Guild Wars developer criticizes XBL business model
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Feb 24th 2006 at 3:30PM }
Jeff Strain, co-founder of
ArenaNet and Guild Wars creator, said that Microsoft's Xbox Live business model would have to change in order
to attract MMO developers. Strain criticized the XBL system for not providing MMO operators with the necessary ability
to form close relationships with the players and communities associated with their games. Without handing the customer
relationship back to the publisher/developer, Strain believes that Microsoft will be unable to successfully tap the MMO
market.Strain's comments follow the announcement that NCsoft, the publisher of Guild Wars, has no plans to develop titles for the Xbox 360, despite already working on projects for other next-gen consoles.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mandarin @ Feb 24th 2006 3:43PM
Xbox is pretty much limited to FFXI online now.. Eww
Sense @ Feb 24th 2006 3:46PM
WTF?
Bungie developed a very strong community around it's gamers through Xbox Live. As a matter of fact it maintains some very impressive stat tracking. And this works just fine over XBL. Does this guy think that people with "broadband required" XBL don't have access to NCSoft.com?
Or does he mean that people who pay $50 bucks a year for Live Gold might not want to pay monthly for an MMO?
Besides, I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft would be able to lend help to developers who want to maintain the relationship with customers. Microsoft is pretty good at getting developers the tools they need.
I mean, that's the slogan right?
"Developers! Developers! Developers!...(ad nauseum)"
LunarDuality @ Feb 24th 2006 3:53PM
I second the WTF. I mean it's got FFXI and Marvel is coming out with one in the next year or so.
So, what exactly is the problem? You think MS isn't interested in the monthly fee model of MMOs? You think MS doesn't like to "build community"?
I mean, I'd like him to break down his argument more because at this point it seems pretty baseless.
m3mnoch @ Feb 24th 2006 3:58PM
that has to be the dumbest argument i've ever heard.
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/PlayerStats.aspx?player=m3mnoch
you don't think bungie has a deep relationship with their customers? how many halo players say "microsoft makes halo" vs. how many say "bungie makes halo?"
you would think the dork would be excited about xbl hosting an mmo like guild wars. it fits perfectly within their episodic-content business model.
hell. they'd even get to lift the infrastructure burden a bit as they leaned on xbox live.
this just sounds like the whining of a loser getting soundly thrashed by blizzard.
guess what jeff. you're not 'making it up in volume.' subscription fees don't seem to be an impediment to sales. your low margin/high sales tactic just isn't working.
some advice: it'd work if you targeted casual gamers for your mmo -- not the hardcore. hardcores don't care about monthly fees. maybe, just maybe it's about accessibility, not short-circuiting user base growth isses by dropping subscription fees.
m3mnmoch.
Scott @ Feb 24th 2006 3:59PM
Strain is basically saying that he doesn't want to change the current business model he is using so that he can get on Live. He wants MS to adapt its business model to what he is doing instead of trying to find some middle ground.
Raskawa @ Feb 24th 2006 4:02PM
Agreed with the WTF's... this is stupid of NCSoft.. for their fans and games XBL would be perfect. I dig NCSoft games, but will play whatever the best MMO is on the Xbox360 when they start rolling out.. and I won't pay for more than one MMO at a time, so they are going to miss out.
copa @ Feb 24th 2006 4:24PM
I don't think Strain is being a total 'tard about this. His company has built a lot of infrastructure around managing user accounts and player data. It puts him in an awkward position to say, "You can't have access to this data anymore, and if you want to cross-sell additional content to your users, you have to go through Microsoft to do it, and Microsoft gets a cut."
On the other hand, I don't think Strain is being realistic, either. I've tried the set-up where the publisher maintains the online accounts separately, and it sucks. Last year, I had to maintain separate usernames and passwords for the PS2 Online and EA Sports, and negoiate a different set of privacy policies and spam rules for each one. And that was just for a single game. I'm not doing that for every game I purchase on the Xbox 360.
What is everyone's number one complaint about FFXI? The freaking account setup at the beginning. That's what you get when you have to maneuver through Square's crappy online management / billing infrastructure separate from Microsoft's. If it was Live-Integrated, you would just stick in your disc, click yes to start monthly billing, and begin playing.
