Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

There will be another MMORPG that is more successful than WoW was at its peak

2

Comments

  • RandomDownRandomDown Louisville, KYPosts: 145Member
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    WoW was more than just a Theme Park MMO. It was like a popular hair style that spread like wild fire. It spread throughout every Middle School and High School. Nerds played it. Jocks played it. Chicks played it. Business people played it. Ghetto people played it. It ran on just about every machine out there.

    WoW is hardly unique in that regard, even in the history of gaming.

    That was also a conscious decision during the development process. They wanted it to be as accessible to as many people as possible for the broadest market. If you demand top of the line graphics to future proof your game then that is going to eliminate a substantial portion of your initial player base.

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    WoW was more than just a Theme Park MMO. It was like a popular hair style that spread like wild fire. It spread throughout every Middle School and High School. Nerds played it. Jocks played it. Chicks played it. Business people played it. Ghetto people played it. It ran on just about every machine out there.

    WoW is hardly unique in that regard, even in the history of gaming.

    I don't know.  There are many other MMO's that have attracted such a wide-spread fanbase.  Sure, other games might have the occassional jock, chick, middleschooler, highschooler, nerd, grandma,etc, but WoW took it quite a bit further.

    In a way, I think WoW benefited from the mid-200's gaming scene, where you have all kinds of non-gamers getting into the mix.  The Wii, the Rockband/Guitair Hero games, and WoW made up a kind of Holy Trinity for casual gamers.  I think they've since moved on to Facebook, phones, and tablets though, for the most part.

    You make me like charity

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by MindTrigger

    Marketing came after an interesting product that already had tons of momentum on its side.  It would be suicide for ANet to spend a fortune on ads to try to get more players.  Ultimately it may also not matter, if they have shitty player retention long term.

    Yes, that's just it.  Eventually there will be another interesting product that has tons of momentum on its side.  And that will make massive marketing expenditures profitable.

    Most games would have a much larger playerbase if they had WoW's marketing budget.  Probably not WoW-style numbers, but a lot more than they have now.  The problem is that spending $200 million on marketing to get $100 million in revenue isn't profitable, so they don't.

    Agreed, but the worthy game has to come first.  All we've been seeing for years is regurgitated MMO concepts. 

    I think the next big MMO could very likely be browser based and be designed for Facebook.  Those of us here on this website will decry it as garbage, but it will be popular nonetheless.  That's another thing to take into account.  There was no (or very little) social media and social media gaming while WoW was on fire.  Things have changed across the entertainment spectra.

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,618Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by stayontarget
    Not going to happen Quizz,  8years ago people had limited choices in what they could play.  Blizzard was in the right place at the right time with the right product.  Today we have far more choices which tends to make the gaming world a niche market.

    I never say never but this is exactly right. Current MMORPG players are spread out in 100s of games and the number of MMOs is getting larger by the day. When WOW was attracting players by the bucketload there were what? 10 MMOs to choose from?

     

    For a phenomenom like WOW to happen again there will either have to be a huge influx of new players who don't already have favorite MMOs or a mass closing of the MMOs that currently exists--specially the ones with large bases...the ones that are profitable.

     

    If you have a really profitable coffee shop on a busy corner, opening a second one accross the street might increase the total volume of customers a tiny bit (the people who hate crossing streets :) ) but more or less, they'd just split the number of customers the first one had to begin with. They might increase the total number of customers if in addition to coffee they started selling cell phones and TVs...but it wouldn't be just a coffee shop any longer would it?

  • itbewillyitbewilly Mason, OHPosts: 346Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    No game will be as popular as WoW was at its peak.

    I disagree. WoW at its peak had what? 13 million? Im asking because depending who you ask these numbers are different. Lets say WoW had 15 million at its peak. On one platform that is incredible. Imagine a couple different scenarios that MMO's have yet to make a worthy attempt at really.

