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!

[Column] General: We Must Stop Poisoning the Well

12357

Comments

  • BMBenderBMBender Nowhere, NCPosts: 568Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by FanOfSuperman

    I promise, it's so much more enjoyable and rewarding to look at things in a postivie light.

    Besides, it might even help each of us to live longer ;)


    I disagree it's much more enjoyable to sit back munching popcorn watching both camps rip into each other. Very entertaining, the Op among them.

    image
  • NecropsieNecropsie BursaPosts: 142Member Uncommon

    Amazing, another "ESO IS GOOD SHUT UP AND BUY THAT GAME" article.

    Anybody remembers who Jeff Gerstmann was? Nobody? Sigh.. Oh well, at least i know that i won't be visiting mmorpg.com for a while, at least not before they collect ZeniMax ad money.. See you in another community fellas!

    Stages of a new mmo: 1) It's just beta. It still has plenty of time before release. 2) It just launched. Give it time. WoW wasn't built in a day. 3) We don't need you anyway. 4) F2P announced. 5)Huge influx of players. 6) Look how much has changed. 7) Cash shop is the only thing developed lately. 8) It has been a long journey and we thank everyone who was part of it. Shutting down in 3 months. (Courtesy of Robokapp.)

  • FanOfSupermanFanOfSuperman Burlington, VTPosts: 137Member
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by Superman0X

    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

    Perhaps the issue is not with the players/customers. Perhaps the issue is with the developers/publishers. The seem to not be in touch with reality, and the fact that the community calls them on this should not be seen as a problem.

    No, its also the fault of the customer, there are usually beta weekends, open betas, tons of chances to try the game before launch, beta previews, beta reviews, beta videos, and people STILL buy the games knowing they're sick of themeparks.

    Extremely valid point!

    In today's day of open beta where everyone can get in and try a game til their heart's content, there is little excuse for blaming the developers.

    Just about every one of the MMOs I've purchased within the last 3 or more years, I was able to sample to a point where I was easily able to determine if it was worth the purchase or asking price.

    The only MMO I can remember that I would consider, that threw me a curve in this regard, was SWTOR. And that's because I love PvP. No beta testing or open beta trial could have prepared me for the rampant hacking/cheating in PvP that was going on in that game after launch -- and even then, with that abuse going on, I can still say with confidence, that overall, I still feel SWTOR's other merits made the game worth the purchase price.

    I'm not saying that developers are completely innocent in all this, as there are often those the intentionaly try to mislead the playerbase; however, it's not like most players don't have adequate time to test out and try the game before making the decision to purchase that game.

  • MurlockDanceMurlockDance ParisPosts: 1,223Member

    I guess I am on the fence about this subject. I can see in a way where the OP is coming from.

     

    Take for example AO. I know it came out a long time ago when there wasn't that much choice in the MMORPG genre since there were only a few games around. However, even by the standards of those days, AO's release was extremely troubled. Even after the devs took it down for two weeks a short time after release to fix some of the worst bugs, it remained one of the most buggy and in some ways half-assed products I ever bought.

    Despite its many, many flaws and dumb design decisions, I loved that game. It wasn't even my first MMO yet I played it for several years. It had so much amazing about it namely a great and beautiful world with a very interesting story behind it. Since there was little hand holding, you had to go out and find your own way in the world. It was also revolutionary for the day and pushed the envelope of the genre a lot.

    If AO had been released today, let's say with the same risks taken and revolutionary ideas as the old one but in its horirble bugged and flawed state, would we have even given it a chance?

     

    On the other hand, I am getting pretty annoyed at the devs and marketers in this genre. Even though I think that gamers can be very vociferous and sometimes misguided about some things, I believe that the blame does not really lie with us. Games are over-hyped and over-marketed, there is now too much money available for the devs and it is getting squandered on overly pretty graphics, cutscenes, and voice acting. Honestly, I don't think an MMORPG needs those things to be a great game. Instead, the meat and potatoes of the more recent AAA games seem to have stagnated or even devolved in the name of streamlining so that anyone can access the game (another subject for another day).

