Folks have been "educated" into a belief in the mmo "rpg" industry, that defines pvp as a place of competition where certain tasks must be accomplished in order to achieve a victory. That part of the definition is pretty broad. The problem is that the genre has taken this definition to solely mean that pvp is an immediate gratification experience that is usually in an instanced bubble where the outcome does not at all relate to anyone outside of said bubble.
Snip...........................................
Teso states that pvp is meant to achieve something for the entire realm. It states that developers don't have to program the title to allow for a handful of races and classes to just form different gangs (okay, you call them guilds but what are they really?) of the same kinds of folk and put them in somewhat silly E-sport events. And that's just a start. Read what they have to say, and understand from there.
If the developers are creating the PvP environment, one apart from the rest of the world, while creating a set of tasks to accomplish for "victory" and "rewards" it is exactly as you describe as being the problem with PvP. And that is what TESO is.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Oh well if he said it, it must apply to everyone....whoever he is.
Seeing as how I replied to someone telling another person (and ONLY for you) while making a statement that "players today want"....I proved my point. His all inclusive comments are false.
But as usual, we will toss out all evidence that goes against what we ourselves want so the dream world we live in can go on.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Why does the OP assume that the PvP is 'hard core'? There are all kinds of opportunities to PvP in different ways. Just like DAoC in the first couple years when a lot of the player base was more casual, there were lots of people who came to the frontier only rarely, like when a relic was under attack. Its only as hardcore as people make it.
As far as 'story-driven' PvE, again, its only as story-driven as you make it. You can focus on the story-line quest, or you can just wander out and do stuff when you come across it.
Basically the OP has made a false comparison that does not do justice to the game's options.
funny then that the MMO industry has grown by a factor of 10 over the last decade. All of those people buying stuff they don't want.
And for the record, its unfair to say that ESO is just an amusement park style MMO. PvP by its very nature is the opposite of themepark because for the most part its content depends on the players and is not developer scripted.
funny then that the MMO industry has grown by a factor of 10 over the last decade. All of those people buying stuff they don't want.
And for the record, its unfair to say that ESO is just an amusement park style MMO. PvP by its very nature is the opposite of themepark because for the most part its content depends on the players and is not developer scripted.
Yet subscriptions have plummeted over the last 5 years and F2P has risen to the top showing they are not worth paying for anymore.
And yes, TESO PvP is themepark, the developers have created the entire battlefield with set objectives for "victory" with the added bonus of themepark style rewards. Its PvP for carebears.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
funny then that the MMO industry has grown by a factor of 10 over the last decade. All of those people buying stuff they don't want.
And for the record, its unfair to say that ESO is just an amusement park style MMO. PvP by its very nature is the opposite of themepark because for the most part its content depends on the players and is not developer scripted.
Yet subscriptions have plummeted over the last 5 years and F2P has risen to the top showing they are not worth paying for anymore.
And yes, TESO PvP is themepark, the developers have created the entire battlefield with set objectives for "victory" with the added bonus of themepark style rewards. Its PvP for carebears.
you think that those companies that put out FTP games are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts? F2P with cash shows can make good money, in fact a lot of people spend more money on those games than a sub would have cost. In any event, I was talking about the MMO player base, which has grown dramatically by any objective measure, which is a separate from the financial model question of F2P versus P2P.
As far as ESO PvP being carebear, then by your definition DAoC was carebear? Because their PvP model is very similar to DAoC, in fact one of the DAoC guys is heading up the game development.
Anyway, sounds like you've made up your mind that its not the game for you. Bye, and good luck finding what you want.
funny then that the MMO industry has grown by a factor of 10 over the last decade. All of those people buying stuff they don't want.
And for the record, its unfair to say that ESO is just an amusement park style MMO. PvP by its very nature is the opposite of themepark because for the most part its content depends on the players and is not developer scripted.
Yet subscriptions have plummeted over the last 5 years and F2P has risen to the top showing they are not worth paying for anymore.
