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!

Why did MMOs become about the money and numbers?

1235715

Comments

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,751Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Scot

    Most games ten to twenty years ago were not crap.

     

    Sure they were(crap being a market/business success, not some silly arbitrary personally biased qualifiers).

    Only thing that has changed is that the market is much bigger these days thus you subjectively feel there is less good games while in fact, the choice is just broader - there is a number of good games that are not your cup of tea.

    And then...

    First you complain that Pepsi Cola is perceived as better source of executives, now you argue that it isn't a case?

    You just twist and misuse facts to fit your already made up, invalid tho, conclusions.

    Sorry, it's time to deal with reality.

    Well I am not even sure now of what you were getting at with the remark about crap games. My own position is that there are good games out there, too many brands, but still good games. Sometimes they don't make them like they used to, sometimes they make them far better.

    I do think the gaming industry has fallen prey to the idea that a big executive name is more important than gaming industry experience, how do you think Riccitiello got to be CEO of EA? No design experience whatsoever and they put him in charge? This has been a feature of the gaming industry in the 00's.

    Indeed, that study I put up showed a healthy number of CEO's with what I would consider the right kind of background. My argument is not that every CEO is now a suit, just that is the way its heading. But yes, if you had asked me to forecast that study I would have not thought things were as good as they seem to be. Good to see that they are not.

    Have you some how missed the increasing corporate attitude of gaming companies, the priority of branding and so on? To deny that gaming companies have become more corporate is rather hard to do. And part of that process is putting executives in charge.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Scot

    I do think the gaming industry has fallen prey to the idea that a big executive name is more important than gaming industry experience

    Nothing is falling, it is an inevitable consequence of increased production costs, the companies grew bigger, hence you need skilled executives who can run mid/large size company. There is no harm there.

    Your arguments are inconsistent and contradictory.

    First you say that MMO market is somewhat getting eaten up by corporations and that it "hurts" games at the end. You demonstrate with comment above and how CEOs are no longer "gamers" but suits - which you happen to provide evidence that is supposedly to claim otherwise.

    In the same breath you say that all is fine, big-small, good-bad, all sort of games are being produced as ever. So where is the harm you speak of?

    Note: That study is worthless piece of internetz. The response rate of the "survey" is 25%, basically it has same value as polls on these boards.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,751Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Scot

    I do think the gaming industry has fallen prey to the idea that a big executive name is more important than gaming industry experience

     

    Nothing is falling, it is an inevitable consequence of increased production costs, the companies grew bigger, hence you need skilled executives who can run mid/large size company. There is no harm there.

    Your arguments are inconsistent and contradictory.

    First you say that MMO market is somewhat getting eaten up by corporations and that it "hurts" games at the end. You demonstrate with comment above and how CEOs are no longer "gamers" but suits - which you happen to provide evidence that is supposedly to claim otherwise.

    In the same breath you say that all is fine, big-small, good-bad, all sort of games are being produced as ever. So where is the harm you speak of?

     

    Note: That study is worthless piece of internetz. The response rate of the "survey" is 25%, basically it has same value as polls on these boards.

    25% is not bad in my estimation, we don't exactly hear CEO's talking about these sort of issues all the time. Next time I will remember to only link anything that absolutely supports my view as we clearly need to think in just black and white here.

    The harm is coming from the brands and the non gaming ethos that has taken over gaming studios. That is not to say they cannot produce a good game, let me give you a couple of examples. Dragon Age, great game; DA2, appalling milk it for all it is worth sequel. The milking of the Mass Effect series.

    The harm is also more obvious to spot after a gaming company is bought out by a larger company like what happened to Turbine. Lotro before and after they were bought out by Times-Warner shows what happens when the corporate mentality takes priority over making a fine game.

    Of course great games are still being made, you are trying to foster an opinion on me I do not have.

    You talk about the "inevitable" consequences of gaming companies getting larger, there is some truth here. I am sorry but I am not going to paint this issue black and white, it is more complex than that. Many early gaming companies promoted from within their ranks, they gave those without much business experience senior executive positions. Now some claim that was why many folded and there is some truth there, but many were going to fold anyway, that's the sort of market gaming was and still is. You still see those with a developer background being promoted into the most senior positions and I presume doing fine as they stay there. So the issue is not that clear cut, but I lean on the side that this eventually caused more problems than it solved. What is more clear cut is the effect corporate mentality has on the gaming ethos of the company.

