Are You a MMO Fan or an Apologist?

By now, few would argue that Age of Conan has a bright future. There are incredibly detailed reasons why AoC fell on its back and didn't get up -- if indeed it was ever standing up in the first place -- but I also want to use it as an example of what happens when fans go bad.

But first, a story. It's called Don't Let the Reading of the Forums Get You Down after an eloquently titled post on the official AoC forums by a Funcom developer.

It starts like this:

Athelan (FC dev): "...Currently the forums tend to be a very bad snapshot of the game community as a whole. Especially during a turbulent time like an MMO launch, people are far more likely to go and vocalize negative opinions then they are positive ones..."

That this is coming from a developer in response to forums full of negative criticism about a game that has streams of problems says more about Funcom and the state of Age of Conan than any review or blog post ever could, but that's not why I bring it up. Let's look at the fan responses, which start with a bunch of "Well said!" posts, intermingled with "Well said, but can you fix A and B?", before moving onto people saying they like the game, but not Funcom:

"The forums don't "have me down". I am "down", though, and the reason is Funcom's general attitude towards paying customers that have complaints about Funcom's practices, particularly in relation to launch."

Which prompts this:

"Dude, they are trying to get stuff going. You get a free firsts month anyways. So whats the big deal?"

And then this:

"They have their hands full. The world doesnt revolve around you."

Then this:

"if you arent happy then take the game back. you dont deserve to play it if you cant pay the price of a little patience"

There are 40 more pages of this stuff, but we can stop here. The point I'm trying to make is that there are two types of people who like MMOs, and like a particular type of MMO, and the term 'fanboy' isn't specific enough. Instead, i'll break them down into two types: the Fan and the Apologist. One is helpful, the other is poison. Here's a rundown, with some pop-psychology thrown in.

The Fan

This guy or girl likes a game more than the average player. They talk about it to non-players, and even non-gamers, they're fairly forgiving, they identify with other players, they probably paid cash for the game and will buy the expansion, and if they can, they'll probably mod it. They hold the developers to close scrutiny, and they hate it when something changes too dramatically, or doesn't get fixed. In the end, a good Fan will balance praise and feedback (the carrot) with the threat of leaving (the stick), and they're driven by the desire to make their favourite game even better.

Fans are massively important to developers, so long as they know how to keep them. Those developers that do attract Fans will have a captive audience of paying customers -- not pirates -- that provide free, and hopefully constructive, advice.

The Apologist

These gamers share a lot of characteristics with the Fan, but differ on a few points. First, they have a twisted view of the developer-player relationship, where they identify closely with the developers. They feel attached to them -- even indebted to them -- most likely because they lack other sorts of attachment, and they'll reply quickly and positively to every official post.

They're ultra conservative about the state of the game, and they place enormous faith in the wisdom and work ethic of its creators. They'll excuse clearly broken parts of the game as 'design decisions' and they see criticism as a personal attack on the developer -- and thus themselves -- and consequently respond defensively. It's a black and white world for the Apologist and you're either with him or against him.

They're trolls, but not in the traditional sense. They tend to lurk on the official forums, and they'll pounce when someone makes a criticism. In fact, in the twisted mind of the Apologist, the critic is the troll. The critic's coming in to their lair and starting trouble. That's why they'll tell the critic to fuck off or, as in the example above, say they're not "deserving" in some way. Ultimately, they have no overt desire to see the game get better, or if they do, they think it will come from the genius and hard work of the developer, not an ungrateful troll.

Nice Clothes, Boss

But most importantly, the Apologist is bad for developers. Sycophants are always bad, but they exist because people like to have them around, and it's counterintuitive to reinforce behaviour that criticises your actions, and then punish behaviour that praises you. But this is how good business are run, and the more Apologists you have, the harder it is to figure out what to do next.

The take home message for developers is obvious: get rid of the Apologists. The first step is to create an environment that supports fans. For example, don't be an apologist yourself. Take responsibility, don't lie or tell half-truths about the state of the game, just be honest. Fans will respect you for it, and it doesn't leave room for Apologists to come in and... apologise. You could also create incentives for fans to make suggestions, like putting their name in a changelog, awarding subscriptions, and so on.

Next, identify the Apologists and squash them. If you see someone replying to a criticism that excuses or apologises for you, jump in and say something using your own words -- Apologists like to think they can speak for you, but don't let them. And if someone tells a critic they aren't worthy of the game, jump on them, or again, reply in your own words. This is the equivalent to someone, anyone, telling a potential customer to go away, and you shouldn't let that happen.

I wouldn't make the call that Apologists solely brought down AoC, but at a time when Funcom needed good, honest feedback, we had a large collective of people praising the emperor's shiny new breastplate. Worse, those that did complain were left with the impression that AoC was fine (it wasn't) and that everything was going to be okay (it wasn't), implying that the problem was with the critic, rather than the game. Who wants to hang around in such a bizarre environment? No wonder people left the game in droves. Mythic, and anyone else about to pop out a MMO right now, would do well to learn from this.