And yes, TESO PvP is themepark, the developers have created the entire battlefield with set objectives for "victory" with the added bonus of themepark style rewards. Its PvP for carebears.
you think that those companies that put out FTP games are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts? F2P with cash shows can make good money, in fact a lot of people spend more money on those games than a sub would have cost. In any event, I was talking about the MMO player base, which has grown dramatically by any objective measure, which is a separate from the financial model question of F2P versus P2P.
As far as ESO PvP being carebear, then by your definition DAoC was carebear? Because their PvP model is very similar to DAoC, in fact one of the DAoC guys is heading up the game development.
Anyway, sounds like you've made up your mind that its not the game for you. Bye, and good luck finding what you want.
1. red herring. Fewer people willing to pay a sub has nothing to do with a coming running F2P out of the kindness of their hearts or not. MMORPGS are no longer worth paying for because its the same thing over and over, innovation no longer matters, just trying to be as successful as WoW is all they are gunning for. Game is second, and it shows.
2. Yes, DaoC was PvP for carebears, it was the first game to make PvP for PvEers. It was weak, period. I don't need reasons to PvP created for me, I don't need rewards and I don't need a developer telling me I am so stupid that if they don't make it so each faction has different races, I wont know who the enemy is. Its a crap themepark based design from top to bottom.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
But who cares, ESO is an amusement park style mmo and pvp is just one of the rides. Same shit, new graphics.
Well, it can be "same shit" for you (and for you only) but hey, it seems that players today want this kind of gameplay.
Sandbox? Look at Darkfall. Failed quake arena. Full loot? It's old and useless? Forced PvP everywhere? BF4 and Planetside2 are there to be played.
MMO are all about a character, in a world, with some mechanics to prevent griefind, stupid playing styles and having fun following stories and adventures, not killing people 24h/24
It's same shit for anyone that has played mmo's as long as I have. Of course there are gamers that go through the same motions year after year, game after game, while never realising it or just somehow find it fun for the millionth time. I call them idiots.
Darkfall devs had beautiful ideas, far more than just pvp, the original design for Darkfall had pve features that put every other game to shame. It's just that they lacked the tools and talent to implement them. Sandbox games are way harder to make than themeparks.
BF and PS don't offer anything but pvp, I want way more than that.
Market is filled by people that started with WoW, they don't know any better because all we've had for the past ten is the same shit.
But who cares, ESO is an amusement park style mmo and pvp is just one of the rides. Same shit, new graphics.
Well, it can be "same shit" for you (and for you only) but hey, it seems that players today want this kind of gameplay.
Sandbox? Look at Darkfall. Failed quake arena. Full loot? It's old and useless? Forced PvP everywhere? BF4 and Planetside2 are there to be played.
MMO are all about a character, in a world, with some mechanics to prevent griefind, stupid playing styles and having fun following stories and adventures, not killing people 24h/24
It's same shit for anyone that has played mmo's as long as I have. Of course there are gamers that go through the same motions year after year, game after game, while never realising it or just somehow find it fun for the millionth time. I call them idiots.
Darkfall devs had beautiful ideas, far more than just pvp, the original design for Darkfall had pve features that put every other game to shame. It's just that they lacked the tools and talent to implement them. Sandbox games are way harder to make than themeparks.
BF and PS don't offer anything but pvp, I want way more than that.
Market is filled by people that started with WoW, they don't know any better because all we've had for the past ten is the same shit.
Sandbox fans go through the same motions year after year, they latch on to some grand idea from any two-bit developer and pump-up the hype-meter for 4 years before it releases.
And then when the game turns out to be a POS with only a handful of people playing it, they flood the forums with excuses about why it was just a lack of tools or talent that made the game fail.