    When it comes to how a business ethos takes over a gaming ethos, then you have to look no further than the bragging of Riccitiello once he got into EA. He was crowing about how he had designers thinking of cost first. Now of course a gaming company must think of cost, but that's an executives job, to reign in creation and design when they go too far. The creative team should not be counting pennies before something gets to the white board.

    The branding of games, the big titles which get a new one in the series every year is another example of how corporate ethos comes before gaming ethos. You have a cash cow and you milk it. But how much space does that leave for anything that is not a brand name getting a chance? This has created a narrowing of opportunity for anything new coming out. When a takeover occurs a few titles are cheery picked and the rest go to the wind. Oh and some of those brand games are among my favs, mostly big funding has meant a better game. But some are rather creaky and showing their seams, big funding is not a guaranteed success.

    I am not saying that a gaming company should not act and think as a company, business ethos is important. But just like any company, once you always put business ethos before a creative and quality ethos, there will be problems ahead. Simcity anyone?

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Icewhite

    Rewind to Spring of 2004.

    "EQ2 is gonna so rock!" "Pfft, have you seen Blizzard's cartoony graphics, no one's ever going to want to play that."

    Spring of 2005.

    "Subs don't mean anything!" "EQ's still a better game, damn WoW kiddies"

     

    Well, those statements are true. The core MMORPG crowd, by and large, never went over to WoW. WoW found its market with the casual gamers and RTS players who liked Blizzard lore. They were the first big name game company to make an MMO, and the first one to support it with a 1 year long multi million dollar ad campaign. When they announced beta it was in every website and magazine available at the time. They were the first to hit true mainstream, and their momentum has kept them going ever since, with very little to do with the actual game mechanics, which are objectively poor.

    Naw.  The core MMORPG crowd jumped to wow too.

    Some did, most didn't. Sub charts back that up. The big dips in population for games like DAoC didn't happen until Trials of Atlantis and New Frontiers/Catacombs. Or SWG's NGE. WoW was mocked by the core MMO crowd, by and large.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    Originally posted by Icewhite Rewind to Spring of 2004. "EQ2 is gonna so rock!" "Pfft, have you seen Blizzard's cartoony graphics, no one's ever going to want to play that." Spring of 2005. "Subs don't mean anything!" "EQ's still a better game, damn WoW kiddies"  
    Well, those statements are true. The core MMORPG crowd, by and large, never went over to WoW. WoW found its market with the casual gamers and RTS players who liked Blizzard lore. They were the first big name game company to make an MMO, and the first one to support it with a 1 year long multi million dollar ad campaign. When they announced beta it was in every website and magazine available at the time. They were the first to hit true mainstream, and their momentum has kept them going ever since, with very little to do with the actual game mechanics, which are objectively poor.
    Naw.  The core MMORPG crowd jumped to wow too.

    It's not like that was a big deal. The "core" MMORPG crowd was a tiny part of the market.

    But really, when people are talking about the "core" MMORPG crowd, who are they talking about? Are they just talking about the people who played UO?
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.
  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Scot

    The harm is coming from the brands and the non gaming ethos that has taken over gaming studios.

    That is no harm, that is a fact - companies become bigger. Same goes for the rest of your post, you are not clearing out what is supposed to represent the harm you speak of, you only talk about things that are different but that alone does not make them any better or worse.


    It boils down to 2 situations:

    1) You believe game are somewhat worse than they used to be and then I point you out to my rose tinted glasses comment.

    2) Games did not become worse and you are just not making any point nor sense.


    Your ranting is lacking substance, it's just silly.

    But fair enough, it was my bad when I thought you have something to say...

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Scot

    The harm is coming from the brands and the non gaming ethos that has taken over gaming studios.

     

    That is no harm, that is a fact - companies become bigger. Same goes for the rest of your post, you are not clearing out what is supposed to represent the harm you speak of, you only talk about things that are different but that alone does not make them any better or worse.