    Consoles - Xbox Live and Playstation Plus prove console players are willing to pay extra for online gaming. If a company made a serious effort to bring an AAA MMO to either of these consoles let alone if they had the technology to make a game that ran on all three platforms together(ps3/xobox/pc) it would destroy 15 million monthly users. Hell look at the numbers some of the best console games pull in. Black Ops 2 just shattered games sales. With its map packs it proves also again console gamers will pay for bonus content. if i company said "We wanna charge you $15 per month(general cost of mmo's monthly) and we will guarentee additional content regularly for that fee people would be all over it.

    Social network/browser based gaming - Another area where mmo's havent even begin to tap into its player base. Zynga's Farmville had 18+ million monthly users at one point(no clue what it peaked at.This is just a published number i know of). Many of those users pay extra month for items in its game. If a decent mmo came along that adapted to Social gaming it would have millions of monthly users. It couldnt cost nearly as much to creat as AAA pc titles that cost upwards of half a billion to make. 

    http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/01/zynga-turns-on-the-viral-charm-with-farmville-2/

    A game just released with 15 million monthly users? A company with 344 million monthly  users active?  People will say "Social games dont count" or "Farmville sucks" but honestly with numbers like this im surprised they havent already tried to tap into this fan base. An mmo would surely work on social networks not that any true gamers would wanna play it.

    Maybe if we are talking pc games you are right but gaming as a whole has plenty of area's yet it hasnt even  really attempted to make a splash in.

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    WoW was more than just a Theme Park MMO. It was like a popular hair style that spread like wild fire. It spread throughout every Middle School and High School. Nerds played it. Jocks played it. Chicks played it. Business people played it. Ghetto people played it. It ran on just about every machine out there.

    WoW is hardly unique in that regard, even in the history of gaming.

    It is unique in that regard to this genre. Prior to WoW the MMORPG was a game for geeks and nerds like those of us who sit here and discuss this stuff.

    The first huge success in any genre was, in its day, unique in that regard to its genre.

    We will have to see what happens.  WoW is slowly fading, and a lot of people have left this genre out of pure "been there done that" boredom. 

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,618Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by itbewilly
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    No game will be as popular as WoW was at its peak.

    I disagree. WoW at its peak had what? 13 million? Im asking because depending who you ask these numbers are different. Lets say WoW had 15 million at its peak. On one platform that is incredible. Imagine a couple different scenarios that MMO's have yet to make a worthy attempt at really.

    Consoles - Xbox Live and Playstation Plus prove console players are willing to pay extra for online gaming. If a company made a serious effort to bring an AAA MMO to either of these consoles let alone if they had the technology to make a game that ran on all three platforms together(ps3/xobox/pc) it would destroy 15 million monthly users. Hell look at the numbers some of the best console games pull in. Black Ops 2 just shattered games sales. With its map packs it proves also again console gamers will pay for bonus content. if i company said "We wanna charge you $15 per month(general cost of mmo's monthly) and we will guarentee additional content regularly for that fee people would be all over it.

    Social network/browser based gaming - Another area where mmo's havent even begin to tap into its player base. Zynga's Farmville had 18+ million monthly users at one point(no clue what it peaked at.This is just a published number i know of). Many of those users pay extra month for items in its game. If a decent mmo came along that adapted to Social gaming it would have millions of monthly users. It couldnt cost nearly as much to creat as AAA pc titles that cost upwards of half a billion to make. 

    http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/01/zynga-turns-on-the-viral-charm-with-farmville-2/

    A game just released with 15 million monthly users? A company with 344 million monthly  users active?  People will say "Social games dont count" or "Farmville sucks" but honestly with numbers like this im surprised they havent already tried to tap into this fan base. An mmo would surely work on social networks not that any true gamers would wanna play it.

    Maybe if we are talking pc games you are right but gaming as a whole has plenty of area's yet it hasnt even  really attempted to make a splash in.

     Yuck. You got that right.

     

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by itbewilly
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    No game will be as popular as WoW was at its peak.

    I disagree. WoW at its peak had what? 13 million? Im asking because depending who you ask these numbers are different. Lets say WoW had 15 million at its peak. On one platform that is incredible. Imagine a couple different scenarios that MMO's have yet to make a worthy attempt at really.

