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!

80% playing every day after one week

2

Comments

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,939Member Uncommon

    If I blew $150 on alpha access for a F2P game, I'd be trying to get my money out of it too.

    And really, do you think people are going to stop playing after paying that?

    I'll bet they brag about their 60-90 day retention level too, when it happens, never mind that people that bought the $150 bag, paid for that time whether they use it or not.

     

    Not particularly impressive.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,204Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    If I blew $150 on alpha access for a F2P game, I'd be trying to get my money out of it too.

    And really, do you think people are going to stop playing after paying that?

    I'll bet they brag about their 60-90 day retention level too, when it happens, never mind that people that bought the $150 bag, paid for that time whether they use it or not.

    Not particularly impressive.

    If they have impressive retention at 60 and 90 days it will be impressive. People spend $135 on a collector's edition and 3 months sub for most games yet we don't always hear about impressive retention. Gamers don't keep playing a game if they don't like it, they rant and rage on the forums instead. We don't see Zenimax tooting the horn over ESO right now so just because someone spends a lot on a game ($80+) doesn't mean they'll keep playing it.

    I do think those that have bought in now are probably the target demographic so they're more likely to be in the retention pool. We'll see how it pans out at 60, 90, 180, and a year after the unwashed masses get in and flavor the soup.

  • WolfhammerWolfhammer KetteringPosts: 694Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quesa
    Originally posted by tyfon

    I just got an email from Trion CEO, as did the other founders.

    What was quite cool and I personally can relate to was:

    After the first week, we saw that more than 80% of you were still playing every day and we upgraded it again

     

    It's now been three weeks for me, and my wife and me have not been this hooked on a game in a long time :)

     

     

    They also mentioned server upgrades and the beta progress, but I guess the email will be in some articles soon on this and other sites.

    These are people who liked what they saw so much that they dropped big bucks to be part of the testing process including some mechanics that involve time based activities.  This not only means that the population to sample from is HIGHLY biased but that some game activities highly encourage logging in at least once per day (farming).

    All of this makes it nothing more than a meaningless propaganda post that you slopped up an regurgitated for them which isn't really a negative but highlights how this entire thread is kinda dumb.

    Not nearly as dumb & meaningless as your post old chap..  Some people can't handle decent news about a game they feel threatened by  eh?

    OP, you and the Mrs carry on enjoying the crap out of the game and ignore Victor Meldrew here.  

    Happy weekend all :)

    image

    image

  • ApraxisApraxis RegensburgPosts: 1,515Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Siveria
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by jigo86
    Originally posted by Creslin321

    I hope it does well when it comes out...the spawn camping gankers worry me though...

    thats one of the parts im looking forward to.. reminds me of wow classic where the world was still filed with players to kill

    Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I love me some PvP.  And I have absolutely no problem with getting ganked while questing in a PvP area.  And you are right, there are plenty of players to kill in AA.

    I only get annoyed that 50's spawn camping level 30's seems so rampant.  And even if you kill the 50's, it makes no difference, they are back almost immediately, and you wind up having to wait like 90 seconds to spawn because of repeated ganking.

     

     

    Thats the problem with open pvp games, the playerbase today is full of cowards who won't fight anyone their own level, in fact they will run like a dog with its tail between its legs if anyone who can fight them shows up.

    In other news: I'll probally not play AA because it has open pvp, because games with open pvp have terrible community and terrible players infesting them. Nothing but gankers who are too much if a bunch of chickens to fight someone their own level so they pick on people who can't fight back. All I can say is this game is pretty much doomed if this doesn't change. Open pvp games do not make it in todays market much at all in the usa/canada, and its due to the immaturity of the playerbase itself.

    These types of open pvp games work in Asia and such because the players there have something the players here don't: respect for one another.  In most mmo's with open pvp in non-usa/canadian countires, they never have these max level camping people half their level problems that plague ones in the us/canada. Its not pvp when all your doing is ganking people half your level, thats just that player being a coward who is to scared to fight anyone their own skill/char level.