    It boils down to 2 situations:

    1) You believe game are somewhat worse than they used to be and then I point you out to my rose tinted glasses comment.

    2) Games did not become worse and you are just not making any point nor sense.


    Your ranting is lacking substance, it's just silly.

    But fair enough, it was my bad when I thought you have something to say...

    That's right and the bottom line is, most game developers are not in the business to make games for themselves. They make games to make money, which in turn pays the bills and feeds the family. Some designers are fortunate enough that their preferences coincide with the segment they are trying to serve, but I doubt this is the norm.

    But Scot's beef must be with the fact that developers are not making games for specifically for him. And this is what fuels his rants.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    Misdirect all you want, but AoC and SWTOR would have killed to have a 500k growing subs like EQ did. LotRO too. Instead they continuiously shrink, merge servers, and then go FTP.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,290Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    Misdirect all you want, but AoC and SWTOR would have killed to have a 500k growing subs like EQ did. LotRO too. Instead they continuiously shrink, merge servers, and then go FTP.

    And yet the end up at the same place.  500k subs.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    Misdirect all you want, but AoC and SWTOR would have killed to have a 500k growing subs like EQ did. LotRO too. Instead they continuiously shrink, merge servers, and then go FTP.

    And yet the end up at the same place.  500k subs.

    No, they don't. If you think 500k people were paying subscribers to AoC before it went FTP you're delusional.

    And even if that were the case, hypothetically, the big difference is, old MMOs were made on a much smaller budget, reaching 500k was great. An MMO like AoC that took 100 million at least? Having 500k is beyond failure. And don't just let me do the talking, look up the articles of AoC's launch, TWO partners of Funcom's went bankrupt due to the failure, and most of the staff got layed off. Hell, AoC's marketing budget was probably bigger than the entire budget of two pre WoW MMOs combined.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,290Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    Misdirect all you want, but AoC and SWTOR would have killed to have a 500k growing subs like EQ did. LotRO too. Instead they continuiously shrink, merge servers, and then go FTP.

    And yet the end up at the same place.  500k subs.

    No, they don't. If you think 500k people were paying subscribers to AoC before it went FTP you're delusional.

    And even if that were the case, hypothetically, the big difference is, old MMOs were made on a much smaller budget, reaching 500k was great. An MMO like AoC that took 100 million at least? Having 500k is beyond failure. And don't just let me do the talking, look up the articles of AoC's launch, TWO partners of Funcom's went bankrupt due to the failure, and most of the staff got layed off. Hell, AoC's marketing budget was probably bigger than the entire budget of two pre WoW MMOs combined.

     I don't know what Aoc had before.  I do know that DAOC, SWG, UO and AC would have liked to get 500k subs as well.

    I do know that swtor has 500k subs. 

    And yes you are right that they were made on a much smaller budget.  There are also 100 x more mmo games today than before.    Having 500k was not as much as they hoped but it was what they needed.  That was the devs themselves saying that.

    Any game today reaching 500k subs with this many games is pretty amazing.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    No, we're talking about the people who played MMORPGs before WoW came out. Not an insignificant number, considering most pre WoW MMOs had more subs than AAA MMORPGs post WOW.

    Didn't we already talk about spreading lies on the forums, DF?

    Misdirect all you want, but AoC and SWTOR would have killed to have a 500k growing subs like EQ did. LotRO too. Instead they continuiously shrink, merge servers, and then go FTP.

    And yet the end up at the same place.  500k subs.

    No, they don't. If you think 500k people were paying subscribers to AoC before it went FTP you're delusional.

    And even if that were the case, hypothetically, the big difference is, old MMOs were made on a much smaller budget, reaching 500k was great. An MMO like AoC that took 100 million at least? Having 500k is beyond failure. And don't just let me do the talking, look up the articles of AoC's launch, TWO partners of Funcom's went bankrupt due to the failure, and most of the staff got layed off. Hell, AoC's marketing budget was probably bigger than the entire budget of two pre WoW MMOs combined.

     I don't know what Aoc had before.  I do know that DAOC, SWG, UO and AC would have liked to get 500k subs as well.

    I do know that swtor has 500k subs. 

    And yes you are right that they were made on a much smaller budget.  There are also 100 x more mmo games today than before.  

