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!

2004 v. 2014: The State of the MMO Genre

123457»

Comments

  • GuyClinchGuyClinch Sunnyvale, CAPosts: 485Member
    Final Fantasy XIV is fairly awful on consoles. Even though the PS4 is equally to a mediocre computer - I don't think its going to be thrilling enough on consoles to be a breath of fresh air. Consoles just suck too much.  The controller is just an awful way to play MMOs.
  • himodshimods fuckyouPosts: 54Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by himods
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
     

    137 million and in the top 10 earning f2p games in the world last year....doesn't sound like you have any idea what you're talking about.

    Just to add to that .. they still have 500k subs (as much as Eve) and that is another $90M ... so the game made $227M in 2013. In fact, it made back the total production cost in less than a year ... i would say it is a huge financial success.

     

    It made profit sure, but it's a farcry from success story when you consider the fanbase SW has. 

    On the topic: you people need count in how much internet has grown since 2004, comparing sub numbers then and now is silly. Also, WoW made MMOs mainstream.

    Financial success is financial success. You can always claim that it does not get everyone who has ever watched SW to play .. but so what .. it makes lots of money ... MORE than most MMOs .. and certainly all the sandboxes.

     

     

    Oh right, because a game with one of the biggest names in entertainment and a development & marketing budget of $150-500 million makes more money than some noname game with a shoestring budget in comparison, this somehow proves that it's a success? Give me a fucking break.

    It sold 2 million boxes and has now lost 75% of its playerbase. Lol, success indeed.

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

    Oh right, because a game with one of the biggest names in entertainment and a development & marketing budget of $150-500 million makes more money than some noname game with a shoestring budget in comparison, this somehow proves that it's a success?

    Yes ... if a game got a shoestring budget .. it is not a success in getting big investment in the first place.

    In fact, i got the same number of subs (on top of lots of f2p money) in a much shorter time than Eve .. now that is a success. Who wants to spend 7-8 years to get to 500k subs .. when a better game can do it in a month.

    And f2p makes even more money than that pantry 500k subs.

     

  • himodshimods fuckyouPosts: 54Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by himods

    Oh right, because a game with one of the biggest names in entertainment and a development & marketing budget of $150-500 million makes more money than some noname game with a shoestring budget in comparison, this somehow proves that it's a success?

    Yes ... if a game got a shoestring budget .. it is not a success in getting big investment in the first place.

    In fact, i got the same number of subs (on top of lots of f2p money) in a much shorter time than Eve .. now that is a success. Who wants to spend 7-8 years to get to 500k subs .. when a better game can do it in a month.

    And f2p makes even more money than that pantry 500k subs.

     

    Was there a 'whoosh!' sound when what I wrote went just completely over your head?

    Half of what you wrote makes no sense and the other half has nothing to do with the subject.

  • Fenrir767Fenrir767 Waitsfield, VTPosts: 595Member
    Originally posted by himods
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by himods
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
     

    137 million and in the top 10 earning f2p games in the world last year....doesn't sound like you have any idea what you're talking about.

    Just to add to that .. they still have 500k subs (as much as Eve) and that is another $90M ... so the game made $227M in 2013. In fact, it made back the total production cost in less than a year ... i would say it is a huge financial success.

     

    It made profit sure, but it's a farcry from success story when you consider the fanbase SW has. 

    On the topic: you people need count in how much internet has grown since 2004, comparing sub numbers then and now is silly. Also, WoW made MMOs mainstream.

    Financial success is financial success. You can always claim that it does not get everyone who has ever watched SW to play .. but so what .. it makes lots of money ... MORE than most MMOs .. and certainly all the sandboxes.

     

     

    Oh right, because a game with one of the biggest names in entertainment and a development & marketing budget of $150-500 million makes more money than some noname game with a shoestring budget in comparison, this somehow proves that it's a success? Give me a fucking break.

    It sold 2 million boxes and has now lost 75% of its playerbase. Lol, success indeed.

    SWG sold 1 million in 2 years and peaked at about 300k subscribers losing 70% of its player base as well. The game so many here cite as the greatest of MMOs suffers from the same issue as all of the recent ones player retention! 

    The bugs ridiculous grinds and other aspects pushed 700k players out the door yet that game is regarded here as a resounding success which it clearly was not hence all the revamps until finally it even lost it's Niche players. 

    If SWG was the game at launch that was described on it's Box at launch we probably wouldn't have SWTOR and would still be playing it however it was not and never lived up to it's full potential financially either!