    Consoles - Xbox Live and Playstation Plus prove console players are willing to pay extra for online gaming. If a company made a serious effort to bring an AAA MMO to either of these consoles let alone if they had the technology to make a game that ran on all three platforms together(ps3/xobox/pc) it would destroy 15 million monthly users. Hell look at the numbers some of the best console games pull in. Black Ops 2 just shattered games sales. With its map packs it proves also again console gamers will pay for bonus content. if i company said "We wanna charge you $15 per month(general cost of mmo's monthly) and we will guarentee additional content regularly for that fee people would be all over it.

    Social network/browser based gaming - Another area where mmo's havent even begin to tap into its player base. Zynga's Farmville had 18+ million monthly users at one point(no clue what it peaked at.This is just a published number i know of). Many of those users pay extra month for items in its game. If a decent mmo came along that adapted to Social gaming it would have millions of monthly users. It couldnt cost nearly as much to creat as AAA pc titles that cost upwards of half a billion to make. 

    http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/01/zynga-turns-on-the-viral-charm-with-farmville-2/

    A game just released with 15 million monthly users? A company with 344 million monthly  users active?  People will say "Social games dont count" or "Farmville sucks" but honestly with numbers like this im surprised they havent already tried to tap into this fan base. An mmo would surely work on social networks not that any true gamers would wanna play it.

    Maybe if we are talking pc games you are right but gaming as a whole has plenty of area's yet it hasnt even  really attempted to make a splash in.

     Yuck. You got that right.

     

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    I think you would be surprised how much time people are willing to spend gaming on Facebook.  Especially for the right game.

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,618Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by itbewilly
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    No game will be as popular as WoW was at its peak.

    I disagree. WoW at its peak had what? 13 million? Im asking because depending who you ask these numbers are different. Lets say WoW had 15 million at its peak. On one platform that is incredible. Imagine a couple different scenarios that MMO's have yet to make a worthy attempt at really.

    Consoles - Xbox Live and Playstation Plus prove console players are willing to pay extra for online gaming. If a company made a serious effort to bring an AAA MMO to either of these consoles let alone if they had the technology to make a game that ran on all three platforms together(ps3/xobox/pc) it would destroy 15 million monthly users. Hell look at the numbers some of the best console games pull in. Black Ops 2 just shattered games sales. With its map packs it proves also again console gamers will pay for bonus content. if i company said "We wanna charge you $15 per month(general cost of mmo's monthly) and we will guarentee additional content regularly for that fee people would be all over it.

    Social network/browser based gaming - Another area where mmo's havent even begin to tap into its player base. Zynga's Farmville had 18+ million monthly users at one point(no clue what it peaked at.This is just a published number i know of). Many of those users pay extra month for items in its game. If a decent mmo came along that adapted to Social gaming it would have millions of monthly users. It couldnt cost nearly as much to creat as AAA pc titles that cost upwards of half a billion to make. 

    http://venturebeat.com/2012/10/01/zynga-turns-on-the-viral-charm-with-farmville-2/

    A game just released with 15 million monthly users? A company with 344 million monthly  users active?  People will say "Social games dont count" or "Farmville sucks" but honestly with numbers like this im surprised they havent already tried to tap into this fan base. An mmo would surely work on social networks not that any true gamers would wanna play it.

    Maybe if we are talking pc games you are right but gaming as a whole has plenty of area's yet it hasnt even  really attempted to make a splash in.

     Yuck. You got that right.

     

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    I think you would be surprised how much time people are willing to spend gaming on Facebook.  Especially for the right game.

    I wouldn't be surprised at all, specially since my son has been programming casual games in a thriving casual games company for the past 6 years. But in his spare time he plays WOW, SWTOR, GW2, etc... I raised him right image

     

    I don't think Quizz had Farmville or even Minecraft in mind. I think he's talking about something that has at least the same degree of complexity as WOW.

