I mostly agree with your sentiment. I think WoW and Facebook are very similar in function, connecting people socially through software. I don't really think one is any better or worse than the other.
However, I do think something like WoW is a significant artistic achievement as well as a social tool. I really think this artistic product is the "achievement" of WoW.
I really think this artistic product is the "achievement" of WoW.
That's one take. Another is its achievement was taking an entertainment medium that people used to pay for only once, applying Skinnerian behavior modification techniques to keep them coming back and paying for monthly, then scaling that model to an unprecedented massive scale.
Granted the social aspects of online games are truly fun, but the nice thing about Facebook is that it (initially at least) succeeded and scaled with just the social part and not the psychological manipulations mmo's like WoW relied on from day 1.
Some of the stuff that's been added recently, like Farmville and whatnot, exploits both the social and psychological, but the core value of FB is that it is still primarily a social experience, a way for people separated by distance and/or life (new baby, etc.) to maintain connections and know what's going on in each others' lives.
You're partly right, but I think a game like WoW would exist even if there weren't a market to exploit (although probably not on the same scale with today's technology). Look back to the 80s and 90s when these types of games existed for cheap or free.
Many of the "psychological manipulations" present in WoW were present in the genre long before someone at Blizzard (or Sony or whoever else) decided those game play mechanics can make a boatload of cash. The tone of your post suggests that games are designed from the bottom up as a psychological manipulation tool. This is most certainly not the case; they are designed to be fun (although I could buy the argument that this stuff is being done consciously with WoW now, and would not be surprised if evidence were presented). For the most part these "manipulative" qualities in games were discovered/researched after gaming became popular, they did not insert these manipulations into games to make them popular. Most of this psychology stuff is pretty new to popular game design.
So far I haven't even addressed the original point of my statement, the artistic merits. WoW is a huge 3d environment created from scratch by a team of talented (and I'm sure very well paid) artists. There are many people who are excited about the lore of WoW the same way others get excited about LotR. To say:
"The achievement of WoW is to inflate the importance mouse clicks to an insane level by a more complex mechanism.
That is all."
Especially with the "that is all" added to the end, this statement dismisses the creative work that went in to WoW to create one of the largest 3d interactive worlds ever made.
Anyway, both services offer value to the user but I'm just sayin' give credit where credits due.
Regarding WoW's artistic achievement, I've read a good observation about that - they've somehow created an art style whose longevity is not dependent on continually increasing gfx capabilities, but maintains an appeal even as other games get higher realism and whatnot. Timeless design in any domain is quite a feat.
I just thing people don't care how technically difficult a game was to make; they just care if it's fun. The issue of these games all relying on the same underlying psychology to cultivate addiction is also relevant, of course
I love that line.
The achievement of WoW is to inflate the importance mouse clicks to an insane level by a more complex mechanism.
That is all.