  • himodshimods fuckyouPosts: 54Member
    Originally posted by Fenrir767
    Originally posted by himods
     .

     

     

    Oh right, because a game with one of the biggest names in entertainment and a development & marketing budget of $150-500 million makes more money than some noname game with a shoestring budget in comparison, this somehow proves that it's a success? Give me a fucking break.

    It sold 2 million boxes and has now lost 75% of its playerbase. Lol, success indeed.

    SWG sold 1 million in 2 years and peaked at about 300k subscribers losing 70% of its player base as well. The game so many here cite as the greatest of MMOs suffers from the same issue as all of the recent ones player retention! 

    The bugs ridiculous grinds and other aspects pushed 700k players out the door yet that game is regarded here as a resounding success which it clearly was not hence all the revamps until finally it even lost it's Niche players. 

    If SWG was the game at launch that was described on it's Box at launch we probably wouldn't have SWTOR and would still be playing it however it was not and never lived up to it's full potential financially either!

    Ok? I honestly have no idea what your point is, but I'm damn sure you are missing a couple of elephants in the room. First of, internet has propably tripled since those days, this of course means millions of more potential customers. Second is the dev cost of SWG, which I would imagine was miniscule to SWTORs. Third is of course WoW, which sucked more than a couple of MMOs to near death, including SWG. Fourth is again WoW, it also made MMOs mainstream, again more potential customers for future games like SWTOR.

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

    Ok? I honestly have no idea what your point is, but I'm damn sure you are missing a couple of elephants in the room. First of, internet has propably tripled since those days, this of course means millions of more potential customers. Second is the dev cost of SWG, which I would imagine was miniscule to SWTORs. Third is of course WoW, which sucked more than a couple of MMOs to near death, including SWG. Fourth is again WoW, it also made MMOs mainstream, again more potential customers for future games like SWTOR.

    It is no surprise you are trying to ignore the point.

    TOR is a money making success .. it does not matter if you try to make some excuse for it not to be .. but it is in the top 10 .. just the f2p part.

    You may as well say GTA is not a success because not everyone who has ever seen a gangster movie buys the game.

     

  • Fenrir767Fenrir767 Waitsfield, VTPosts: 595Member
    The point I am trying to make us you beloved game had the same issues as every new MMO wether it be TOR or another game.....
  • AkerbeltzAkerbeltz Vitoria-GasteizPosts: 161Member Uncommon

    Just to expand on some of the late comments:

     

    - SWG had achieved an stable player-base of 300k. The ones that left mainly joined WoW. What actually killed SWG was trying to imitate WoW's design because they ambitioned its massive sub numbers. May I quote this:

     

    "We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

    Nancy MacIntyre, SWG senior director at LucasArts

     

    It pains my heart so much: A corporate imbecile with no idea of what RPG is about that nowadays puts on her twitter account that she's working on "The Next Big Thing" AKA "The Next Shiny for the Illiterate Masses". This is what current mainstream videogaming is about: skinner's box mechanics and story on-rails under a paint of flashy graphics, glitter, Voice-Overs and a lots of Marketing and Over-Production, all the while the functional scope of the game is limited, there is no interdependency among players and lacks any sustainability on the long-run.

     

    I'm not saying that SWG was a perfect game: It's true that some aspects were too grindy, that the missions could be more elaborated, etc. But features and functionality wise, the game had an ambition and an scope that few games have matched - perhaps only EVE, UO and maybe AC.

     

    What some of us are asking are companies with the ethos and philosophy of Paradox Games and CCP, that emphasize substance over presentation  and that respect the intelligence and creativity of the players. These companies target a particular segment of the public instead of going for the masses and prioritize the production costs and milestones of their projects accordingly. And they work and they are financially and critically successful, with a loyal and commited customer-base (see Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings or EVE).

    Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

  • skyline385skyline385 BangalorePosts: 564Member
    Originally posted by Akerbeltz

    Just to expand on some of the late comments:

     

    - SWG had achieved an stable player-base of 300k. The ones that left mainly joined WoW. What actually killed SWG was trying to imitate WoW's design. May I quote this:

     

    "We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

    Nancy MacIntyre, SWG senior director at LucasArts

     

    It pains my heart so much: A corporate imbecile with no idea of what RPG is about that nowadays puts on her twitter account that she's working on "The Next Big Thing" AKA "The Next Shiny for the Illiterate Masses". This is what current mainstream videogaming is about: skinner's box mechanics and story on-rails under a paint of flashy graphics, glitter, Voice-Overs and a lots of Marketing and Over-Production, all the while the functional scope of the game is limited, there is no interdependency among players and lacks any sustainability on the long-run.