    The number of AAA MMOs competing against one another is the same size if not SMALLER than in the past. Pre WoW you had EQ, UO, AO, DAoC, SB, SWG, AC, EnB, L1, L2, FF11, and CoH all fighting one another. Almost all of them were AAA MMOs of their time.

    Nowadays, you have, LotRO, AoC, WoW, EQ2, SWTOR, Rift, DCUO, STO, GW, and... that's about it for big budget MMOs. Count that, compare it to the previous list, and keep in mind that there are many MANY more players in the MMO space and way more people with cable internet than there were in pre WoW days.

    SWTOR, most expensive MMORPG ever made, only 500k subs (which, we know based on their numbers is way more than they actually have). That's sad. That's what happens when publishers run things, they churn out garbage MMOs.

     

    Meanwhile we have games like Eve, making MMOs like they used to be made in pre WoW days, steadily growing to be the second biggest MMO on the market.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,290Member Uncommon
    There are literally 100 times more mmos now all competing with each other than 10 years ago. Yours was a rediculous comment

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,290Member Uncommon
    There are 600 games on this site alone. Not to mention all the mmo like games out: lol, defiance. ..

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,290Member Uncommon
    Swtor still has more subs than eve

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    There are literally 100 times more mmos now all competing with each other than 10 years ago. Yours was a rediculous comment

    Comparitively there are tons of players now too. There were dozens and dozens and dozens of MMOs back then, but the only ones people talked about then, and the only ones people largely talk about now, are the AAA titles. And comparing the two times, there were more AAA titles in competition then than there are now.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    There are 600 games on this site alone. Not to mention all the mmo like games out: lol, defiance. ..

    Many of the games on this site aren't MMOs, and of the games listed on this site, some aren't even running anymore.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,633Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    There are 600 games on this site alone. Not to mention all the mmo like games out: lol, defiance. ..

    Many of the games on this site aren't MMOs, and of the games listed on this site, some aren't even running anymore.

    Whether they meet anyone's strict definition of what an MMO should be or not, the point remains that they have significant enough overlap within the segment that most of those hundreds of games are competing for the same MMO segment time and dollars.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

    I do know that swtor has 500k subs. 

        NO you don't.. You wish they did..  At one point when TOR had dozens of servers, at one point over 100..  But not now..  The population of TOR dropped faster then a prom dress.. LOL  TOR has 17 servers, and you can not put that many active accounts on that many servers..  Most people on the forums everywhere are estimating that TOR is in the 200,000 ballpark..  The only ones I ever hear spouting large numbers are fans that wish their team was number 1.. 

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,751Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by Scot

    The harm is coming from the brands and the non gaming ethos that has taken over gaming studios.

     

    That is no harm, that is a fact - companies become bigger. Same goes for the rest of your post, you are not clearing out what is supposed to represent the harm you speak of, you only talk about things that are different but that alone does not make them any better or worse.


    It boils down to 2 situations:

    1) You believe game are somewhat worse than they used to be and then I point you out to my rose tinted glasses comment.

    2) Games did not become worse and you are just not making any point nor sense.


    Your ranting is lacking substance, it's just silly.

    But fair enough, it was my bad when I thought you have something to say...

    You think I see through rose tinted glasses about the past; I think you see through rose tinted glasses about the current day. I will leave you with this quote as I doubt we will get further on this issue:

    "The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,751Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    There are 600 games on this site alone. Not to mention all the mmo like games out: lol, defiance. ..

    Many of the games on this site aren't MMOs, and of the games listed on this site, some aren't even running anymore.

    Whether they meet anyone's strict definition of what an MMO should be or not, the point remains that they have significant enough overlap within the segment that most of those hundreds of games are competing for the same MMO segment time and dollars.

    I don't think it is an issue that we have many games on the list that are not MMO's. Most are 'MMO like' or as was said compete in the same space. I would say though that with every game heading towards having multiplayer content we may end up in a situation were every game released could justifiably be in the same space. So that's one to watch out for.

    Where I raise objections is in the like of Nari's thread where he justifies his opinion on what MMO's are by what games are on the game list of sites like this. The Mods are not applying some sort of complex equation to see if a game is a MMO or not. If it is popular, only online and has a couple of MMO elements to gameplay it gets in, that seems to me to be their main criteria.

