It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by L0C0Man Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG Originally posted by Irondust It is Lineage, started in 1998 and still has millions of players in Korea
The problem with those of you who said it is Lineage is, Lineage is NO LONGER running (closed 2011), regardless of how much profits it made.
If it is no longer running, it cannot, at this stage, be claimed to be the "longest running profitable MMO" - since UO has already outlived it in length (because it is still going) and strong sign that WoW will probably also do that.
So at the moment, it is UO - until WoW stacked on enough years to oust UO and everyone else too.
NCSoft closed the US servers since it wasn't profitable there, but it's still running on Korea, and actually if you check their Q4 report, it's reponsible for 24% of their sales for Q4 2012 (second only to GW2's 45%, and higher than AION, Lineage 2 and blade and soul combined), and the sales numbers are almost twice as much compared to both Q3 2012 and Q4 2011.... so it's not only still profitable after all this time, it's actually growing.
But UO still running, regardless of whether we count in Lineage Korea (which is already stretching it considering they already pulled out of NA and the west, which means it already half closed shop in a sense).
Until UO stops and Lineage still keeps going on for 1 year after UO stops, Lineage can still not yet claim to be the "longest" running profitable mmo.
The semantic of "Longest" is > than "most profitable" in the "Longest running profitable" debate, because until a game closes shop, it is can still potentially profit.
Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
Lineage earns more money than UO and Everquest combined, so it definetly "Longest profitable". Not "potentially", but really profitable.
UO is not even earning enough to be named on EA reports. if you count that then there's tons of ancient games that have paid for themselves by now yet are not making any important gain for the company.
if runescape shipped first then that's it, if not it's lineage.
Originally posted by Irondust Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
It is still "potentially" because, once again, neither UO and Everquest is over.
Plus even if we are going by "your" arbitrary equation of "profit > duration" in this discussion, WoW will beat the crap out of Lineage and Lineage WILL NOT even be a close second. So either way you look at it, Lineage is second, at best.
Originally posted by Rthuth434 UO is not even earning enough to be named on EA reports. if you count that then there's tons of ancient games that have paid for themselves by now yet are not making any important gain for the company. if runescape shipped first then that's it, if not it's lineage.
It really doesn't matter, because the title has the word "Longest" in it. Until UO dies and Lineage match up by lasting another year more than UO, it is not "longest".
And it is certainly not "most profitable" if you are leaning towards "profitable" side of the debate because WoW will beat that by a mile and more, even IF WoW ends now and Lineage ends 5 years later.
lawl. not "most" profitable. i said longest running, profitable mmo. i then further defined profitable as having some meaningful gain to the finances.
since Lineage pre-dates runescape it's the clear winner there.
Originally posted by strykr619 Yet they shut down their NA servers? Sorry but Lineage can't be counted if they had to cut it back due to lack of players. If you want to see a game with little overhead still turning over a good profit look at Everquest. 100k players still 14 years later.
If that is the standard then Everquest can't be counted either since EQ1 doesn't have asian market servers.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
Originally posted by Rthuth434 lawl. not "most" profitable. i said longest running, profitable mmo. i then further defined profitable as having some meaningful gain to the finances. since Lineage pre-dates runescape it's the clear winner there.
Longest running profitable, even if you define it as a means equation not as in a modal equation of either time or profit, would still NOT be Lineage.
If you calculate means of time/profit I'm sure Lineage would not beat WoW.
No matter how you look at it mathematically, Lineage at the current stage is NOT the "longest running most profitable"
... unless you are NOT looking at it scientifically or mathematically but rather by some artibtrary standards that god knows what it is, lol
Ultima Online was released in 1997
Lineage was released in 1998
Everquest was released in 1999
Asheron's Call was also released in 1999
Runescape was released in 2001
Dark age of Camelot was also released in 2001
EvE online was released in 2003
Final Fantasy XI was also released in 2003
Out of that list I Lineage (on a global scale) is more profitable than even some modern MMO's out here in the west. In my opinion, since Ultima Online isn't even listed by EA financials, the oldest profitable MMO, on a global scale is Lineage. Otherwise I would have to say Runescape or EvE online, according to how you want to label profitability.
It's an arbitrary argument regardless. The fact that 4 of the MMO's in the list were released prior to 2000, and are still up and running, is impressive.
But we are not talking about "potentially profitable", we are talking about really profitable. If we watch it from your position, than plenty of games could be considered "potentially profitable", because they have live servers and not shut down yet. The question is, is these games are making profit to actually release updates and grow in development, or they just half-dead?
Lineage still making millions of dollars, is UO and everquest making it too? I'm doubt in it
Originally posted by XAPGames Originally posted by Rthuth434 did RS ship before Lineage? it's gotta be one of those two. i don't know if UO meets the requirements. i know EQ is doing well but probably not old enough.
Lineage older than EQ? I'm surprised. I always figured LIN as an eastern EQ clone.
Hmm would appear so its came out a few months before EQ. So lineage it is if there stiull pulling a profit ifnot Everquest probaly i know there stilll pulling profits.
Originally posted by Kilrane It's an arbitrary argument regardless.
The problem is it is not an arbitrary arguement.
