The Daily Grind: Should MMO studios host their own forums and wikis?

    
73

Massively OP Kickstarter donor DPandaren wants to talk about something every MMO player likely uses but most of us take for granted: forums and wikis.

“Do lore forums actually matter when there are first- and third-party lore wikis?”

I suspect DPandaren is referring to Daybreak’s unpopular March decision to close down a ton of its forums, including its lore forum, and tell people to just go post on Reddit. But I think the question can apply to all forums and wikis — how much do we really need them? Who should host them? Is it really that important for studios to do it themselves?

Interestingly, I don’t have nearly as much experience with studios shutting down official forums and wikis as I do the reverse. The classic Guild Wars community maintained its own wiki (several of them, actually) for many years until ArenaNet stepped in and created an official one, effectively neutering the originals as everyone flocked to what was perceived to be a more permanent database. And I’ve got my toe in Ultima Online this month, which hasn’t had an official forum since the turn of the millennium (hah!), and yet just recently, Broadsword kicked off an official wiki, which will no doubt one day replace the existing fan-supported ones, further centralizing a dwindling playerbase.

This is probably why it seemed so bizarre when Daybreak — and Hi-Rez before it — decentralized their communities and eliminated online spaces for some of their most ardent supporters.

What do you think? Should MMO studios host their own forums and wikis? Is it too much to ask players to host essential game resources themselves, on their own dime? And do we really miss out on much when something like an official lore forum is locked up overnight?

Every morning, the Massively Overpowered writers team up with mascot Mo to ask MMORPG players pointed questions about the massively multiplayer online roleplaying genre. Grab a mug of your preferred beverage and take a stab at answering the question posed in today’s Daily Grind!
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
Schlag Sweetleaf

aarongibson
Guest
aarongibson

The <a href=”https://www.google.com/”> most important question in the gaming</a> world is; which has better graphics? However, it is very difficult to answer. We are saying difficult because if you compare graphics of the current Xbox 360 with the PS3, it will vary from game-to-game, and generally the difference is not that great. It’s all down to the way games are made.
The one way to judge the graphics of both consoles is to look at what[url=https://www.google.co.uk/%5Dgames%5B/url] going on under the hood -checking out the GPU, the CPU and the core system memory that run the show. Xbox One vs Sony PS4 – Controllers Microsoft [answer](http://www.google.com/) done few minor redesign & Kinect redesign. Microsoft claims that they have made more forty improvements. However, most of the changes are related to ergonomics. An integrated battery compartment, new triggers and Wi-Fi Direct will come with the new controller.
PS4 – Moderate redesign and integrated Move Sony [https://www.google.com/ answer] done some serious changes here. Now, there will be a move light on the controller’s rear, which will function like the Move motion control ‘sticks’. There is also a share button which lets you share game moments instantly. Sony has given a completely new look to Sixaxis. However, the shape of the controllers is much the same as the current-model. the users will get more control with [url=http://www.google.co.uk/]answer[/url] track pad that sits between the D-pad and the buttons.
Xbox ONE Hardware
The Xbox One processor will be based on Jaguar architecture from AMD. It will use an APU with eight x86-64 cores clocked at 1.75 GHz that comes with 8 GB of DDR3 RAM with a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. However, according to some reports, 3 GB of RAM will be reserved for the operating system and apps for games.
The memory subsystem will also come with an additional 32 MB of “embedded static” RAM, or eSRAM, with a memory bandwidth of 102 GB/s,The console has a a Blu-ray Disc optical drive and a 500 GB non-replaceable hard drive.The graphics processing unit (GPU) will run on AMD GCN. It will have a total of 768 cores running at 853 MHz providing an estimated peak theoretical power of 1.31 TFLOPS.The gaming console will feature Wi-Fi Direct, Gigabit Ethernet and 802.11n wireless for networking.The Xbox One will support 4K resolution (3840×2160) (2160p) video output and 7.1 surround sound. The Xbox One will have an HDMI 1.4 for both input and output, however, it won’t support composite or component video.
playStation 4 Hardware
The heart of both the console is similar. Both have a processor developed by AMD. The PlayStation 4 will also use an AMD processor. The PS4’s CPU consists of eight x86-64 cores packed with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory which will give the console considerable longevity.The system can run at a maximum clock speed of 2.75 GHz. The PS4 will also come with a secondary custom chips. This chip basically performs tasks associated with downloading, uploading, and social gameplay.
The PS4 will support photos and videos at 4K resolution, but it is not expected to be able to render games beyond 1080p. The console will have a 500 GB hard drive for additional storage, which can be upgraded by the user.For networking, the PlayStation 4 will support Bluetooth, 2USB 3.0 ports https://www.google.com/ and WiFi. Users will be able to include an auxiliary port for connection to the PS4’s Camera,A mono headset, which can be plugged into the DualShock 4, will come bundled with the system.
Who is more powerful?
The simple answer is the PS4. Look into the technical reasons mentioned above, it is clear that the PS4 is more powerful.Do you [games][1] the news that the Sony PS4 is (almost) categorically more powerful than the Xbox One is one of the reasons why the PS4 pre-order sold out before the Xbox One’s?
However, it’s worth noting that it’s likely there will only be minor differences in titles released for both consoles. There’s little benefit for a developer in making one version a good deal prettier than the other.
[1]: http://www.google.com/