Jesse @ Feb 24th 2006 4:27PM
so does this mean they are supporting rev? they say they are making games for next gen console"S" but not 360.. so that leaves 2 consoles left. :P
Exo @ Feb 24th 2006 4:29PM
WTF at all you guys saying WTF.
They dont want to have to reconstruct how the game works for it to work with XBL. Its simple to understand. IF you even read they say they want to work on other consoles. Not to mention A game like guild wars would work horribly on a console. You need a mouse and keyboard to play. a controller simply does not have enough buttons.
FFXI is jumping on 360 cause they want another platform to bring in new players to their failing MMO.
And if you people are forgetting its not the subscribtion thats a problerm, because you dont need to have gold membershp to play MMOs.
Id rather see good games still made for PC rather then them getting shitty console ports that dont play nearly as well.
"this just sounds like the whining of a loser getting soundly thrashed by blizzard."
what does that have to do with anything retard, Bilizzard isnt making a 360 MMO eitehr
batman @ Feb 24th 2006 4:33PM
all he saying is: "wah! we don't want to comprimise and meet in the middle! we want to do it our own way!"
definetly a WTF, if there ever was one.
Babylonian @ Feb 24th 2006 4:37PM
Seriously, this guy is pretty far off the mark. The lack of developer interaction and responsibility is what makes XBL great. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
Babylonian @ Feb 24th 2006 4:39PM
Seriously, this guy is pretty far off the mark. The lack of developer interaction and responsibility is what makes XBL great. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
batman @ Feb 24th 2006 4:44PM
m3noch said it best: Halo 2, the BIGGEST game on the Xbox franchise completly destroys his enntire premise about not having a close relationship tween devs, pubs, and gamers.
Exo:
"WTF at all you guys saying WTF.
They dont want to have to reconstruct how the game works for it to work with XBL. Its simple to understand. IF you even read they say they want to work on other consoles. Not to mention A game like guild wars would work horribly on a console. You need a mouse and keyboard to play. a controller simply does not have enough buttons."
Not a single person (Strain included) said anything about porting anything anywhere, i have no idea why you brought that up. What we are saying WTF to is his foolish insistence that XBL fundamentally separates the three groups mentioned above.
That is simply not true, what XBL fundamentally separates is the player from the month-2-month fee, as well as the dev and pub from their existing online system. Nothing more, nothing less. XBL is not fundmentally flawed, it simply does things differently than Strain wants to.
batman @ Feb 24th 2006 4:52PM
oh and exo, you need gold to play online multiplayer don't you? isn't the 2nd M in MMORPG for "multiplayer"? and isn't the O for "online"?
dsub @ Feb 24th 2006 4:53PM
this is like saying Windows prevents developer's from creating a close relationship and community with it's gamers. Yet guild wars is on PC...hmm...
They can always follow in Square's footsteps and not require XBOX live! gold but setup there own servers and subscription plans. If you do it like that the environment is no different than the developer controlled model that PC's and PS2 use.
Sol @ Feb 24th 2006 5:11PM
I agree with the WTFs - XBL is a way for the developers to worry less about the network and online aspects of a title by having a unified front and having Microsoft(and their deep as hell pockets) to foot the bill of costs of servers and such. So rather than build upon the tools that they(NCSoft) have at hand they would rather go the PS2/EA online route - huh?
Haven't most of the developers been saying how much games are gonna cost in the new generation? Wouldn't XBL or a comparable unified servive from Sony or Nintendo keep those costs down?
Isn't episodic content a buzz word they are always throwing around and sownloadable content - 2 very big parts of what microsoft push for the 360?
So unless microsoft is killing developers on the back end of XBL - he's either just whining or playing nice with Sony(the only next gen system that I've read their supporting) - who's supposed XBL killer(PS HUB?!?!?) is still in the works, and still has a couple of years to go to catch up with XBL
Gotta agree with Exo on the whole FF XI is just throwing MS a bone,.,.,it has almost the same exact long ass hell install as it does on the PC and PS2? Wha? Oooo we ge a square title!! I would have rathered a hi def port of PSOne's Bushido Blade 2
Oh, last I heard, Blizzard & MS have some kind of annoucement for E3(WOW on 360? maybe - my money's on STarcraft Ghost not coming out on the old XBOX, it's delayed again and gonna be on the 360 for early '07
m3mnoch @ Feb 24th 2006 5:13PM
"what does that have to do with anything retard, Bilizzard isnt making a 360 MMO eitehr"
funny. i don't remember mentioning they were. you know. come to think about it, i don't remember blizzard saying anything about the business model for xbl being terrible for an mmo either.
golly, wally. that's weird.
here's something else that's weird. the guild wars episodic business model is a perfect fit with xbox live but he's saying no. for example this doozy of a quote:
"Xbox Live, for example, their whole goal is to encourage people to go and buy games on the shelf, then there's an online component for it. But for us, when you buy it on the shelf, that's just the beginning of our relationship with you - and we want a direct connection with our customer so that we're always giving you new content, always supporting you directly."
