What If MMOs And Other Online Story Games Had A Planned Lifespan?

If you’re on this site, it’s a pretty good bet that you’re playing some kind of live-service game. It might be an MMORPG, or a MOBA, or it could be a story-based gacha game. There are really plenty of options to choose from. But the one thing that remains true is that they’re online and, if they’re successful, long-running.

For games like MOBAs or shooters, this means updating mechanics, changing the meta, adding new modes… that kind of thing. There is a bit of narrative to these games, but in most cases, it’s not the focus of the game. MMORPGs and ARPGs, on the other hand, are narratively focused. Yes, players can choose to ignore that in favor of content like raids, PvP, and other challenges. But the game’s existence is based on a story. A story that many players become invested in.

It’s a lot like TV shows in that the story progresses over time. Players become invested in the world and characters, only more so because they’re actually putting in work to progress the story and their character. And like a lot of TV shows, there is always the chance for the game to just end without the story being resolved at all.

The long-term nature of MMOs also has another problem, aside from the potential of being cut short by executives who have decided it’s not worth the investment. That’s the fact they the writers can literally lose the plot over time. It’s something we’ve seen a lot of in TV shows that run for years on end. Either way, those engaging with the story will end up frustrated, either because the story makes no sense or because they’ll never find out what happens.

I’ve often thought, in the case of television, that the solution would be to determine up front that a show would run for the time needed to tell the story in its entirety. If we’re not talking about something like The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones, where they’re trying to tell an already-long story in a TV format, it’s doable to tell a story in a single season or two. And, well, something like the two shows mentioned already has a massive built-in fan base, so unless they do something horribly wrong, they don’t have to worry about ratings. But something new doesn’t have that advantage.

With games, the concern is always whether they’re making enough money off of players to keep the game going. And, yes, the development cycle does dictate how quickly a story can be told. That’s all to say that I’m aware there are limiting factors to how games can be developed. That said, I’ve come to wonder if setting some sort of end date for these games might not be ideal.

Basically, if we’re dealing with a game that is built around a story, determine how long it will take to tell that story and set that as the game’s lifespan goal. Ideally, this would allow players to find out how things end. Then, if all goes well, the game can be “renewed”, for lack of a better term. And the story can continue, And, if it doesn’t... Well, at least we got to find out what happened.

This may solve some other problems the game industry keeps running into with these types of games, such as all the massive layoffs. If they have a plan of how things should go and an end date for the game, they could potentially treat it the same way the television industry treats shows, and contract staff for the duration of the run. Much like camera people or other behind-the-scenes staff, devs could know that they’re contracted for a specific amount of time and plan for after that.

If the game gets “renewed” for another season, as it were, the company could use this time to upgrade the systems, either by reworking the existing one or starting with a new game that just continues where the old one left off, allowing players to bring their characters and stuff over.

It’s not like some companies aren’t already doing that with some games. But they’re either trying to develop for both games in tandem, or rather than waiting for a real ending on the first game, just start the second and leave the first out there hanging. Both of those scenarios can be frustrating to players, if for no other reason than the developers are forced to divide resources, and at least one of the games can suffer for it.

Now, you may wonder what happens to the first game – the first part of the story. Ideally, the first game can remain accessible for new players who might want to experience it before moving into the new one. Which could mean the company can continue to make some money off the first game without putting development effort into it. Because everything that the players can do in it is complete. It would be particularly appealing for players who want to bring some of the old game goodies into the new game with them. Clothes, mounts, minions, titles… You get the idea.

If we’re all honest with ourselves, a lot of MMOs suffer from dead zones after so long. The devs have to work to find reasons to bring players back, but once the content there is done, there’s really no reason to return to a zone you’ve completed for long. So, with the exception of some primary hubs, it may not be necessary to bring the whole world into the next chapter. There may have to be some asset shifts for gatherers, so they can still find the materials they need in the new game.

I do want to close out by saying what we all know. I am not a developer. I did spend some time learning coding, but never really put it to use, and I’ve never developed a game. So, I’ll readily admit that I’m just throwing an idea out there that may not work the way I’d like it to work.

What I am, though, is a gamer who loves stories. I love telling stories, reading stories, and, yes, playing them. And I am endlessly disappointed when they fail to come to a conclusion because a decision was made somewhere along the line to save money. At the same time, I hate when they’ve managed to go on too long and jump the shark because the writers have long since lost track of what they were trying to do in the first place, just to keep it going.

So, I’d like for solutions to be found. This is what I’ve come up with.