    I am also annoyed at the pre-order circus, the collector's edition drama, the hype trains, and the paid alpha/beta fiascos. How about we rewind back to the days when real fans bought the game at release and through word of mouth got their friends to play. The best advertizers are US, and we give free marketing if we really like a product. How about we go back to a time when alpha tests and beta tests were TESTs, and not demos, trials or a marketing ploy? Then we can have long term trials for the game at release so that people can try before buying.

     

    So, are we really poisoning the well? I think that the way the genre has overall evolved, or rather devolved, with the marketing ploys, paid-for tests, pre-orders, etc. is actually setting up these games to disappoint and then get dumped on by angry gamers. Contrast that to how the older generation of games that were so well-loved that gamers told other gamers that they were worth playing and should give them a shot...

    Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.

    image
  • syriinxsyriinx New York, NYPosts: 1,063Member Uncommon
    [mod edit]

     

  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,077Member Uncommon

    I may be blind, but I have a hard time thinking of a truly BAD MMO that has come out in past years.

     

    Rift's setting and art style was a bit to bland for my tastes, but, save for some optimization issues, played fine for the average themepark, and the multiple souls and specs were a very nice touch.

     

    I loved TOR up until endgame, I raided with my guild and then I was done with it.  No bitterness there, I found the game very fun for the time I played it.

     

    GW2, great game, great value, I just, after playing it for a while, realized i really perfered the trinity system.  Lack of progression hurts it for me too, but thats not why everyone plays.  I know lots of people who like it.

     

    EvE is fantastic at what they want the game to do, and what its meant to be.  I just dont like sandbox that much, still gonna give star citizen a shot though.

     

    Defiance was really the only truly disapointing game in recent memory, for me.  The landmass was way to small vs what I was expecting, and nearly zero progression.  

  • KarahandrasKarahandras Sible HedinghamPosts: 1,673Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by BearKnight
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.

    The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?

    In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.

    I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.

    There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions. 

     

    EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.

    No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.

    can you provide a link for that number please?  I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).

    Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....

    So that's a no then?

  • KarahandrasKarahandras Sible HedinghamPosts: 1,673Member Uncommon
    Suprised no one has mentioned buy in beta's and alpha as part of the problem.
  • Agent_JosephAgent_Joseph SarajevoPosts: 1,070Member Uncommon
    I 'll  stick  old good clean well's,not need those new founded poisoned with crap

    only EVE is real MMO...but I am impressive with TSW

  • BMBenderBMBender Nowhere, NCPosts: 568Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Suprised no one has mentioned buy in beta's and alpha as part of the problem.
    2-3 posts up

    image
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Elmira, ONPosts: 2,499Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Jacxolope

    No- Thats not it...

    Almost every MMO is a financial 'success' - Its that the companies are not satisfied as they are chasing WOW numbers. Very rarely do MMOs fail and most make money. In any business this is considered a total success. To run in the Black. The problem is (another analogy- sorry) the guy running the mom and pop cafe isnt happy unless hes making the same profit the Mcdonalds is thats located off the highway- 

     

    If we gauge success as having to be in the same arena as "Wow" (which is what most companies think) there will never be a success again more likely than not- Nor will there be real innovation.

     

    TSW was a bit innovative but flawed (and evident it was going to go F2P) and Rift was a WOW clone with its own flavor (and was/is decent enough)- Both of these games I am sure are financial successes. Maybe not to the point the suits in the boardroom demand. 

    EDIT_ Even Ultima Online is a subscription only game and still making mney with no development over 16 years after launch. Paid for probably a million times over and still running. But the numbers would never be "good enough" for a new MMO since they do not gauge success on profit but rather expectations that are based off of WOW in an oversaturated market of (mostly) clones and reskins.

    Edit... reneg.... Yeah, you're right. I shouldn't say "financial success" because if these games weren't making any money they we wouldn't be seeing them churned out so quickly. I actually like your analogy better. 

     

    The main point I was trying to get at was that we punish the people who try to do new things, so you'll never see those shops running on shoestring budgets making games that are innovative. 

     

    BTW, it's showing support for games like Shards Online that will change the industry, it won't be the overseas dev shops or the AAA publishers. It's all about the indies! Seriously, go back that damn game! It's what you say you want! 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • syriinxsyriinx New York, NYPosts: 1,063Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CrazKanuk

     

    BTW, it's showing support for games like Shards Online that will change the industry, it won't be the overseas dev shops or the AAA publishers. It's all about the indies! Seriously, go back that damn game! It's what you say you want! 

