The joint CEOs of Bioware admitted this week that their claim to RPG fame,Baldur's Gate, was dangerously close to being one of the first true MMOs (Massively Multiplayer Online games). Pitched to publishers as Battleground: Infinity, the game revolved around gods of all mythologies and was extremely ambitious, according to joint-CEO Ray Muzyka's comment during a panel at GDC Europe.

It wasn't until Muzyka and joint-CEO Greg Zeschuck brought the grandiose idea to Interplay that they were suggested to bring the game's engine into theDungeons and Dragons universe and forget that MMO nonsense. However, what if Bioware decided to keep the MMO elements within Baldur's Gate?

This isn't the time to wax philosophic about what a Baldur's Gate MMO would have been like, but to ask an even more important question. How would audiences respond to such an adaptation of Dungeons and Dragons? We sort of know the answer today with success stories like Dungeons and Dragons Online: Eberron Unlimited, but many forget that DDO: Stormreach -- its original release complete with subscription fee -- wasn't exactly brimming with life before Turbine turned it into a free-to-play title.

While there are several possible factors that could have played into DDO: Stormreach's then-imminent exodus, MMO failures generally are an issue of worth versus cost. In other words, does said game warrant said amount of dollars per month? If DDO: Stormreach in its original form was providing a valuable return on investment, Turbine probably wouldn't have turned to the free-to-play model (something that before then was unheard of outside of Nexon's localizations of its Asian F2P games).

Regardless of whether you agree with Turbine's motivations to enter the F2P arena, there is an important lesson to be learned here. Video game adaptations of beloved franchises are a risky business already, but what about MMOs?

It seems flawless, doesn't it? There can't possibly be too much to mess up when you're merely allowing fans of 'X' franchise live in its world. According to recent history, that couldn't be farther from the truth. With titles like Matrix Online recently suffering a shutdown and others like Star Wars Galaxies addled by constant, gut-wrenching changes, adapting heavily canonized franchises is highly ambitious and dangerous territory.

Every time an MMO based off an existing franchise is announced, various forums and comment pages are set aflame by both excitement and lament. It seems as if some of us are jaded by previous MMO adaptations regardless of their turnout. I can't imagine what the hot flames of nerd rage were like whenStar Trek Online or Lord of the Rings Online (LoTRO) were announced, both of which have seen moderate to runaway success.

In short, can an MMO adaptation of a popular franchise ruin audience perception of said property? Of course, but if successful adaptations are to say anything to this issue, the problem goes beyond fanboy and girl culture. It speaks volumes to game design.

The number one reason MMOs of existing franchises fail isn't because the worlds they create aren't accurate canonically. While it may seem shallow, it's all about aesthetics. If the world that's created doesn't feel like the one it's trying to emulate, then its chances of success are slim to none.

The reason why titles like LoTRO, WoW and Final Fantasy XI are so successful is because taking part in the world truly feels like you're a part of that universe. Everything that surrounds you in Azeroth or Middle Earth from the environments to the characters and dialog feels like the games and novels that came before them.

There is a lot to say to the inexplicable feeling of life that these worlds create and even more to say to what goes into creating such feeling.  Considering Bioware created one of the most successful adaptations of Dungeons and Dragons' Forgotten Realms universe, I wouldn't have Baldur's Gate any other way.