Twilight for Twilight War

Sad News for Smiling Gator Twilight War: After the Fall (thanks Frans and Dentist) announces the insolvency of Smiling Gator Productions, who were at work on Twilight War: After the Fall, a Source-engine MMORPG. Word is:
It's not a Happy New Year here at Smiling Gator Productions.

Unfortunately, the end of 2005 is also the end of SGP. Our committed funds have run dry and we were not successful in the hunt for additional investment. The websites and email will be disabled in the coming days, so this is our last announcement before we shut down for good. Thanks again to our fantastic forums community for all the support and contributions! We hope you find another project and give them the devotion and incisive comments we've enjoyed reading for the past 17 months.
View : : :
8.
 
stuff
Jan 4, 2006, 15:42
Dev
8.
stuff Jan 4, 2006, 15:42
Jan 4, 2006, 15:42
Dev
 
For the last few years everyone has tried to jump on the MMORPG bandwagon. They see the big guys doing good like Everquest and Ultima Online and figure its a money pot. Then along came WoW, and thats dominating now. Its got 5 million subscribers. Figure $15 a month and they are raking in $75 million a month. Everyone is looking with greed on that money, and once its started, it seems like practically a garunteed income stream (unlike most games which get 99% of the money in first few months after release).

The place is littered with MMORPG wannabees. The problem is, its FAR more expensive and manpower intensive to develope and run one of these things than most people/companies realize. AND you have to continually pay for the servers, bandwidth, AND continually develope new content and patches, and customer support. Blizzard may rake in $75 million a month, but I bet they pay out a huge majority of that in server, bandwidth, and development costs. A typical server there has something like 6,000-10,000 people ONLINE at once. Figure that the actual population per server is more like 30,000. With 5 million people thats probably 150-200 servers. And the bandwidth to keep 6,000 people per server simultaneously logged in? Since you can do it on dialup, figure 5k/sec bandwidth needed. Thats something like 4 gigabytes per second bandwidth PER SERVER. Do you know what kinda connection you have to have for that?
Thats an OC 192 connection (or few). And they need that for every 6000 people.
Those are frigging NOT cheap. $50,000 a month? $250,000 a month? I have no clue, but I know its WAY up there.

Then the server hardware itself to be able to handle 6,000 simultaneous connections. Probably has to be a dual or quad Xeon or AMD opteron. Thats fortunately only a 1 time cost but that isn't cheap either.

And none of this is counting how you have to have the MMORPG in continual development to add new content or else your base will leave you. Most games the development is up front before release (except maybe a patch or 3). Your MMORPG will fail if you only do up front developement.

And NONE of this addresses if you have something that looks interesting or unusual enough to draw people, or if its fun. Blizzard got its start because they had an IP that was familiar, and they had a reputation for quality. So tons of people tried it. They stayed because it is a high quality MMORPG thats fun.

Anyway, thats why there's so many failures littering the wayside. And with WoW's monster success (I think they are biggest now) you will see lots more attempts at MMORPGs.

This comment was edited on Jan 4, 15:47.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
2.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
7.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
 8.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
stuff
9.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
10.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
11.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
12.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
13.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
14.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
15.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
17.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
16.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
18.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
19.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
20.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
23.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
24.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
21.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
22.
Jan 4, 2006Jan 4 2006
26.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
25.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
27.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
28.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
29.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
30.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
31.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
32.
Jan 5, 2006Jan 5 2006
33.
Jan 7, 2006Jan 7 2006