    The game i want probably cant be made for a couple million bucks

  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,077Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by BearKnight
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.

    The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?

    In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.

    I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.

    There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions. 

     

    EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.

    No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.

    can you provide a link for that number please?  I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).

    Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....

    So that's a no then?

    there's this one.  http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-20-league-of-legends-2013-revenue-topped-USD600m-report

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,209Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Karahandras

    can you provide a link for that number please?  I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).

    Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....

    So that's a no then?

    Are you being lazy or willfully obtuse? I posted links just above this post. If you're going to take pot shots and have people do the searching for you at least read the thread. 

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Algo Star SystemPosts: 651Member Uncommon

    I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change.  The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical.  These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.

     

    The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do.  If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.

     

    Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games. 

     

    We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.

     
  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,077Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FlyByKnight

    I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change.  The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical.  These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.

     

    The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do.  If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.

     

    Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games. 

     

    We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.

     

    People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.  

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Elmira, ONPosts: 2,499Member Uncommon
    [mod edit]

    FYI, Bound by Flame actually ran numerous advertisements on MMORPG.com and they got a 4.5. So :P

     

    I'd actually like to see the people with gripes write a good, non-biased review. To say that ESO is a bad game is ridiculous. You have to weight reviews appropriately, and it's not often all about how much someone enjoyed it over another, it's having a common yardstick. Likes/Not Likes should stick to Facebook. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Algo Star SystemPosts: 651Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by FlyByKnight

    I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change.  The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical.  These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.

     

    The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do.  If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.

     

    Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games. 

     

    We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.

     

    People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.  

     

    The companies don't change their behavior and practice because the people are spending money WHILE being cynical and skeptical.  It's like deep down we all have some glimmer of hope that we're wrong but know the reality is we'll be let down but we'll risk it. I blame this on the developers as well, with their vague marketing, half truths, magic bean selling, P.R. powered Q&A sessions, and home cooking with media outlets *cough*mmorpg.com*cough*.

  • kakasakikakasaki Lockhart, TXPosts: 1,205Member
    Originally posted by Yamota
    Originally posted by Jacxolope
    Originally posted by Yoda_Clone

    And one more time MMORPG.com attempts to defend a major advertiser...

    ...by blaming the customers for the poor quality of the product?  Again?

    I suspect most of us are less concerned about how feature rich a new MMORPG may be than we are concerned that the "promised" features actually work.  Consider:  Who sets up players' expectations?

    --The developers.

    --The marketers.

    --Their advertisements (aka paid reviews).

    --Their shils in the forums.

    --Their promises of great and wonderful things that are new and unique so we should spend our money on their product and not on someone else's product.

    Do the players force these "expectations" onto the developers?  No.  So, when the players experience something that doesn't meet expectations, whose fault is it?

    MMORPG.com continues to lose what little credibility it has left with these repeated attempts to rationalize a bad product.  ESO could have been a great game, but it isn't.  ZOS didn't listen to its testers.  ZOS didn't get a clue from the massive cancellation of pre-orders after the open Beta sessions.  ZOS hasn't gotten a clue from the massive cancellation of subscriptions.

    ZOS built up player expectations with a whole lot of marketing hype and then didn't deliver on the product they promised.

    FACT:  That is not their customers' fault.

     
     

    Very solid post.

    I second that. Awesome post!

    Not to pick on any one post in particular but quoting these in particular to illustrate the mentality of people on this site that leads to the “poisoning of the well”.  Posts like these ignore the fact that to many people, the games in question are an entertaining past-time that is worth the cost. Doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree that a game is worthwhile but the acidic vitriol that is spewed in this sites comment section in a daily basis is the real reason this site has lost any credibility with most of the gaming community. In fact, mention MMORPG.com in most game world chat and the overwhelming consensus is that it is a home for the angry, jaded old vets that hate… well pretty much every MMO released in the last 5 years. Sadly, I agree with them.

    No one (at least not anyone with any maturity) is saying people have to like every game that comes out. But posters kind of lose any credibility when:

    ·         Their post history has them bashing EVERY MMO in current release.

    ·         Flaming one game as the reason MMOs are in decline and ridiculing said games supporters but on the same breath, rabidly defending the game(s) they like and labeling every negative poster as “troll” or “hater.”