    Anyway, Unless I can stay out of the pvp area's for the entire game because I cba to bother with those cowards that play in those area's that spawn camp and such, I'll probally not touch AA, and I know I am not the only one who is like this. I like pvp when I have a choice when I want to fight and that the fighting is in a balanced zone (like lv restrictions if above x level you cannot enter said zone, like arena pvp brackets in alot of mmos its like 30-35, 36-40, 41-45 etc), but I dislike it when it is forced on me by a game, especally when its against people who I can't even have a fair fight with that  just spawn camp/kill people half their level all day, its just no fun like this, and if you have fun spawn camping/ganking people half your level, there is something wrong with you, and to me (and many others even the real pvpers who are lv capped and only fight people their own level range) your a coward who is scared of a real fight.

    Either way, the immature spawn campers/low lv gankers is what usually kills games with open pvp, people will only take being ganked second they leave town by people they can't even fight back against  for so long before they just get sick of it and just can't be bothered with the game anymore, its caused more than 1 open pvp mmorpg released in recent years to die off and close down due to lack of interest.

    Comment directed to the part in orange:

    Don't worry.. you can stay out of pvp area's as long as you want.. absolutely no need to ever enter an area in pvp mode.

     

    Comment for everything else:

    Typically overreacting post with no whatsoever substance. Over there everything is better.. blabla. All pvp player are cowards, evil, scumbags and immature.. blabla

     

    About spawn camping in pvp areas(and it will you affect only there.. with other words not relevant for pve player):

    They should fix it..because that one is really a easy fixable problem. And most pvp players don't like that either.. but there are always a few, which will do everything, what is possible(exploiting, cheating, griefing). Though they are a very small minority.. but that is a matter to good game design to avoid as much as possible holes.. or fix them very fast.. and the second would be don't be shy with the banhammer against cheater and botter.

     

  • lttexxanlttexxan levelland, TXPosts: 419Member Uncommon

    89.4% of ALL statistics are made up 64.7% of the time.

    This is 100% true usually 76.4% of the time.

    But hey it was posted by the company that is trying to sell a free to play game to a bunch of rubes for $150.00 and make them feel good about staying in it for an ENTIRE week!

    I checked the stats myself.

    This is 47.8% accurate to my investigation.

    It's better to lurk in forums and be thought a fool...than to endlessly "Quote" and remove all doubts.

  • xAPOCxxAPOCx Vineland, NJPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by lttexxan

    89.4% of ALL statistics are made up 64.7% of the time.

    This is 100% true usually 76.4% of the time.

    But hey it was posted by the company that is trying to sell a free to play game to a bunch of rubes for $150.00 and make them feel good about staying in it for an ENTIRE week!

    I checked the stats myself.

    This is 47.8% accurate to my investigation.

    Isent this a p2p with f2p option?

    image

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,924Member Uncommon

    I'd hope people are playing that much, they are paying such an outrageous price of $150 to TEST a game that only needs localization. Its a shame founders packs are the biggest rip off of the consumer in some time, its pre-order on crack. Its fine for some indies who need the money to thrive but big companies like Trion doing it is just horrid. 

     

    Ranting aside, again $150. I'd really hope a lot of people are getting the most TESTING the game out if your paying in that huge of a fee to test. 

  • DeathsmindDeathsmind Newbury Park, CAPosts: 180Member
    Originally posted by Purutzil

    I'd hope people are playing that much, they are paying such an outrageous price of $150 to TEST a game that only needs localization. Its a shame founders packs are the biggest rip off of the consumer in some time, its pre-order on crack. Its fine for some indies who need the money to thrive but big companies like Trion doing it is just horrid. 

     

    Ranting aside, again $150. I'd really hope a lot of people are getting the most TESTING the game out if your paying in that huge of a fee to test. 

    Theres only about 20% if that still playing ESO they paid $80 to test the game. Whats the difference? I rather pay a little more for a huge increase in retention. 

  • obocoboc Northglenn, COPosts: 189Member
    It's nice we have a few choices out there atm. Some will play ESO, some AA and other WS. The choice is your's ! What ever floats you're mouse. Game on !
  • mark2123mark2123 LondonPosts: 308Member Uncommon
    There's a lot of people on here being negative about anyone who paid for the Alpha.  It's their money and they can enjoy it how they want to.  Don't be jealous that you can't afford to pay such a price (if you are not interested, then why are you on this forum?)
  • rutaqrutaq somerville, MAPosts: 428Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quesa
    Originally posted by tyfon

    I just got an email from Trion CEO, as did the other founders.