[scribbling notes]
let's see....
xbox live: buy game on the shelf.
ncsoft: buy game on the shelf.
yep. check.
xbox live: an online relationship starts with an ongoing pipe of fresh content.
ncsoft: an online relationship starts with an ongoing pipe of fresh content.
yep. check.
xbox live: perfect for episodic content.
ncsoft: business model is about episodic content.
yep. check.
xbox live: offers best of breed server architecture for developers.
ncsoft: subsidize the hard cost of server architecture themselves.
yep. check.
[nodding prophetically]
um. last time i checked, that's what xbox live does -- constantly feed you new content. buying the game off the shelf is just the begining for microsoft too. maybe he's just afraid the easy nature of spending points (they're only points! not real money! woot!) will lead to some buyers remorse? i duuno.
if you ask me, looks like they are perfect. so, i have no idea what he's talking about and it sure as hell sounds like he doesn't either.
as to the whining, did you read the whole interview?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14931
it basically equates to: my silly contradicting business model isn't working so i'm going to take my ball and go home.
sounds like the whining of someone who got their ass handed to them to me.
m3mnoch.
batman @ Feb 24th 2006 5:16PM
pwned. straight pwned.
Cade @ Feb 24th 2006 5:17PM
Apparantly he's forgotten that Xbox Live silver allows you to access MMORPG's free of charge.
TiaMaster @ Feb 24th 2006 5:25PM
Um, how do these people get to a place where they are considered an authority on a business model?
I can't stand the fact that "being in the industry" can mean pretty much anything when it comes to video games.
I know they have to for journalism's sake, but its a shame Joystiq has to print what this guy said like its some profound remark on what things should or shouldn't be like. Especially when most everyone can see that he's basically a boob-head.
Superzapper2000 @ Feb 24th 2006 6:02PM
Maybe Mr Strain just doesn't like Microsoft .I heard that a few people might dislike them .It just a rumour though .
Nintendohaw @ Feb 24th 2006 6:36PM
we'll just ignore the fact that Guildwars isn't really an MMORPG. it's jsut an ORPG like diablo. Idiots always miscategorize this game
Zer0Her0 @ Feb 24th 2006 7:55PM
I was thinking HEY WAIT A MINUTE you guys are making a game for the 360, but a quick look at there site, and it does look like they are(already have?) pulled the plug on Auto Assault for the 360. Shame, looked like a decently fun game too. No signs of it being released. Oh well, don't need someone like this releasing games for the 360/Live
Exo @ Feb 24th 2006 8:16PM
@ batman, yes An MMO is a multiplayer game, but it also has ben anounced that game like FFXI dont require a gold membership to play.
Most games have multiplayer online as an extra, While MMO is only multiplayer online. Forcing people to pay for liev would just deter them. They would more likely just play it on pc instead and save their money.
Anything else you would like me to correct you on?
epobirs @ Feb 24th 2006 9:21PM
Translation: We are accustomed to owning our community end to end, and if a player goes to a different game it should only be a NCsoft title.
Imagine a big indoor mall where all of the stores have the same parent company and no matter what you buy the money all goes to the same place. This is how companies want their online offerings to work. EA was the perfect example. They wouldn't work within Xbox Live because they wanted people to live in their mall and not Micorosft's where the venues could be from any number of third parties as well as MS itself. It wasn't until Microsoft gave up its sports line that EA decided they could bear to give up absolute control of Xbox user's online experience in favor of the increased customer base for their products. In EA's defense, they had a stunning amount of money invested in their online infrastructure but it took them a while to appreciate they cannot own everything unless they produce their own console. EA has come close to doing that on more than one occasion but ultimately shied away from the great risk of simultaneously having a failed platform while alienating the owners of the existing platforms that make up nearly all of their revenue.
