Well I agree with the sentiments to an extent, that is that whatever overcomes WoW will be something we haven't thought of yet. Sort of like how WoW took over largely because of what was innovation at the time period.
I think the "Facebook" comparison was intended to be about drawing in the casual computer using Joe, along with (or instead of) gamers, and also doing away with the intimidation of established player bases. Of course the problem with that is that any game that did away with that would have no real progression or anything to work towards. I mean if I can play for two years and be akin to some dude just starting today that isn't going to be much of a game. Unless of course they are going to handle everything through some kind of action based mechanics where there are no 'stats' but that will alienate a good portion of the people so it can't work. For example my father and stepmother play WoW and have absolutly no talent with action games, they would refuse to play a game like that.
At any rate as far as a literal online "Facebook" (which is not how I took this), it's been done. That's fundementally what things like "Second Life" were. Get online, make an Avatar, and what you do is totally based on how much space you can afford to rent from Linden. You can create almost anything you want within the engine, and buy and exchange what you make with others for virtual currency which can be exchanged for real money. This lead to some fairly talented designers actually making millions. At any rate, there everyone was pretty much themselves, and nobody really had a set "advantage" other than real life money or
their natural artistic talent.
To a lesser extent you've seen this with things like "Habbo" which was an online avatar-based chatmode, and of course obscure things like "Tyra Banks Virtual Studio" (which was mocked on Something Awful, I never would have heard about it otherwise). The whole idea of the MMOG "Facebook" goes back before Facebook to things like Club Cairbe on Q-Link (and of course "Habitat").
The point here is that people making a connection between online "games" and social networking is not new. It's been done before, and none of them have really overcome WoW, despite apparent comments by Linden Labs (the guys doing Second Life) that they had more subscribers.
The article is fundementally correct though, that it will doubtlessly take something new to really replace WoW.
Honestly though, given the subject of the newest expansion I can't see Blizzard seriously expanding the game anymore without losing a lot of quality/consistincy.
I've already heard RUMORS that Blizzard is developing a new MMORPG (at the planning stages) which is NOT Starcraft Online (as people have suspected). Allegedly their plan is to end Warcraft on a high note rather than wait for it to degenerate into a mere shadow of itself as they milk every penny out of it, and eventually turn out the lights (so to speak). They won't wind up competing with themselves this way, and allegedly this is the whole point of the Achievements and "Blizz Score" because it will apparently affect veteran content and such in their newer games.
Whether this will prove true or not remains to be seen, I have mixed opinions about it given my investment in WoW. On one hand it would be nice to see the game end on a high note as opposed to one month not renewing, or producing a heart wrenching "farewell to WoW" video for Youtube with sad music, pictures of the prettier parts of the landscape, and the player's main character wandering off to never be seen again. On the other hand all periodic burn out aside, I do like having a place to go to engage in raiding (which I find fun). Any new game is likely to take nearly forever to get to that kind of stuff.
>>>----Therumancer--->