  • hupahupa VaasaPosts: 30Member
    Population is growing so fast that we need to start thinking about moving to other planets (mars-one.com). Of course there's going to be a game/virtual world that's going to be more successful than WoW in the future. Maybe the OP should've restricted the discussion to our lifetime. Unless the mayan calendar is correct...
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Iselin

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    MMO does not have to demand a lot more time or commitment. In fact, you can see the trend is to have LESS TIME commitment. Hence LFD/LFR so you don't have to commit to a raid schedule.

    Definition changes all the time. There is nothing mysterious about it.

  • RandomDownRandomDown Louisville, KYPosts: 145Member

    Populations starting to plateau and decline in many first world countries. Projections have been revised long ago and will likely decline around the year 2050. I can't remember the exact projection but it was at or in the latter half of this century. So not really relevant. Though if you want to start getting all futurist then why not consider actual sentient A.I. and the fact they may want to play games etc etc. So really it should be considered within a smaller timeframe than that.

     

    Even with raid schedules and the like you don't always have people running a single raid in an entire night, in fact they made it so there is no obligation to do so, which is great. You progression for the week can be completing that raid this week ten days or whatever arbitrary time they use if you and your groups schedule don't mesh often.

  • a large advertising budget is huge for player growth. i think the only other recent company to do a tv ad that i've seen, in the past 2 years, has to be trion, but even then it didn't last very long. it's really basic business. you have to advertise to bring in new customers. this is true with most products that compete within a crowded market. the number of people that actually watch mmo news isn't as big as people think. the company would need direct advertisements across the board (radio, podcast, internet, tv, movie previews, retail posterts, etc.). discount sales, free game time, starting bonuses, etc are all part of good marketing. everyone has a push point that would get them to try a product of interest, and good marketing is based off of finding that point.

    WoW is in a lot of areas. just off the top of my head.. i think they have a brazil hub, korean hub, hub in china, and the normal NA and EU. i may be talking out of my ass here, but i doubt that most games are available in as many countries as WoW is. Rift is available in NA, EU, S. Korea, and not sure about anywhere else.

    WoW also started on a a great IP. most of the people i knew who were into non mmo gaming had played a warcraft title. it was an easy jump for them to get into gaming based off of the lore and style. i think a new mega million player mmo would have to based off of a great IP, as well as a few other things. if not a pre-established IP, then a large push for lore involvement would have to be pushed through ads and other story infusing avenues (books, comics, tv show, animated movies, etc.). the market is just so large that in order to stand out from the rest, a company would have to make people want to be involved with a world.

    a lot of people want different things. this is really going to screw over most new games sincse no one is every happy. i think a new game on this level would have to offer something that really sets itself apart from the standard games released today. a patented system similar to what we've seen in some anime tv shows would do the trick (sword art online or dot hack), but i don't think it needs to be on that level to get those types of numbers. it's amazing how far an original idea goes. the anime i mentioned are slick because they would add interaction to a game, and with somthing like an mmorpg this is always a good thing. i don't think we need to be fully imersed into a game like that, but a little something would go a long way. a good gimic is often times the the structure to a good idea.

    imho a 10 mil+ player mmo today would have to have amazing marketing with a massive budget, be available in most of the world, have a great launch with continued additions to the game (player and/or developer), a great IP or a new IP with a major out of game content push, the largest world we could have ever wanted, obvioulsy it would have to have solid gameplay that would fit the needs of most players with a HUGE selection of gameplay options, and will have to offer something that we haven't seen before to unite player game types.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,618Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Iselin

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    MMO does not have to demand a lot more time or commitment. In fact, you can see the trend is to have LESS TIME commitment. Hence LFD/LFR so you don't have to commit to a raid schedule.

    Definition changes all the time. There is nothing mysterious about it.

    Why am I not surprised that you're willing to broaden the definition of MMORPG to be almost all encompassing? Here I'll go one better:

    Massive = bigger than a breadbox

    Multiplayer = both of us

    Online = this one is obvious

    Role Playing = well that little bundle of pixels ain't really me, so yeah...I'm playing a role

    Game = Hot diggity! Ain't this fun?