     

    I'm not saying that SWG was a perfect game: It's true that some aspects were too grindy, that the missions could be more elaborated, etc. But features and functionality wise, the game had an ambition and an scope that few games have matched - perhaps only EVE, UO and maybe AC.

     

    What some of us are asking are companies with the ethos and philosophy of Paradox Games and CCP, that emphasize substance over presentation  and that respect the intelligence and creativity of the players. These companies target a particular segment of the public instead of going for the masses and prioritize the production costs and milestones of their projects accordingly. And they work and they are financially and critically successful, with a loyal and commited customer-base (see Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings or EVE).

    Can you show me a proof of this 300K stable population, like the article from where you got this info ??

    image
  • iridescenceiridescence Elliot Lake, ONPosts: 1,486Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Yes ... if a game got a shoestring budget .. it is not a success in getting big investment in the first place.

    In fact, i got the same number of subs (on top of lots of f2p money) in a much shorter time than Eve .. now that is a success. Who wants to spend 7-8 years to get to 500k subs .. when a better game can do it in a month.

    And f2p makes even more money than that pantry 500k subs.

     

    Well, EVE cost almost nothing to make and maintain compared to any big budget MMO so they get to put a lot more of that money into the profit column. Add to that that they are still making  that money on 11 year old game. How much money will SWTOR be making in 9 years?

    Plus F2P is over-rated as a source of making money. As you yourself have said time and again most F2P players don't pay anything so you need any millions to get enough whales to add up to anything substantial.

     

     

  • AkerbeltzAkerbeltz Vitoria-GasteizPosts: 161Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by skyline385
    Originally posted by Akerbeltz

    Just to expand on some of the late comments:

     

    - SWG had achieved an stable player-base of 300k. The ones that left mainly joined WoW. What actually killed SWG was trying to imitate WoW's design. May I quote this:

     

    "We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

    Nancy MacIntyre, SWG senior director at LucasArts

     

    It pains my heart so much: A corporate imbecile with no idea of what RPG is about that nowadays puts on her twitter account that she's working on "The Next Big Thing" AKA "The Next Shiny for the Illiterate Masses". This is what current mainstream videogaming is about: skinner's box mechanics and story on-rails under a paint of flashy graphics, glitter, Voice-Overs and a lots of Marketing and Over-Production, all the while the functional scope of the game is limited, there is no interdependency among players and lacks any sustainability on the long-run.

     

    I'm not saying that SWG was a perfect game: It's true that some aspects were too grindy, that the missions could be more elaborated, etc. But features and functionality wise, the game had an ambition and an scope that few games have matched - perhaps only EVE, UO and maybe AC.

     

    What some of us are asking are companies with the ethos and philosophy of Paradox Games and CCP, that emphasize substance over presentation  and that respect the intelligence and creativity of the players. These companies target a particular segment of the public instead of going for the masses and prioritize the production costs and milestones of their projects accordingly. And they work and they are financially and critically successful, with a loyal and commited customer-base (see Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings or EVE).

    Can you show me a proof of this 300K stable population, like the article from where you got this info ??

     

    Subs Numbers:

     

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_101/560-Blowing-Up-Galaxies

     

    I underline the following:

    "Even so, the game attracted around 300,000 subscribers, a respectable showing then. A year later, World of Warcraft debuted and redefined "respectable." At both SOE and its licensor, LucasArts, WoW envy grew strong."

     

     

    About the corporate bitch's statement:

     

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/10/arts/10star.html?_r=0

     

    I underline this as well:

    "Someone might wonder, well, it's just a game, what's the big deal?" said Robert Kruck, 54, an engineer for Motorola who lives in Schaumburg, Ill., who said he had canceled seven of his eight Galaxies accounts. "But for many people it is much more than a game," he said. "It is a part of their lives where they have invested huge amounts of time building a community. And that community has been based on a sophisticated, mature game. So now, for them to take an adult-level combat and economics simulation and turn it into a mindless game for 10-year-olds is a violation of that community."

     

    Again:

     

    "We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base," said Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts. "There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

     

    Moral of the Story: As in any form of artistic expression, catering to the masses leads to dull, shallow, watered-down creations.