They never give a thought to the obvious point that the idea was pretty harebrained to begin with. If I felt a need to call people who like different shit than me something, idiot probably would fit nicely.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Why does the OP assume that the PvP is 'hard core'? There are all kinds of opportunities to PvP in different ways. Just like DAoC in the first couple years when a lot of the player base was more casual, there were lots of people who came to the frontier only rarely, like when a relic was under attack. Its only as hardcore as people make it.
As far as 'story-driven' PvE, again, its only as story-driven as you make it. You can focus on the story-line quest, or you can just wander out and do stuff when you come across it.
Basically the OP has made a false comparison that does not do justice to the game's options.
The most non-hard core pvp game was Dark Age of Camelot. Yet, it had the most advanced pvp system I've seen - outside of Shadowbane.
It was a pve centered title, complete with 1-50 levels per faction with no enemies roaming past your guys like the Johnny Griefers that abuse the crappy imaginations of most pvp titles. But you could go into a mega dungeon called Darkness Falls - if the level 50s earned it through successful conquest in massive non-instanced zones called frontiers. Otherwise, if you chose to craft and raid pve dungeons, that was your call. I had 19 level 50s - only a few were over Realm Rank 7 (10 realm ranks at the time I still played) - which wasn't difficult to get if you did other than just hump castles.
It had the best pvp in my opinion, because there was no gear score or ladder rankings. Capture points were held for the length of a battleground timer. No flags and holding points. Castles had relics of great power that related to the lore of each realm. Captured relics could be returned to their former holdings (i.e., Excalibur to Castle Excalibur)...or those relics could be stolen in massive alliance battles between realms, and taken to an enemy realm to grant them bonuses in coin, xp, and so forth.
I'll leave it at that - if you want to know more just google Dark Age of Camelot and read up.
And then when the game turns out to be a POS with only a handful of people playing it, they flood the forums with excuses about why it was just a lack of tools or talent that made the game fail.
They never give a thought to the obvious point that the idea was pretty harebrained to begin with. If I felt a need to call people who like different shit than me something, idiot probably would fit nicely.
Oh right like you DAOC clones dont come out of the woodwork every time the second coming gets mentioned in someones alpha somewhere. WAR, GW2 after this one bombs I am sure the Camelot Unchained forums will be flooded with hype.
And then when the game turns out to be a POS with only a handful of people playing it, they flood the forums with excuses about why it was just a lack of tools or talent that made the game fail.
They never give a thought to the obvious point that the idea was pretty harebrained to begin with. If I felt a need to call people who like different shit than me something, idiot probably would fit nicely.
Oh right like you DAOC clones dont come out of the woodwork every time the second coming gets mentioned in someones alpha somewhere. WAR, GW2 after this one bombs I am sure the Camelot Unchained forums will be flooded with hype.
Funny thing is I think WAR was a POS and I have zero interest in CU...
But it doesn't surprise me that our resident "look at me I use a blue font!" DAoC hater would find a way to take a post about themeparks and sandboxes and use it to take a shot at DAoC.
And your continued and frequent contributions to a forum for a game you hate makes me think you're just a cybershill... who do you work for? Wildstar? Scarlet Blade?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
And then when the game turns out to be a POS with only a handful of people playing it, they flood the forums with excuses about why it was just a lack of tools or talent that made the game fail.
They never give a thought to the obvious point that the idea was pretty harebrained to begin with. If I felt a need to call people who like different shit than me something, idiot probably would fit nicely.
Oh right like you DAOC clones dont come out of the woodwork every time the second coming gets mentioned in someones alpha somewhere. WAR, GW2 after this one bombs I am sure the Camelot Unchained forums will be flooded with hype.
This x10
DaoC couldn't top SWGs numbers, WAR bombed, they don't even like it when you mention GW2, yet amazingly some talk about sandboxes as if they aren't popular even though EvE is the second biggest subscription game in history. Every year sees an increase in subscribers even though the game has been out for 10 years. Seriously, 500k subscribers to a 10 year old game? EvE probably made more than DaoC, War and GW2 combined..........