     

    OK... Farmville is officially an MMORPG... happy?

  • DejoblueDejoblue Youngstown, OHPosts: 296Member Uncommon

    I agree that there will be an MMO, msot likely sandbox, that bests WoWs subscriber base.

    WoW was a phenomenon in that, first and foremost, bradband had just hit the masses around 2004. Here in MO outside of STL and NC we had just gotten 1/5/10 DSL and out cable company had nothing in 2004.

    Add to that the fact that you didnt need to be on the hpone now to be online and you had a huge crowd of people that paid $40 a month and wanted to explore the intarwebs!

    EQ2 was coming but EQ had a then terrible reputation for being hardcore and grindy. WoW was less so, but still had much grind and need for grouping. Todays MMO crowd would balk at Classic WoW, as "accessible" as it was, it was still pretty hardcore.

    Add to that EQs very dated graphics compared to WoWs not only better but stylized graphics and there is only one choice... or was there?

     

    EQ2 released early Nov IIRC and WoW two weeks later on the 23. EQ2 was more of the same despite their better graphics. But one could argue that their graphics are more detailed but more pixeleated as well. It is an odd combo even tho it looks better than WoW inho. But that immersion is broken easily by the pixelation, whereas WoW is stylized.

     

    So there you go, right place right time right IP right competitor.

    I guarantee you that had WoW not come out when it did, just before christmas with EQ2, then we would have all played EQ2 and it would have been the one to garner millions of players.

  • ManestreamManestream PrestonPosts: 633Member Uncommon

    I also have to agree, that WoW at its release was bigger than they expectd it to become. It had 14-15 million at its peak, now its more like 9mill but still dwarfs the others with that.

    I would say it will be beaten eventually, but maybe not for a couple more years at least or (more than likely with todays designers) the next decade or so. I have read some things about ESO (Elder Scrolls Online), and they have said some things that has put me off completly. The design of which had been used in past games that did not even last a year (some not even 6mths). If that is what they are going to do then its a big risk and if I was an invester for a game that had put 300 million to it i would be expecting alot better. Not just another failure as that is where i see that one heading for right now (unless they change it).

  • MykellMykell MackayPosts: 618Member Uncommon

    Personally i dont think there will ever be anything close to WoW and i look to another medium TV.

     

    The most watched television broadcast of all time was the final episode of M*A*S*H in 1983. Since then TV has fragmented into so many shows to accomodate the niches societies are made up of now.

     

    MMO's are the same. There are more games to play than a person will ever have time. With so many offerings people find their niche that they like whether its sci-fi, fantasy or even a game about tanks.

     

    The only way i see a game beating WoW is if there is a massive leap forward in technology that changes the medium and how we play games. Some sort of virtual reality maybe, but if that happens would we even compare it to WoW?

     

     

  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    We see this sort of claim in baseball all the time.  There will never be another 300 game winner.  There will never be another player who bats .400.  And so forth.  Until some transcendently talented player comes along and does exactly what we were assured could never happen again.  Just this year, we saw a triple crown winner, a rookie nearly win the MVP award, and a knuckleball pitcher with more career losses than wins entering the season win a Cy Young in a landslide.  If you could combine CC Sabathia's career up to age 31 with Jaime Moyer's starting at age 33 (taking a year off at age 32, even), you'd have a 400 game winner.

    In my life time I doubt I'll see anyone break Nolan Ryan's career strike out record (5714).  image

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Iselin

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    MMO does not have to demand a lot more time or commitment. In fact, you can see the trend is to have LESS TIME commitment. Hence LFD/LFR so you don't have to commit to a raid schedule.

    Definition changes all the time. There is nothing mysterious about it.

    Why am I not surprised that you're willing to broaden the definition of MMORPG to be almost all encompassing? Here I'll go one better:

    Massive = bigger than a breadbox

    Multiplayer = both of us

    Online = this one is obvious

    Role Playing = well that little bundle of pixels ain't really me, so yeah...I'm playing a role

    Game = Hot diggity! Ain't this fun?

     

    OK... Farmville is officially an MMORPG... happy?