     

    EDIT: typos

    Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

  • himodshimods fuckyouPosts: 54Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by himods
     

    Ok? I honestly have no idea what your point is, but I'm damn sure you are missing a couple of elephants in the room. First of, internet has propably tripled since those days, this of course means millions of more potential customers. Second is the dev cost of SWG, which I would imagine was miniscule to SWTORs. Third is of course WoW, which sucked more than a couple of MMOs to near death, including SWG. Fourth is again WoW, it also made MMOs mainstream, again more potential customers for future games like SWTOR.

    It is no surprise you are trying to ignore the point.

    TOR is a money making success .. it does not matter if you try to make some excuse for it not to be .. but it is in the top 10 .. just the f2p part.

    You may as well say GTA is not a success because not everyone who has ever seen a gangster movie buys the game.

     

     

    I was quoting Fenrir, not you.

    Your point is obvious: praise swtor while ignoring facts.

    I never said swtor is not doing money these days. But a success, something that lives up to its potential, it certainly is not. Losing 70-75% of its subscribers in the first eight months, getting called a disaapointment by EA and forced to go f2p or end up dead. Some analysts say that swtor failure was the real reason behind EA CEO stepping down.

    You really need to lay off the sauce for a while.

  • Solar_ProphetSolar_Prophet Columbus, OHPosts: 879Member Uncommon

    Games ten years ago had terrible mechanics, lackluster content, horrible UIs, and consisted primarily of grinding. The only 'user created content' consisted of role-playing (which is perfectly possible in today's games) or deciding which area to go kill 10000 mobs in that day in order to get that last 1/800th of your experience bar to level up... that is, if you could find a group to do it with, since soloing was nigh impossible (or at least improbable).

    People complain that today's 'endgame' is nothing but a carrot on a stick. While true, what exactly do you people call being forced to grind like madmen to level, or camping the same spot for days or weeks waiting on a rare mob? Throw on some white gloves and rename yourselves to Bugs Bunny folks, because that sure as hell sounds like a carrot to me.

    Today, we enjoy hundreds of games, each with varying themes, settings, payment models, etc. The amount of diversity available in the genre is mind-blowing. Games are easier than ever to play due to incredibly well-designed and streamlined UIs, and raid mechanics of today absolutely blow away the glorified tank and spank crap of yesteryear. The only reason they're 'easier' is due to the availability of information; anyone can head over to Youtube and watch a detailed video of how a fight works, something which wasn't really possible when UO and EQ were king.

    Honestly, if between all the new games, older games still running, and even those on private servers (which we're not supposed to talk about here) you can't find one to play, then the problem is you, not the genre.

    AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!

  • Fenrir767Fenrir767 Waitsfield, VTPosts: 595Member
    You want more information about just how close SWGs story mirrors TORs here is the link two years in the game had lost 75% of its player base.

    http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/star-wars-galaxies-sales-top-a-million-units

    And if you don't think there was a clear financial motive around the revamps you're kidding yourselves. SOE has remained guarded about all official info regarding SWG cost etc for years. Never seen any figures therefore we can't compare. Judging from all the broken systems and half finished code when it was launched it probably cost a fair bit if you then calculate inflation it may even fall somewhere near TORs cost.
  • GuyClinchGuyClinch Sunnyvale, CAPosts: 485Member
    Originally posted by Solar_Prophet

    Games ten years ago had terrible mechanics, lackluster content, horrible UIs, and consisted primarily of grinding. The only 'user created content' consisted of role-playing (which is perfectly possible in today's games) or deciding which area to go kill 10000 mobs in that day in order to get that last 1/800th of your experience bar to level up... that is, if you could find a group to do it with, since soloing was nigh impossible (or at least improbable).

     

    This. Like I said before some of these people around here need to go back and play those older games. They simply weren't that good. SOE was one of the most unprofessional studios on the planet.. The good old days just weren't that good. The whole 'dungeons' thing that people are crying about were just random tank and spank mobs stuck in a maze. Yeah it took you hours to do it but gamers today expect more then that.

    Don't get me wrong there was SOME cool stuff about EQ, DaoC etc. But on balance they were far inferior games to even the worst modern MMO.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by GuyClinch
    Originally posted by Solar_Prophet

    Games ten years ago had terrible mechanics, lackluster content, horrible UIs, and consisted primarily of grinding. The only 'user created content' consisted of role-playing (which is perfectly possible in today's games) or deciding which area to go kill 10000 mobs in that day in order to get that last 1/800th of your experience bar to level up... that is, if you could find a group to do it with, since soloing was nigh impossible (or at least improbable).