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
DaoC couldn't top SWGs numbers, WAR bombed, they don't even like it when you mention GW2, yet amazingly some talk about sandboxes as if they aren't popular even though EvE is the second biggest subscription game in history. Every year sees an increase in subscribers even though the game has been out for 10 years. Seriously, 500k subscribers to a 10 year old game? EvE probably made more than DaoC, War and GW2 combined..........
Do you actually believe these lies ? Eve second biggest subscription game, don't make me laugh. They hit the 500k sub in 2013, which was their peak. This is a small fish when you compare with the most subbed games.
Here is something which you might find useful next time :
Back in the days of old, there were no PvE MMOers, or PvP MMOers... you did both because they were both necessary, and there were no other games on the market catering to one or the other.
This isn't really an accurate statement. The original EverQuest is about as old as you can get and still be talking about an arguably quality product, and it always had different server types with rulesets catering to different types of player. The only group that wasn't particularly catered to in the "days of old" was the solo gamer.
Originally posted by JJ82
Yet subscriptions have plummeted over the last 5 years and F2P has risen to the top showing they are not worth paying for anymore.
Please tell me you are just trolling. There is no evidence supporting the theory that F2P has risen to the top because games which offer a subscription dropped in quality. The only reason it wasn't on top from the start is because nobody offered the option, you had to sub to play anything. If WoW had launched as a F2P or hybrid game, subscriptions would have died completely ten years ago. When choosing between new products of roughly equal quality, most people will go with whichever has the lowest cost.
I think it's pretty laughable to try to claim that vanilla WoW was of objectively higher quality than most of the recent and/or upcoming major releases in the MMO market.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
you think that those companies that put out FTP games are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts? F2P with cash shows can make good money, in fact a lot of people spend more money on those games than a sub would have cost. In any event, I was talking about the MMO player base, which has grown dramatically by any objective measure, which is a separate from the financial model question of F2P versus P2P.
As far as ESO PvP being carebear, then by your definition DAoC was carebear? Because their PvP model is very similar to DAoC, in fact one of the DAoC guys is heading up the game development.
Anyway, sounds like you've made up your mind that its not the game for you. Bye, and good luck finding what you want.
1. red herring. Fewer people willing to pay a sub has nothing to do with a coming running F2P out of the kindness of their hearts or not. MMORPGS are no longer worth paying for because its the same thing over and over, innovation no longer matters, just trying to be as successful as WoW is all they are gunning for. Game is second, and it shows.
2. Yes, DaoC was PvP for carebears, it was the first game to make PvP for PvEers. It was weak, period. I don't need reasons to PvP created for me, I don't need rewards and I don't need a developer telling me I am so stupid that if they don't make it so each faction has different races, I wont know who the enemy is. Its a crap themepark based design from top to bottom.
1. You don't seem to understand that even in F2P, players ARE paying for the game. Its just not all of them, and they do it in a different way than a monthly sub, but you are crazy if you don't think there is money coming in. If there wasn't money coming in, they would shut down the game.
2. Ok now you are either trolling or you are really dim. Are you seriously saying that DAoC used different races so that PvP players could know who their enemy is?!? You don't think there was more to it than that, ie, making the realms thematically different?
Anyway, it sounds like you don't like the game. So why are you here? Go play your ideal MMO and leave this one alone. Or if there isn't an ideal MMO, go get Mom to lend you some money so you can pursue your dreams!
From most of the polls I've seen, the vast majority of players seem to prefer PvP that oriented to smaller groups. Rather than participating in Large Scale battles. Now I suspect this is because they aren't sure how well that will work (for their computer with their Internet connection). I would even go so far as to predict that large scale AvA will be more popular with the console crowd where its assumed the "playing field" will be more even. For instance, your connection to the Xbox Live Server may be different, but the hardware of your console is exactly the same.
Comments
Oh well if he said it, it must apply to everyone....whoever he is.