Viable game consoles require immense investment in capital and effort. Publishers wishing to benefit from that have give up the notion that the platform owner's influence, both positive and negative, ends at the network port. If a publisher has a highly addictive MMORPG they have to consider the perspective of the platform owner. They make their money from software sales. If a single game is played to the exclusion of all else for months on end, a common MMORPG situation, it isn't a favorable condition for the console maker unless it is their game or they're getting a piece of the subscription action from the publisher.
Issues like controllers are trivialities. Off the shelf USB devices cover the issue in one fell swoop. The real sticking point for subsription driven games on consoles is an innate conflict with the console business model. Without compromise everybody, platform owers, publishers, and gamers, lose out.
batman @ Feb 24th 2006 10:00PM
yes, the fact that they haven't said that EVERY MMORPG will not require a gold membership. Only FFXI.
Kyle Weierbach @ Feb 25th 2006 12:53AM
As an alpha tester for Guild Wars: Prophecies (aka Guild Wars) and Guild Wars: Factions I may be a little biased, but I feel I need to set a few things straight.
People should learn to stop pulling quotes out of context, and read the full interview.
Jeff said Xbox Live separates developers and customers because the content is basically static, and all support happens through Microsoft. Though some companies take a proactive role, like Bungie, most don't. Also Consider how readily would you be to completely redesign your game from the bottom up, so it would work with one platform.
Let me explain a little about how Guild Wars works to illustrate my point. When you play Guild Wars, your client is basically just an interface to send which buttons you've pushed and display the Guild Wars world. No actual game plays out on your computer. Whereas with games like Halo 1/2 the game is actually run by one of the participants' xbox.
Let's say you attempt to hack Guild wars, and change how fast you can run, the amount of gold you have, and your location in the world. The client may appear that you have succeeded, but the reality is these hacks will never work. That's not to say other server side bugs will never appear, but the difference is Arena.net can quickly detect and almost seamlessly patch their game.
Guild Wars doesn't have a monthly fees to play. So greedy bastards argument is out.
Guild Wars was designed to make extensive use of instances. This, in of itself, would make it an almost perfect console game. Although the interface, and game elements would have to be extensively redone to work with a control pad.
Finally I'd like to point out that Jeff isn't totally ruling out a console port in the interview, or trying to make Microsoft completely give up control. He's merely asking Microsoft to compromise on who's running the back end.
P.S. I'm not confirming or denying any possible future plans for Arena.net. I am not speaking for them, nor was I asked to do so. I'm merely clarifying what I believe Jeff Strain intended to say in the interview with gameindustry.biz. Nothing more, nothing less.
m3mnoch @ Feb 25th 2006 2:31AM
"People should learn to stop pulling quotes out of context, and read the full interview."
'people' meaning me, i'm assuming. tho, not sure how i was pulling quotes out of context. it's not like i pulled something like this: "from a technology standpoint, consoles are all about going to a store, buying a disc" and hollered that he didn't know consoles can now deliver software.
uh. no. i'm pretty sure i quoted an entire paragraph and then linked to the original, full article. not even the stub joystiq put up.
context included -- free of charge.
"Jeff said Xbox Live separates developers and customers because the content is basically static"
right. but... it's not. please read one of the million articles about how the marketplace and achievements and downloadables for xbox live are setting the standard.
um. no. not static. kinda my whole point.
"all support happens through Microsoft"
ah! good point. forgot that one. another financial burden microsoft is taking care of for developers so they don't have to waste resources on network troubleshooting, etc. thanks.
"Though some companies take a proactive role, like Bungie, most don't"
so... if ncsoft wanted to ignore their customers and give them over to microsoft they could? um. i thought they wanted to be involved. what your saying here is that they can if they want to?
um. okay. i think he said they want to. what's the problem again?
"Consider how readily would you be to completely redesign your game from the bottom up, so it would work with one platform"
welcome to multi-platform game programming.
think about games like gta that hit consoles, handhelds, phones, you name it. wow. it must really suck to be them. they have to redesign their entire game for one platform -- only multiple times!
"Let me explain a little about how Guild Wars works to illustrate my point"
good stuff for the rookies reading. i'm all good with client/server architecture. thanks.
"Let's say you attempt to hack Guild wars ... seamlessly patch their game."
it's called never trust the client. been around for-ev-er.