    ·         Rabidly decry a game but admit to have never played it.

    ·         Calls themselves fans of the genre but admit to hate every modern MMO and admit they haven’t played an MMO in over 5 years but oddly still log over a hundred posts a month on a site dedicated to MMOs…

     

    Dislike a game all you want.  Discuss (notice this is different that troll) the merits/flaws of a game to your heart contents. Just remember:

    ·         Be civil. Most of us on this site are here because we like MMOs. We may not agree on which ones are good/bad but we agree that we like the genre.

    ·         These are games. Maintain a little perspective and realize that because a dev releases a game you loathe, the sky is not falling and it is not the end of the world or civilization as we know it.

    ·         Anonymity is not free license to act like a douche. If you wouldn’t say something to someone’s face, maybe it shouldn’t be posted online under an anonymous façade.

    ·         Did I mention this are just games?

    A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Elmira, ONPosts: 2,499Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FlyByKnight
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by FlyByKnight

    I got an idea, how about one of these developers prove people wrong? Until that happens nothing will change.  The consumers have every right to be cynical and skeptical.  These developers are blatantly on rails with the things they do, and one can't help but make bets.

     

    The funny thing is I got to sit down and play Archeage on a friends rig. THAT game proves that the features and little details people want to see in their MMORPGs are doable. I was taken back by how many things there are for people to do.  If the questing wasn't so dialogue skip worthy and the combat wasn't tab targeted I'd call it a 9/10.

     

    Knowing that a game can have the attention to detail and challenge people want from playing the above, why shouldn't I be cynical when big companies like Bethesda, & Sony, NCSoft can't get it right? Why shouldn't people bet on a game going F2P when they are rushed we're used to rushed P.O.S. status quo games. 

     

    We're not poisoning the well, the developers and publishers are and they're laughing to the bank doing it.

     

    People do have a right to be cynical and skeptical, but they still dont change their behavior based on that cynicism or skepticism.  

     

    The companies don't change their behavior and practice because the people are spending money WHILE being cynical and skeptical.  It's like deep down we all have some glimmer of hope that we're wrong but know the reality is we'll be let down but we'll risk it. I blame this on the developers as well, with their vague marketing, half truths, magic bean selling, P.R. powered Q&A sessions, and home cooking with media outlets *cough*mmorpg.com*cough*.

    Yeah, if I was Spiders and gave MMORPG so much money (for real), only for MMORPG to turn around and give me a bad review, I'd be seriously pissed. /sarcasm 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • LawlmonsterLawlmonster Dallas, TXPosts: 954Member Uncommon

    Write a post about truth in media, have it censored or removed. I wish I could make this shit up.

     

    Good work.

    "This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Elmira, ONPosts: 2,499Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Lawlmonster

    Write a post about truth in media, have it censored or removed. I wish I could make this shit up.

     

    Good work.

    Well if it's truth then back it up with facts. You do an awful lot of talking about journalistic integrity, but do nothing to substantiate your facts the way you supposedly want journalists to. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • GilgamerGilgamer Lenoir, NCPosts: 20Member

    Feature creep can kill a well intended game and poorly implemented features are a double curse because they frustrate the user and steal resources from other areas of development.  Vanguard is a good example of a game probably killed by it's overly ambitious feature list.  I think it's ok to have a game that launches with a short feature list as long as the devs are clear about what features they intend to amend to the game after launch, and whether those features will be free or part of a paid expansion and whether or not they have a defined time table.

    Players want features but they also want quality.  Unfortunately only the largest developers can usually deliver on both.  And some games from huge developers only gained most of their features over several expansions and others games are now forced to launch with those features to compete.  I have a new  car to sell you, it has no stereo, no power windows, no gps, no cruise control, and only comes in one color, but it's a ton of fun to drive, has a powerful engine, has no miles, and will take you anywhere.  Would you buy it?

    In short, gamers should probably shorten their list of must have features, but insist those be implemented flawlessly and devs should hold back the tide of hype and feature creep, but be open to adding features alongside content as the community consensus dictates.  Be aware though that some features cannot/should not be tacked on after the fact (PvP, seamless world, crafting) but others can be (mounts, naval combat, housing, etc.,). 