If the developers are creating the PvP environment, one apart from the rest of the world, while creating a set of tasks to accomplish for "victory" and "rewards" it is exactly as you describe as being the problem with PvP. And that is what TESO is.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Seeing as how I replied to someone telling another person (and ONLY for you) while making a statement that "players today want"....I proved my point. His all inclusive comments are false.
But as usual, we will toss out all evidence that goes against what we ourselves want so the dream world we live in can go on.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Why does the OP assume that the PvP is 'hard core'? There are all kinds of opportunities to PvP in different ways. Just like DAoC in the first couple years when a lot of the player base was more casual, there were lots of people who came to the frontier only rarely, like when a relic was under attack. Its only as hardcore as people make it.
As far as 'story-driven' PvE, again, its only as story-driven as you make it. You can focus on the story-line quest, or you can just wander out and do stuff when you come across it.
Basically the OP has made a false comparison that does not do justice to the game's options.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
funny then that the MMO industry has grown by a factor of 10 over the last decade. All of those people buying stuff they don't want.
And for the record, its unfair to say that ESO is just an amusement park style MMO. PvP by its very nature is the opposite of themepark because for the most part its content depends on the players and is not developer scripted.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
The 2 game might not even be related(GW2 model?). I dont' see how having a pve and pvp is going to make the game fail.
So making a single game allow you to target 2 different group and make more money. I dont' see how that is a fail.
Yet subscriptions have plummeted over the last 5 years and F2P has risen to the top showing they are not worth paying for anymore.
And yes, TESO PvP is themepark, the developers have created the entire battlefield with set objectives for "victory" with the added bonus of themepark style rewards. Its PvP for carebears.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
you think that those companies that put out FTP games are doing it out of the kindness of their hearts? F2P with cash shows can make good money, in fact a lot of people spend more money on those games than a sub would have cost. In any event, I was talking about the MMO player base, which has grown dramatically by any objective measure, which is a separate from the financial model question of F2P versus P2P.
As far as ESO PvP being carebear, then by your definition DAoC was carebear? Because their PvP model is very similar to DAoC, in fact one of the DAoC guys is heading up the game development.
Anyway, sounds like you've made up your mind that its not the game for you. Bye, and good luck finding what you want.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
Staring through an electron microscope in an effort to observe a virus' mode of transmission would definitely be hardcore.
1. red herring. Fewer people willing to pay a sub has nothing to do with a coming running F2P out of the kindness of their hearts or not. MMORPGS are no longer worth paying for because its the same thing over and over, innovation no longer matters, just trying to be as successful as WoW is all they are gunning for. Game is second, and it shows.
2. Yes, DaoC was PvP for carebears, it was the first game to make PvP for PvEers. It was weak, period. I don't need reasons to PvP created for me, I don't need rewards and I don't need a developer telling me I am so stupid that if they don't make it so each faction has different races, I wont know who the enemy is. Its a crap themepark based design from top to bottom.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
It's same shit for anyone that has played mmo's as long as I have. Of course there are gamers that go through the same motions year after year, game after game, while never realising it or just somehow find it fun for the millionth time. I call them idiots.
Darkfall devs had beautiful ideas, far more than just pvp, the original design for Darkfall had pve features that put every other game to shame. It's just that they lacked the tools and talent to implement them. Sandbox games are way harder to make than themeparks.
BF and PS don't offer anything but pvp, I want way more than that.
Market is filled by people that started with WoW, they don't know any better because all we've had for the past ten is the same shit.
Sandbox fans go through the same motions year after year, they latch on to some grand idea from any two-bit developer and pump-up the hype-meter for 4 years before it releases.
And then when the game turns out to be a POS with only a handful of people playing it, they flood the forums with excuses about why it was just a lack of tools or talent that made the game fail.