Because both time and profit ARE mathematically quantifiable. It is only arbitary if you are talkiing about "which one you like to be the longest profitable running mmo"
The only uncertainty at this time is the time factor BECAUSE all of those games are still ongoing.
However even if we are going to take the snapshot of time vs profit Lineage is still a second, because again there is no way it can match the earning of WoW.
And if we are considering profit in terms of longevity, until UO ends it still lived longer on this Earth at the present time compare to Lineage.
So Lineage is likely second overall, at this point in time.
Runescape is 2001 release Lin was 1998 and EQ was 1999.
Originally posted by Irondust But we are not talking about "potentially profitable", we are talking about really profitable. If we watch it from your position, than plenty of games could be considered "potentially profitable", because they have live servers and not shut down yet. The question is, is these games are making profit to actually release updates and grow in development, or they just half-dead? Lineage still making millions of dollars, is UO and everquest making it too? I'm doubt in it
If you are talking about "really profitable" that's even worse - because as I've mentioned repeatedly Lineage is unlikely to ever beat WoW, even if you give Lineage 5 extra years and Wow dies now (of course UO is not in the equation in this instance).
You are still not comprehending the mathematical part of this dilemma.
I'm curious how you came to that conclusion? No offense intended, but it doesn't seem like EQ at all to me.
The main feature they seem to share is totally open world (all zones and dungeons are public). Overland is all one zone. Dungeons are their own open zone each with some of them having several openings around the world.
It's a 2.5d isometric game with world design more reminiscent of UO and many sprite based games of that era, but it's artwork and music were beautiful.
It wasn't a themepark nor a sandbox. It was just open, but you couldn't build much. Guilds could war for castles during designated siege times and control area taxes and access to the castle dungeon. Even non guild and alliance members would come out to help one side or the other in sieges to ensure a good guild managed the tax rate and dungeon.
The game was gear based, but most gear power was based on enchanting the item rather than it inherently beating lower tier gear. A +10 common sword was more powerful than some rarer drops of lower enchantment. Enchanting failure could result in item destruction so there was always a flow of items.
It was pvp-centric, but it wasn't random ganking. The community policed that. However, there were always guild (they were called pledges) wars and feuds.
There was an entire class solely devoted to being the guild leader. Only royals cold make guilds (called pledges).
One North American server, called the Lands of Aden, had a special ruleset.
Anyway, I think Lineage is probably the oldest most successful mmo for sure. I hope ArcheAge lives up to that legacy.
We have different meanings of "really profitable". I mean "really profitable" in a way that game earns more money, than needed to keep servers up, make updates, new content and tech support. You are said than "really profitable" is "most prifitable in world", which is not true.
And I'm not talking about mathematics, I'm talking about which game can be considered "profitable" or "not-profitable". Lineage can be considered profitable, UO and EQ can't, basing of publishers financial reports.
We have different meanings of "really profitable". I mean "really profitable" in a way that game earns more money, than needed to keep servers up, make updates, new content and tech support. You are sad than "really profitable" is "most prifitable in world", which is not true.
If you are not talking about mathematics, than everything about this discussion goes out the window - because BOTH profit and time are very clearly defined and quantifiable numbers, and I have no idea what are you looking for? (maybe an opinion piece?)
Also, profitibility only has one meaning, because it is a numerical meaning. Profitability is a quantifier, NOT an opinion. You minus your earnings with costs, and you come out ahead, there you go, it is a profit. A very simple business concept.
If a game has enough earnings to keep servers up, updates, contents and tech, it is already "profitable". If it can't do any or even miss one of that and have to cut cost, in accounting it is called a "loss". Thus you definition of "really profitable" is entirely skewed because that NOT how accounting works.
If by that definition, I can't see UO and Everquest can be considered a "loss" (or in YOUR definition, not "really profitable" lol) since I'm sure the parent company will not hesitate to chop them off if they are not profitable (especially the fact that you are talking about EA and SOE here, the most corporate of game makers).
So in terms of longest running still profitable (or by your definition, "longest running really profitable" lol) UO is top because it is longest running AND being maintain because it is still making the company money.
I really fail to see how, in any either definition aforementioned, Lineage with come out ahead. Don't get me wrong I think was a good game, but it is just mathematically wrong in so many ways to call it so.
Originally posted by wormywyrm UO I suppose but I think in the minds of many of us it is EQ1 that started the genre.
Then those would be naive minds
It might not cost "that much" to keep a server up. If you trim your staff a bit you might keep a server going cheaply.
As for major profit, lineage is the game. Those asian gamers sure are loyal.
I already said, that we have different opinions of what could be considered profitable. For me it is live servers + updates + additional money for publisher. For you it is just live servers + updates. Further discussion is pointless
Originally posted by Yizle Originally posted by wormywyrm UO I suppose but I think in the minds of many of us it is EQ1 that started the genre.
Well it was 3D. If we aren't taking modern graphics into account then may have there been a MUD that would support massive numbers and therefore be a MMORPG? I'm not familiar.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
Everquest immediatly comes to mind, as a clear top choice. It is not the oldest running, nor the most profitable.. but it is clearly the longest running, most profitable mmo.
Ironically, Lineage has equal claim here. But early in it's release it was tuned to be a money maker.. while other MMO's were less profitable, they had better games and content.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."