  • BadOrbBadOrb ManchesterPosts: 791Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by stevebombsquad
    Originally posted by BearKnight
    Originally posted by Torvaldr

    The article contradicts itself from start to finish. On one hand we shouldn't roll over and accept whatever is thrown our way. On the other we shouldn't over scrutinize. What exactly should happen? How should we not roll over and throw our money away if not through questioning and scrutiny.

    The author uses ESO as an example. The game wants nearly $250 from a customer for the first year of play. Unless one has a couple hundred bucks to burn why wouldn't scrutiny be in order?

    In a business industry worth billions where a single title is expected to gross over $100M per year scrutiny down to the microscopic is in order. When there is that much money changing hands, ethics tends to take a distant back seat especially if ones job is on the line.

    I would also question whether the well is actually being poisoned or not. The author makes the claim but then never really proves it. I can think of a counter-example: SW:TOR. If there was ever well poisoning in progress it was with that title after release, yet here it stands now possibly the most successful (financially and estimated player counts) western mmorpg after WoW. Prove to me the well has been poisoned.

    There is no proof whatsoever that is it the "most successful western MMORPG after WoW". EvE has proven it has more sub numbers per month paying $15 each than SWTOR has in F2P contributions. 

     

    EvE is currently the best "Western" MMORPG on the market currently according to actual subscriber numbers they released unlike SWTOR whom "fluff" their numbers with accounts that are no longer active.

    No, that isn't the case. SWTOR made just shy of $140 million in microtransactions alone last year. That doesn't include income from subscriptions.

    can you provide a link for that number please?  I mean an official link not just to something made up by fanboys/marketers as all i can find from ea is that their revenue doubled after release of f2p but that doesn't really mean much(aoc had 5x after f2p).

    Google SWTOR microtransaction revenue and pick from any of the numerous MMO and gaming news sites that reported it. Doesn't take much to find it.....

    So that's a no then?

    there's this one.  http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-01-20-league-of-legends-2013-revenue-topped-USD600m-report

    It was ridiculous of him to ask for one as this very site had a huge news article about the amount of money micro transactions make in games. I think SWTOR was 7th and wow 6th  All the games above them where pure F2P games without subbs , so yes at the end of 2013 SWTOR made the most money for a western MMO with a subb other than WOW , fact. Next time tell him don't be lazy and keep up with the times that was 2013 and we are almost half way through 2014.

    Cheers,

    BadOrb.

     

    PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
    "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
    The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]

  • syriinxsyriinx New York, NYPosts: 1,063Member Uncommon

    This thread is both hilarious and pathetic at the same time.

     

    First off, the article was not written by Bill Murphy or Mike B or Suzie Ford.  its written by a freelance contributor who does columns about the social and community aspects of MMORPGs.  Shes not out to sell games or inform us on games, just to discuss community aspects of MMORPGs.  Furthermore, its a COMMON opinion to like ESO.  It might or might not be the majority opinion, but a LOT of people feel the way she does about the game:  it has flaws but its more good than bad and its an enjoyable game.  She certainly did not give the game a ringing endorsement and draws attention to the fact a lot of people dont like it.  It doesnt read like a pro ESO article to me at all.

    And her points are clearly valid given the response in this thread.

    People talk about developers and publishers and their evils, but as someone who has been in the genre since 2000 I can say the biggest negative change is the player base.  There is a portion of the player base that is loud, rude, and devoid of logic and common sense.  That portion is significantly more noticeable than it was in the early days of the genre.

    As an example of what developers have to deal with:

    two of the major criticisms agains Rift at release were tiny world and leveling was too fast.  They tried to fix that with Storm Legion.  And now everyone screams that its grindy with wasted space.  Now Trion didn't knock it out of the park with the zone design in SL, but they are NEVER given credit for doing what people asked for.  Myself included, as i said Im part of the problem and I am especially hard on Trion (mostly because I feel rift is so close to being a great MMORPG yet so far, for me).  But people will always harp on the negatives and usually take the positives for granted.

    ESO is one of the few games to move away from three tree progression (even ArcheAge sticks to three trees), contains open world dungeons (yet people want to harp on how quest caves are reused), is generally considered a great looking game (this takes up tons of resources), has a good story...yet if someone likes it its an offense to mankind?

Sign In or Register to comment.