They never give a thought to the obvious point that the idea was pretty harebrained to begin with. If I felt a need to call people who like different shit than me something, idiot probably would fit nicely.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
The most non-hard core pvp game was Dark Age of Camelot. Yet, it had the most advanced pvp system I've seen - outside of Shadowbane.
It was a pve centered title, complete with 1-50 levels per faction with no enemies roaming past your guys like the Johnny Griefers that abuse the crappy imaginations of most pvp titles. But you could go into a mega dungeon called Darkness Falls - if the level 50s earned it through successful conquest in massive non-instanced zones called frontiers. Otherwise, if you chose to craft and raid pve dungeons, that was your call. I had 19 level 50s - only a few were over Realm Rank 7 (10 realm ranks at the time I still played) - which wasn't difficult to get if you did other than just hump castles.
It had the best pvp in my opinion, because there was no gear score or ladder rankings. Capture points were held for the length of a battleground timer. No flags and holding points. Castles had relics of great power that related to the lore of each realm. Captured relics could be returned to their former holdings (i.e., Excalibur to Castle Excalibur)...or those relics could be stolen in massive alliance battles between realms, and taken to an enemy realm to grant them bonuses in coin, xp, and so forth.
I'll leave it at that - if you want to know more just google Dark Age of Camelot and read up.
Oh right like you DAOC clones dont come out of the woodwork every time the second coming gets mentioned in someones alpha somewhere. WAR, GW2 after this one bombs I am sure the Camelot Unchained forums will be flooded with hype.
Funny thing is I think WAR was a POS and I have zero interest in CU...
But it doesn't surprise me that our resident "look at me I use a blue font!" DAoC hater would find a way to take a post about themeparks and sandboxes and use it to take a shot at DAoC.
And your continued and frequent contributions to a forum for a game you hate makes me think you're just a cybershill... who do you work for? Wildstar? Scarlet Blade?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
This x10
DaoC couldn't top SWGs numbers, WAR bombed, they don't even like it when you mention GW2, yet amazingly some talk about sandboxes as if they aren't popular even though EvE is the second biggest subscription game in history. Every year sees an increase in subscribers even though the game has been out for 10 years. Seriously, 500k subscribers to a 10 year old game? EvE probably made more than DaoC, War and GW2 combined..........
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Do you actually believe these lies ? Eve second biggest subscription game, don't make me laugh. They hit the 500k sub in 2013, which was their peak. This is a small fish when you compare with the most subbed games.
Here is something which you might find useful next time :
http://mmodata.blogspot.ca/
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/28/eve-online-hits-500-000-subscribers-heads-into-second-decade/
This isn't really an accurate statement. The original EverQuest is about as old as you can get and still be talking about an arguably quality product, and it always had different server types with rulesets catering to different types of player. The only group that wasn't particularly catered to in the "days of old" was the solo gamer.
Please tell me you are just trolling. There is no evidence supporting the theory that F2P has risen to the top because games which offer a subscription dropped in quality. The only reason it wasn't on top from the start is because nobody offered the option, you had to sub to play anything. If WoW had launched as a F2P or hybrid game, subscriptions would have died completely ten years ago. When choosing between new products of roughly equal quality, most people will go with whichever has the lowest cost.
I think it's pretty laughable to try to claim that vanilla WoW was of objectively higher quality than most of the recent and/or upcoming major releases in the MMO market.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
1. You don't seem to understand that even in F2P, players ARE paying for the game. Its just not all of them, and they do it in a different way than a monthly sub, but you are crazy if you don't think there is money coming in. If there wasn't money coming in, they would shut down the game.
2. Ok now you are either trolling or you are really dim. Are you seriously saying that DAoC used different races so that PvP players could know who their enemy is?!? You don't think there was more to it than that, ie, making the realms thematically different?
Anyway, it sounds like you don't like the game. So why are you here? Go play your ideal MMO and leave this one alone. Or if there isn't an ideal MMO, go get Mom to lend you some money so you can pursue your dreams!
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.