    You are confused. I am not broadening the definition of MMOs. The industry is. To me, it is just a convenient label. There is nothign sacred about it.

    If all the gaming press is calling WOW a MMO, i will use that label too.

    Farmville, fortunately for you, is called a social game by the industry. And i probably wouldn't care much if it is label as MMO too. I don't like MMO, or FPS, or RTS. I like specific games for their gameplay. Genre means little to me.

  • OgreRaperOgreRaper Detroit, MIPosts: 376Member
    It's possible. I'd like to see it happen. It's gonna take a lot of money and a dev team that's actually willing to take risks.
  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member

    I'd just point out that, adjusted for inflation, no movie has ever outgrossed Gone with the WInd.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member

    "Never" is an  unreasonably long time frame to bet against.  So yah, that's a really safe crystal ball. One of those easy statistical questions: 1000000:1 odds means that if you play 1000000 times, you might:

    1) Win exactly once.  2) Win none at all 3) win multiple times 4) Any of the above?  (4, of course)

    But having established that betting against infinity is a fool's game, what conclusion would you like to try and draw from it?

    Because THIS

    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Sooner or later, MMORPGs are going to see another runaway hit like that.  And sooner or later, there's going to be one that bests WoW in its heyday.

    Conclusion is actually not supported either.  Listing the possible outcomes, the outcome "the mmo market may cease to exist before another game 'scores' more subs" is non-zero probability.  Making your assertion a less-than-sure bet.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • RandomDownRandomDown Louisville, KYPosts: 145Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite

    "Never" is an  unreasonably long time frame to bet against.  So yah, that's a really safe crystal ball. One of those easy statistical questions: 1000000:1 odds means that if you play 1000000 times, you might:

    1) Win exactly once.  2) Win none at all 3) win multiple times 4) Any of the above?  (4, of course)

    But having established that betting against infinity is a fool's game, what conclusion would you like to try and draw from it?

     

    That the house always wins in the long run?

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,618Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Iselin

    What I hear you saying is that its possible to have more than 13 million people actively engaged in the same online game and this is true... but we're talking about the type of game that demands a lot more time and commitment than the average farmville player is willing to devote to gaming...unless you go with a revisionist definition of MMORPG that contemplates people playing a very dumbed-down version, alone, in 15 minute spurts ... oh wait, those already exist and have their own forum here... never mind image

    MMO does not have to demand a lot more time or commitment. In fact, you can see the trend is to have LESS TIME commitment. Hence LFD/LFR so you don't have to commit to a raid schedule.

    Definition changes all the time. There is nothing mysterious about it.

    Why am I not surprised that you're willing to broaden the definition of MMORPG to be almost all encompassing? Here I'll go one better:

    Massive = bigger than a breadbox

    Multiplayer = both of us

    Online = this one is obvious

    Role Playing = well that little bundle of pixels ain't really me, so yeah...I'm playing a role

    Game = Hot diggity! Ain't this fun?

     

    OK... Farmville is officially an MMORPG... happy?

    You are confused. I am not broadening the definition of MMOs. The industry is. To me, it is just a convenient label. There is nothign sacred about it.

    If all the gaming press is calling WOW a MMO, i will use that label too.

    Farmville, fortunately for you, is called a social game by the industry. And i probably wouldn't care much if it is label as MMO too. I don't like MMO, or FPS, or RTS. I like specific games for their gameplay. Genre means little to me.

    But considering the OP chose the MMORPG label in his title, it'd be really tough to stay focussed on the topic if we can't have some common understanding of just what the hell we're talking about. Labels are not evil. They're just a convenient shorthand that hopefully, means a similar thing to all of us. 

     

    A discussion of Farmville vs. WOW might be appropriate in a thread about computer games or online activities in general, but I don't know how anyone can think that it has anything to do with a discussion about the possibility of an MMORPG matching or surpassing WOW.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by RandomDown

    That the house always wins in the long run?

    Assuming the house is smarter than bad mathematicians, yes indeed.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

2
Sign In or Register to comment.