longtime veterans may roll on a completely new server, to try and get back some of that "new car smell" they've long since forgotten. But I don't know that enough players are like that to justify wiping an entire game every two years.

After 2 years, aren't they becoming "long term veterans"?

OK, make it 4 years.

>Perhaps players are allowed to take forward with them a family heirloom (item based game) or a genetic memory that provides a unique skill (skills-based game).

Why? They're taking themselves through. They are the "genetic memory".

Richard

[Darniaq]

20.

I should mention that when I look at this concept, I'm mostly considering how it'd need to be sold to the players. I'm also specifically focusing on MMORPGs due to the commercial implications. I do agree that prediodic wipes can re-introduce a freshness to a world, level a previously nigh unbalanced playing field, and attract back players who may have been disgruntled by that. But I also feel it's a very big risk for larger games to take for somewhat abstract benefits.

In the two-year model, are we talking about gamers who stick with the game for two years solid, or those who left but can be enticed back with a fresh new world where everyone is equal again? A world wipe would have different implications depending.

• In my opinion, the former group, the "dedicated veterans", would rightly be put out by having their two years of collective experience and treasures wiped. Their first question would be "why?", followed soon by "what's in it for me?"
  
• Conversely, the latter group, the "newbies", would be attracted by not having to worry about being a lowbie in a highbie land, and maybe no longer being kept from content they were previously kept from experience.

Assuming the game itself is largely unchanged (except for bug/balance and some feature-level new content), I feel a Wipe would be more enticing to the latter group, while the former would need some incentive to play the same game again.

The Dedicated Veterans have their knowledge and experience to help rifle through the same game they previously experienced. However, over a two year period, they probably have achieved the endgame a few times already, and as different Races and Classes. If the game remains largely unchanged, what would drive them to be on top of the game again? A new round of newbies to lord over? While that may sound blunt, I am seriously wondering, because based just on anecdotal experiences, this would be compelling enough on its own to some.

I consider Wipes in the same vein as Permadeath: It's a hard concept to sell, but I do think its sellable. The game just needs to make them relevant to the experience though, rather than punitive. I can't imagine how quickly the SOE game forums would melt if they did periodic wipes in EQlive or SWG :) Players don't want to repeat an experience just because they're forced to.

[Jefferson Washburn]

21.

There certainly seem to be both advantages and disadvantages to character wipes. What about just adding a brand new server, with no transfers allowed? Does this yield the best of both worlds? Old players would be able to hang on to their characters, while newer players, or older players who just want a truely fresh start could enter the new server. Does everyone get what they want? Or am I missing something here?

[Richard Bartle]

22.

Jefferson Washburn>What about just adding a brand new server, with no transfers allowed? Does this yield the best of both worlds?

Almost, yes. Old servers would eventually have to be closed down, though, because they had so few players; at this point, the arguments to transfer characters from the old server to a new server becomes harder to resist. If they knew from the beginning that this server would be wiped in 2010, they couldn't count on much sympathy.

Richard