    What was quite cool and I personally can relate to was:

    After the first week, we saw that more than 80% of you were still playing every day and we upgraded it again

     

    It's now been three weeks for me, and my wife and me have not been this hooked on a game in a long time :)

     

     

    They also mentioned server upgrades and the beta progress, but I guess the email will be in some articles soon on this and other sites.

    These are people who liked what they saw so much that they dropped big bucks to be part of the testing process including some mechanics that involve time based activities.  This not only means that the population to sample from is HIGHLY biased but that some game activities highly encourage logging in at least once per day (farming).

    All of this makes it nothing more than a meaningless propaganda post that you slopped up an regurgitated for them which isn't really a negative but highlights how this entire thread is kinda dumb.

     

    It is true that we don't have any hard numbers for the orders of the Founder Pack Alpha access but it would be nearsighted to dismiss the population as meaningless propaganda.  Game mechanics that encourage daily play are actually a good thing for developers, they keep customers paying .    Given the current success and population during the pay $ 150 to play phase things can only grow when the Beta phase starts this summer.

     

    Trion may be patting themselves on the back a bit but I am sure most developers would love to be in their situation with thousands and thousands of Alpha supporters paying $ 150 to test/pay their game.

     

     

     

     

  • tiglietiglie dagsboro, DEPosts: 36Member Uncommon

    I was really really really hesitant to buy the alpha, but I have been waiting for this game for so long now.  My refund for the shitshow known as ESO helped seal the deal, as I was essentially buying the alpha for normalish game price.  I could not be any happier.  FINALLY, an open PvP non-indie developed bugfest with TONS of content.  This thing is a dream.  

    For everyone complaining about the open PvP, this is not your game.  You have 100 boring instanced PvP PvE titles to choose from.  Just don't play.  

    This game is about player driven conflict and economics.  If you do not know how to play socially there is no point.  You cry about no-life, anti-social PK behavior and do not get the point.  You are the anti-social one.  PKing drives conflict, you call in your friends, or if you are high level, you drop what you are doing, and go actually help someone for the sake of helping, for the sake of conflict.  We create our own carrots here.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    If I blew $150 on alpha access for a F2P game, I'd be trying to get my money out of it too.

    And really, do you think people are going to stop playing after paying that?

    I'll bet they brag about their 60-90 day retention level too, when it happens, never mind that people that bought the $150 bag, paid for that time whether they use it or not.

    Not particularly impressive.

    If they have impressive retention at 60 and 90 days it will be impressive. People spend $135 on a collector's edition and 3 months sub for most games yet we don't always hear about impressive retention. Gamers don't keep playing a game if they don't like it, they rant and rage on the forums instead. We don't see Zenimax tooting the horn over ESO right now so just because someone spends a lot on a game ($80+) doesn't mean they'll keep playing it.

    I do think those that have bought in now are probably the target demographic so they're more likely to be in the retention pool. We'll see how it pans out at 60, 90, 180, and a year after the unwashed masses get in and flavor the soup.

    We're talking about a week of service here, most give an MMO at least a month before they throw in the towel.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • JackdogJackdog Charleston, SCPosts: 6,344Member
    Originally posted by Purutzil

    I'd hope people are playing that much, they are paying such an outrageous price of $150 to TEST a game that only needs localization.

    As someone pointed out earlier in the thread 150.00 equals

    Alpha access

    beta access

    four-day head start

    Trailblazer title (with stats)

    90-day patron pass ($45.00)

    6 Daru Chests( in game goodies)

    10 evenstones

    10 hereafter stones

    glass phoenix hang glider

    desert assassin platemail

    Founder's cloak with customizable logo

     personalizable crest

    10 pet healing potions

    11,250 game store credits ( $75.00)

    Just the store credits and 3 months of patron are $ 120.00 . This is more like purchasing a deluxe edition or collectors edition of the game.

    Anyway this evening the wife and I are going to have a pizza and see Maleficent. Pizza and drinks about 30 bucks, movie and snacks another 40 - 50 all for about 4 - 5 hours of entertainment.