"greedy bastards argument is out"
amen. they are surely anything but. however, "angelic" and "smart" aren't necessarily mutually inclusive.
"Jeff isn't totally ruling out a console port"
never said he was. i'm taking issue with his pronouncement that xbl doesn't align itself with his business model. that's the part of the interview that's total, uneducated rubbish.
m3mnoch.
Kyle Weierbach @ Feb 25th 2006 3:09AM
I had a nice point for point rebuttal written up, but decided my efforts would be wasted. I will let Arena.net and Jeff Strain speak for themselves.
Rabid sensationalism of a story where there is none, shouldn't be rewarded.
Jeff @ Feb 25th 2006 7:01AM
"this just sounds like the whining of a loser getting soundly thrashed by blizzard."
thats such bullshit guild wars has been doing exceptionally well. Its hard enough for an mmo to hit 100,000 players let alone over 1 million like Guild Wars has, and I dont give a shit if WoW has 4.5 million users a million users is impressive.
m3mnoch @ Feb 25th 2006 11:45AM
"a million users is impressive"
yes it is. for a subscription model game. or for an offline game.
not... i repeat. not for a game that is subsidizing network costs and using a high volume/low margin sales model. the whole point of the episodic-no-subscription model is a large number of users. they are essentially trying to make up their small margins in volume.
not impressive. abysmal.
building a game targeted at hardcore users but basing your business model on mainstream users is one of the dumbest moves i've seen.
m3mnoch.
Shawn Oster @ Feb 25th 2006 12:36PM
This is one of the problems with trying to develop for multiple platforms, you get a lowest common denominator effect. I'd rather see a new MMO built with the 360, it's architecture and XBL in mind than a port of something that already exists on the PC.
If developers would embrace what XBL can do (a la Bungie) instead of trying to shoehorn their PC server network into XBL then you could have a pretty amazing game. Strain is simply saying in a different way that it's hard to go cross-platform while optimizing for each specific platform.
SG @ Feb 25th 2006 7:16PM
There is all this talk about how Guild Wars for some reason or another isn't very compatible with Xbox Live and how this point is keeping ArenaNet from developing anything for Xbox. Okay. Is Guild Wars the only title they ever plan on releasing?
SR @ Feb 28th 2006 5:21AM
We're forgetting the most important fact about this whole thing: Guild Wars is a horrible game. I, and everyone (everyone) I know that owns a copy of the game stopped playing long ago. I'm glad they don't like Xbox Live, NC Soft needs to stay very far away from the Xbox. NC Soft, and their 'instanced worlds' are going to ruin MMORPGs.
Jeff @ Mar 4th 2006 12:08AM
"not... i repeat. not for a game that is subsidizing network costs and using a high volume/low margin sales model. the whole point of the episodic-no-subscription model is a large number of users. they are essentially trying to make up their small margins in volume."
again more bs.
iatch2023 @ Mar 4th 2006 3:42PM
I think guild wars is a great game, there seems to be way too many games that come out that have to accomidate for xbox users anyway. I like some of the games I play to stay only available for PC, otherwise I'd have to go out and buy a big screen TV and an xbox, plus an xbox subscription or whatever else you need... needless to say, I don't have an xbox (or an SUV), nor care to own one, reminds me too much of being a little kid and playing pong or nintendo game systems, on the TV that everyone watches programs on. I'll give a thumbs up also for making the online play free, even though that does attract some of the undesirable users to the game. All in all, I think I bought a pretty good game, I'm happy with it. Also, if I have a problem in the game, I would rather gripe about it to the game developer and not xbox. I mean, isn't that the whole point there with what he was saying?
As for the guy that likes to take apart people's statements and add coomments afterwards, also adding comments to his own comments, like he loves the way he sounds... get a life dude, seriously. Unless maybe that's what you need to do in order to decipher things into your thick head, I don't know. You can take apart mine all you want, because I just won't care, thought I should post something positive on ONE of the games out there I found enjoyable for PC.
Jeff @ Mar 4th 2006 4:56PM
yah that's kinda what im getting at, guy seems to think he knows everything about the business so he spouts out lots of bs trying to sound smart. he acts like a million sales is something to scoff at, regardless of whatever it is.
ph and hey, looks like blizzard agrees with arenanet, ge golly. http://www.joystiq.com/2006/03/03/wow-360-aint-gonna-happen-says-blizzard/