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member
    Originally posted by TheScavenger

    A lot of good companies degraded when they saw the money Blizzard made with WoW. They didn't make MMOs because they enjoyed making or playing them, but they actually hated MMOs, but saw how much money there was in the business.

     

    Anyone remember Ultima Online? That was decades ago. That was when EA wasn't all about the money. EA helped make UO, a truly great and probably the best MMO to date. People still talk about it to this day...ITS STILL PAY TO PLAY and...ITS STILL A SUCCESS. More successful than EA's recent MMOs.

     

    Then remember SWG? Yeah so do I. While I personally enjoyed UO more (always liked fantasy), SWG was amazing. Then SOE, a great company at the time, completely changed it. Again, they saw how much money they "thought" they "could" make...in the end, it was a disaster for them. Then SOE re-made it into SWTOR...they took the recent changes of SWG and made it a bit more modern and added a linear story that has nothing to do with MMO. Didn't really work out for them and SOE turned it into a free to play game like the rest of their games.

     

    Even Everquest was more of a sandbox (or maybe its better classified as an open world).

     

    Then of course Asheron's Call was amazing, more niche than EQ and UO. But the developers of AC LOVED their game and the genre. They really wanted to make it great. Then their new MMO, just made for cash and numbers.

     

    the point is...these companies used to be great, they loved MMOs and they really wanted to revolutionize the genre. heck, these companies even let their developers play their MMO. I remember talking to developers in UO and SWG (not GMs, actual developers...in chat)...now these developers never play the MMO. When was the last time you talked to a developer in a game where you didn't have to contact them for a support question? Probably back in the classic days.

     

    So like the title says...why did MMOs become about the money and numbers? What happened to the love that went into them? In the old days, they never cared how many people played the MMO...as long as the ones who played it enjoyed it. Now they are factory made, no love at all...just feels like your playing a machine.

     

     

    World of Warcraft is when games became about money...  and not the game.

     

    Not the game itself, but the era of cable modems and kids (aka: WoW)

    "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."


    -Nariusseldon

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    The "buy in" for releasing an MMORPG is around ten million dollars.

    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/131252/applying_risk_analysis_to_.php

    That ten million dollars gets spent over five years or so of development time. Unless the MMORPG is somehow self funded, the investors have to be paid back. Ten million dollars isn't chump change, never mind the interest.

    That's why MMORPGs are about the numbers, because the money and the numbers because the money and the numbers are what determines if it survives or not.

    Taking it a step further, in theory if more money is invested, and higher numbers are achieved, then more money will be made. It's kind of like MMORPGs are the developers' avatars and they are constantly trying to achieve higher skill levels with their charisma.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • NadiaNadia Canonsburg, PAPosts: 11,866Member
    Originally posted by Antarious

    MMO's were about money almost from the start...

     

    The only reason UO/EQ had small under funded teams is because nobody believed in the projects.   Even tho M59 and NwN (aol) had existed previously...

     

    When UO came out the numbers surpassed anything expected and of course EQ had higher numbers.   At that point we saw more investment into the products and then more MMO's started to be produced.   So before November 2004 we had already started any process you see today...

     

    Games that launched badly, didn't do well (in comparison to EQ at the time) etc

     

    The only thing WoW changed was that we finally had a Western based MMO with big numbers.   L1 far exceeded the numbers of EQ even tho almost all of those numbers came from one geographical location.

    there was also perceived glut of mmos preWOW 

    Microsoft didnt think they could compete w SOE and pulled the plug on Mythica

     

    Flood of games, too few players cause change in online realm

    Boston Globe article, Feb 2004

    http://otherworlds31279.yuku.com/topic/1167/Online-games-failuresuccess-Boston-Globe-article#.UiNBYE2uJp8

    Spurred by the success of EverQuest, lots of companies began launching persistent online role-playing games, without thinking through the demands of the market. "Too many products got created, to be used by too few customers," said Jeffrey Anderson, CEO of Westwood-based Turbine Entertainment Software, developer of another successful online game, Asheron's Call. "It's like we all decided we all wanted to create our own version of MTV."

     

This discussion has been closed.