    I miss DAoC

  • UhwopUhwop Wilm, DEPosts: 1,663Member Uncommon

    Given the number of people around here that think there's no market for sandbox games (if you've never seen the threads in general discussion forums you should check them out) Trion could announce that AA has millions of people subbing to the game after release and there would be people here claiming its propaganda, lies, games a failure, etc.  

    There's a rather large segment of people here who simply do not like sandbox games, and would rather every game be a PvE instanced themepark.  

    And then there's the PvP killed my dog crowd.  

  • HatefullHatefull Posts: 773Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Quesa
    Originally posted by tyfon I just got an email from Trion CEO, as did the other founders. What was quite cool and I personally can relate to was: After the first week, we saw that more than 80% of you were still playing every day and we upgraded it again   It's now been three weeks for me, and my wife and me have not been this hooked on a game in a long time :)     They also mentioned server upgrades and the beta progress, but I guess the email will be in some articles soon on this and other sites.
    These are people who liked what they saw so much that they dropped big bucks to be part of the testing process including some mechanics that involve time based activities.  This not only means that the population to sample from is HIGHLY biased but that some game activities highly encourage logging in at least once per day (farming).

    All of this makes it nothing more than a meaningless propaganda post that you slopped up an regurgitated for them which isn't really a negative but highlights how this entire thread is kinda dumb.


    Your logic...isn't. I knew noting about Archeage and my wife knew less. We decided to purchase the founders pack and see what it was about. Turns out we will both be playing at launch.

    So, you saying it only attracted people that were interested in it in the first place, is flawed, for starters. There are also several members of our guild that tried it on a whim and will be playing when it goes live as well.

    The fact that so many people are willing to shell out cash to play an alpha build speak volumes, the fact that most of them want to keep playing say'seven more.

    So, in light of all that your logic isn't and your post while mostly useless and founded on wild conjecture, is also a dumb waste of time. But I have time to waste so here is your attention for the day. Don't get excited, I won't be answering you again.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by jigo86
    Originally posted by Creslin321

    I hope it does well when it comes out...the spawn camping gankers worry me though...

    thats one of the parts im looking forward to.. reminds me of wow classic where the world was still filed with players to kill

    Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I love me some PvP.  And I have absolutely no problem with getting ganked while questing in a PvP area.  And you are right, there are plenty of players to kill in AA.

    I only get annoyed that 50's spawn camping level 30's seems so rampant.  And even if you kill the 50's, it makes no difference, they are back almost immediately, and you wind up having to wait like 90 seconds to spawn because of repeated ganking.

     

    = bad game design element

    Sounds to me like 50's need better/more reason to fight other 50s for/over things that actually matter instead of spawn camping lowbies. 

  • DeathsmindDeathsmind Newbury Park, CAPosts: 180Member
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Creslin321
    Originally posted by jigo86
    Originally posted by Creslin321

    I hope it does well when it comes out...the spawn camping gankers worry me though...

    thats one of the parts im looking forward to.. reminds me of wow classic where the world was still filed with players to kill

    Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I love me some PvP.  And I have absolutely no problem with getting ganked while questing in a PvP area.  And you are right, there are plenty of players to kill in AA.

    I only get annoyed that 50's spawn camping level 30's seems so rampant.  And even if you kill the 50's, it makes no difference, they are back almost immediately, and you wind up having to wait like 90 seconds to spawn because of repeated ganking.

     

    = bad game design element

    Sounds to me like 50's need better/more reason to fight other 50s for/over things that actually matter instead of spawn camping lowbies. 

    Im guessing you havent been to the internet that much. Trolling and griefing is something that people enjoy doing. Its what gets their rocks off. 

    You will never get rid of people who just want to see the world burn. 

    There are plenty of areas where PVP is not allowed already.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    Given the number of people around here that think there's no market for sandbox games (if you've never seen the threads in general discussion forums you should check them out) Trion could announce that AA has millions of people subbing to the game after release and there would be people here claiming its propaganda, lies, games a failure, etc.  

    There's a rather large segment of people here who simply do not like sandbox games, and would rather every game be a PvE instanced themepark.  

    And then there's the PvP killed my dog crowd.  