     

    This. Like I said before some of these people around here need to go back and play those older games. They simply weren't that good. SOE was one of the most unprofessional studios on the planet.. The good old days just weren't that good. The whole 'dungeons' thing that people are crying about were just random tank and spank mobs stuck in a maze. Yeah it took you hours to do it but gamers today expect more then that.

    Don't get me wrong there was SOME cool stuff about EQ, DaoC etc. But on balance they were far inferior games to even the worst modern MMO.

    yeh .. EQ has terrible combat mechanics, and very tedious game design. I won't touch it with a ten foot pole today. There are plenty of better games to play.

     

  • Kevyne-ShandrisKevyne-Shandris Hephzibah, GAPosts: 1,946Member
    Originally posted by Akerbeltz
    Originally posted by skyline385
    Originally posted by Akerbeltz

    Just to expand on some of the late comments:

     

    - SWG had achieved an stable player-base of 300k. The ones that left mainly joined WoW. What actually killed SWG was trying to imitate WoW's design. May I quote this:

     

    "We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

    Nancy MacIntyre, SWG senior director at LucasArts

     

    It pains my heart so much: A corporate imbecile with no idea of what RPG is about that nowadays puts on her twitter account that she's working on "The Next Big Thing" AKA "The Next Shiny for the Illiterate Masses". This is what current mainstream videogaming is about: skinner's box mechanics and story on-rails under a paint of flashy graphics, glitter, Voice-Overs and a lots of Marketing and Over-Production, all the while the functional scope of the game is limited, there is no interdependency among players and lacks any sustainability on the long-run.

     

    I'm not saying that SWG was a perfect game: It's true that some aspects were too grindy, that the missions could be more elaborated, etc. But features and functionality wise, the game had an ambition and an scope that few games have matched - perhaps only EVE, UO and maybe AC.

     

    What some of us are asking are companies with the ethos and philosophy of Paradox Games and CCP, that emphasize substance over presentation  and that respect the intelligence and creativity of the players. These companies target a particular segment of the public instead of going for the masses and prioritize the production costs and milestones of their projects accordingly. And they work and they are financially and critically successful, with a loyal and commited customer-base (see Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings or EVE).

    Can you show me a proof of this 300K stable population, like the article from where you got this info ??

     

    Subs Numbers:

     

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_101/560-Blowing-Up-Galaxies

     

    I underline the following:

    "Even so, the game attracted around 300,000 subscribers, a respectable showing then. A year later, World of Warcraft debuted and redefined "respectable." At both SOE and its licensor, LucasArts, WoW envy grew strong."

     

     

    About the corporate bitch's statement:

     

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/10/arts/10star.html?_r=0

     

    I underline this as well:

    "Someone might wonder, well, it's just a game, what's the big deal?" said Robert Kruck, 54, an engineer for Motorola who lives in Schaumburg, Ill., who said he had canceled seven of his eight Galaxies accounts. "But for many people it is much more than a game," he said. "It is a part of their lives where they have invested huge amounts of time building a community. And that community has been based on a sophisticated, mature game. So now, for them to take an adult-level combat and economics simulation and turn it into a mindless game for 10-year-olds is a violation of that community."

     

    Again:

     

    "We really just needed to make the game a lot more accessible to a much broader player base," said Nancy MacIntyre, the game's senior director at LucasArts. "There was lots of reading, much too much, in the game. There was a lot of wandering around learning about different abilities. We really needed to give people the experience of being Han Solo or Luke Skywalker rather than being Uncle Owen, the moisture farmer. We wanted more instant gratification: kill, get treasure, repeat. We needed to give people more of an opportunity to be a part of what they have seen in the movies rather than something they had created themselves."

     

    Moral of the Story: As in any form of artistic expression, catering to the masses leads to dull, shallow, watered-down creations.

     

    EDIT: typos

    And there you have it, it wasn't SOE's decision, it's the license holder. George Lucas had full editing rights to his IP, SOE just managed/built it's online assets/collected sub monies.

  • MagiknightMagiknight McKinleyville, CAPosts: 782Member Common
    I want 2004 back :( WTF happened
  • YizleYizle Atlanta, GAPosts: 517Member
    Originally posted by Ice-Queen
     Once companies abandoned people who play mmorps to try and get the console gamers too it went downhill.

    I completely agree with this part.

123457»
Sign In or Register to comment.