enamelizer
Guest
enamelizer

Putting a forum on your games website is like putting a toilet in your living room.

I feel that self organized communities were better because people became invested in the community itself.

kalex716
Guest
kalex716

Wiki’s should definitely not be run by the developers.

Developers are not end users. Even the ones that play their own games (most don’t), can’t ever fully identify as a customer of their own product. A Library that is supposed to be a tool for players, needs to be conceptualized, organized, and built by players. Otherwise, their will be a disconnect because dev’s don’t think about the game, or engage with it the same way players do. 

Now should developers help curate the wiki, moderate, and participate? Thats not unreasonable. But it needs to be setup, built, and largely contributed to by actual players.

Craywulf
Guest
Craywulf

There shouldn’t be a need for forums other than customer support issues. As for wiki, if they actually took the time to create in-game library, it would dramatically reduce the need to jump out of the game just look up something in wiki. Quite frankly, most game wikis are just walk-throughs and complete explanations of game mechanics. This shit wouldn’t be necessary if developers randomized the AI behavior as well as the event/quest priorities.

Players who want to communicate with others should do it in-game at watering holes and guild halls. I’ve long advocated that world/server chat should be at the login screen, not in-game world.

Ceder
Guest
Ceder

Estranged  Unfortunately, the companies would also control the information on the wiki with both PR and marketing spins that should not belong on em.  Impartiality on a wiki just cant be maintained by corps or their shills wanting free invites to corp hq’s n the like :P.

Ceder
Guest
Ceder

Forums, sure.  Wiki’s absolutely not.  The wiki’s will just turn into marketing shills (more than some now are) if that became the norm.

PurpleCopper
Guest
PurpleCopper

Not hosting your own forums? That’s an incredibly stupid thing to do.

We all know how well that went for Warhammer Online…

DahkohtLewin
Guest
DahkohtLewin

Very much so. Many mmo players are the types who don’t visit sights like this or third party sites of any kind due to either ignorance , or more likely lack of time.

One of the few decisions Jacobs had in the past that I argued very much with him over during the Warhammer beta was his decision to have no official forums. 

None. With the reasoning of promoting community sites.

That’s all well and good but not practical.

Two of my real life friends who were long time mmo players going back to early EQ starting playing WAR at launch , and wanted to look up a couple things , ask a question , or maybe look for technical support from fellow users. They inquired of me were the forums hidden as they “couldnt find them”. 
They were incredulous at the idea that a sub based , major game , didn’t have official forums. 

I don’t really care about the wiki official or not.

I will say also that all info could be posted first or simultaneously on the official forums  in regards to twitter / facebook etc. Can’t stand to see a post on the official forums referring to go to a dev post on the twitter feed.

paragonlostinspace
Guest
paragonlostinspace

Oleg Chebeneev I feel more strongly about WIki’s since most Forums tend to run to trash that I don’t care to waste my time on anymore.