    There are many games that claim to be Sandbox games though, that only in fact have a few 'sandbox' game elements, and really their closer to being a themepark game than a sandbox one, Archeage tends to fall into that category, open world PvP does not mean a game is a sandbox, and levels are a feature ascribed to Themepark games, not sandbox ones, it's probably not a bad thing though, as Sandbox games tend to have a limited playerbase, whereas Themeparks do tend to do better, the exception being when the game is overly focused on PvP, especially of the none consensual variety, this limits the spectrum of players considerably, whether the game is a themepark or a sandbox game. When it comes to PvP the majority of MMO players are not into it, and prefer to PvE with occasional PvP, and even then, strictly on their own terms, World of Warcraft is probably the most successful game because it exploits this type of player behaviour. Honestly, i would be surprised if Archeage achieves the popularity of even Aion or Tera, i would consider it to be an impressive achievement if it did. image

  • psiicpsiic Tampa, FLPosts: 943Member Uncommon

    Honestly I do not believe the 80% playing every day for even 1 second.

     

    I know 6 people that bought it and have not touched it since. 

     

    I do believe that they had more interest than they were expecting, but seriously if 80% of alpha testers are playing everyday then they have the highest retention rate of any game in history. 

     

    I call BS.

  • kitaradkitarad RomePosts: 1,744Member Uncommon
    It is possible that since you paid $150 for it you might feel guilty if you don't log in. Even if you tell others you gave it up you might still log in out of guilt. So their figure could be right.

    image

  • DeathsmindDeathsmind Newbury Park, CAPosts: 180Member
    Originally posted by psiic

    Honestly I do not believe the 80% playing every day for even 1 second.

     

    I know 6 people that bought it and have not touched it since. 

     

    I do believe that they had more interest than they were expecting, but seriously if 80% of alpha testers are playing everyday then they have the highest retention rate of any game in history. 

     

    I call BS.

    So the 6 people you know out of the thousands that bought it...Not sure if that is more than 20%...

  • UhwopUhwop Wilm, DEPosts: 1,663Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    Given the number of people around here that think there's no market for sandbox games (if you've never seen the threads in general discussion forums you should check them out) Trion could announce that AA has millions of people subbing to the game after release and there would be people here claiming its propaganda, lies, games a failure, etc.  

    There's a rather large segment of people here who simply do not like sandbox games, and would rather every game be a PvE instanced themepark.  

    And then there's the PvP killed my dog crowd.  

    There are many games that claim to be Sandbox games though, that only in fact have a few 'sandbox' game elements, and really their closer to being a themepark game than a sandbox one, Archeage tends to fall into that category, open world PvP does not mean a game is a sandbox, and levels are a feature ascribed to Themepark games, not sandbox ones, it's probably not a bad thing though, as Sandbox games tend to have a limited playerbase, whereas Themeparks do tend to do better, the exception being when the game is overly focused on PvP, especially of the none consensual variety, this limits the spectrum of players considerably, whether the game is a themepark or a sandbox game. When it comes to PvP the majority of MMO players are not into it, and prefer to PvE with occasional PvP, and even then, strictly on their own terms, World of Warcraft is probably the most successful game because it exploits this type of player behaviour. Honestly, i would be surprised if Archeage achieves the popularity of even Aion or Tera, i would consider it to be an impressive achievement if it did. image

    A good sandbox mmo should allow you to do all the same things you can find in a good themepark, but with more freedom.  

    I also don't think it's possible to make a true sandbox mmo.  For balance reasons you need levels and level appropriate items in a game that will allow for player conflict and economics.  

    Lineage 2 is a free for all pvp game where you could lose items on death, at one point.  It's also the only mmo to achieve WoW like subscription numbers.  The majority not liking pvp is a fallacy.  The majority don't like poorly done pvp, there's a difference.  

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,289Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Uhwop
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    Given the number of people around here that think there's no market for sandbox games (if you've never seen the threads in general discussion forums you should check them out) Trion could announce that AA has millions of people subbing to the game after release and there would be people here claiming its propaganda, lies, games a failure, etc.  

    There's a rather large segment of people here who simply do not like sandbox games, and would rather every game be a PvE instanced themepark.  

    And then there's the PvP killed my dog crowd.  

    There are many games that claim to be Sandbox games though, that only in fact have a few 'sandbox' game elements, and really their closer to being a themepark game than a sandbox one, Archeage tends to fall into that category, open world PvP does not mean a game is a sandbox, and levels are a feature ascribed to Themepark games, not sandbox ones, it's probably not a bad thing though, as Sandbox games tend to have a limited playerbase, whereas Themeparks do tend to do better, the exception being when the game is overly focused on PvP, especially of the none consensual variety, this limits the spectrum of players considerably, whether the game is a themepark or a sandbox game. When it comes to PvP the majority of MMO players are not into it, and prefer to PvE with occasional PvP, and even then, strictly on their own terms, World of Warcraft is probably the most successful game because it exploits this type of player behaviour. Honestly, i would be surprised if Archeage achieves the popularity of even Aion or Tera, i would consider it to be an impressive achievement if it did. image

    A good sandbox mmo should allow you to do all the same things you can find in a good themepark, but with more freedom.  

    I also don't think it's possible to make a true sandbox mmo.  For balance reasons you need levels and level appropriate items in a game that will allow for player conflict and economics.  

    Lineage 2 is a free for all pvp game where you could lose items on death, at one point.  It's also the only mmo to achieve WoW like subscription numbers.  The majority not liking pvp is a fallacy.  The majority don't like poorly done pvp, there's a difference.  

    The majority prefer PvE, which is the point really, its not that they dislike PvP, thats a bit misleading, what they tend to dislike is none consensual PvP, which is an entirely different thing. There has to date not been a single successful game, Sandbox or not, that encompasses none consensual PvP, that did not have a very small player base. Even Eve Online after 10+ years has only managed to attract 500,000 players, and for Archeage to break that particular record would be a singular achievement. image

  • UhwopUhwop Wilm, DEPosts: 1,663Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Uhwop
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Uhwop

    Given the number of people around here that think there's no market for sandbox games (if you've never seen the threads in general discussion forums you should check them out) Trion could announce that AA has millions of people subbing to the game after release and there would be people here claiming its propaganda, lies, games a failure, etc.  

    There's a rather large segment of people here who simply do not like sandbox games, and would rather every game be a PvE instanced themepark.  

    And then there's the PvP killed my dog crowd.  

    There are many games that claim to be Sandbox games though, that only in fact have a few 'sandbox' game elements, and really their closer to being a themepark game than a sandbox one, Archeage tends to fall into that category, open world PvP does not mean a game is a sandbox, and levels are a feature ascribed to Themepark games, not sandbox ones, it's probably not a bad thing though, as Sandbox games tend to have a limited playerbase, whereas Themeparks do tend to do better, the exception being when the game is overly focused on PvP, especially of the none consensual variety, this limits the spectrum of players considerably, whether the game is a themepark or a sandbox game. When it comes to PvP the majority of MMO players are not into it, and prefer to PvE with occasional PvP, and even then, strictly on their own terms, World of Warcraft is probably the most successful game because it exploits this type of player behaviour. Honestly, i would be surprised if Archeage achieves the popularity of even Aion or Tera, i would consider it to be an impressive achievement if it did. image

    A good sandbox mmo should allow you to do all the same things you can find in a good themepark, but with more freedom.  

    I also don't think it's possible to make a true sandbox mmo.  For balance reasons you need levels and level appropriate items in a game that will allow for player conflict and economics.  

    Lineage 2 is a free for all pvp game where you could lose items on death, at one point.  It's also the only mmo to achieve WoW like subscription numbers.  The majority not liking pvp is a fallacy.  The majority don't like poorly done pvp, there's a difference.  

    The majority prefer PvE, which is the point really, its not that they dislike PvP, thats a bit misleading, what they tend to dislike is none consensual PvP, which is an entirely different thing. There has to date not been a single successful game, Sandbox or not, that encompasses none consensual PvP, that did not have a very small player base. Even Eve Online after 10+ years has only managed to attract 500,000 players, and for Archeage to break that particular record would be a singular achievement. image

    Lineage 2 was the second most successful mmo after wow, with millions of subs; not hundreds of thousands.  

    If ccp would let you get out of your spaceship and do something meaningful it would have far more than 500k subs.  

    PvPers don't rant about "scumbag" PvEers, the way that people who don't like pvp complain about pvp.  

    Perception isn't reality, and people are more vocal when complaining than when they're happy.  

    You require only a small group to give a big impression.  

2
Sign In or Register to comment.