Of the three major MMOs coming soon (GW2, TOR, and TSW, I left Archeage out because the US release could years from now and isn't on the radar quite as much here on the West) they each share completely different art styles, themes, and game mechanics. I don't really think there will be much competition here from any of them.
If anything GW2 will have more of an effect on the market. If GW2 is successful, it could very well prevent others from buying into subscription games due to not having enough time to play their second MMO to make up for the subscription cost, but on the other hand if SW:TOR is more successful people who enjoyed a game like GW2 will be able to purchase the boxed copy and still play it without having to worry about maintaining a monthly fee on the GW2, so they could play it casually and get their money's worth.
In fact, it's possible GW2 could have an effect on all current subscription based MMOs everywhere. If it's the next big thing, and starts bleeding out enough WoW subscribers, Blizzard and other MMO developers will likely follow the B2P payment model and ditch the subscription plan (or leave it as optional with benefits).
I don't think anyone should worry. If anything the effects of TOR and GW2 will be positive for the industry as a whole. If one eclipses another in sales and player retention, then it shouldn't cause any negative effects on the market. GW2 will likely keep it's subscription model even if it does poorly (which as far as I'm concerned from the looks of it there is no way in hell that is going to happen), as they already had success in GW with it, and even if they implement a cash shop expect it to be for bonus content (DLC) and costumes that have no effect on gameplay.
GW2's payment plan is also a big reason many people are going to try it, just like GW. I have a couple friends who swore off MMOs years ago due to the time investment required in them, but plan on buying GW2 just because they don't have to maintain a subscription to it like other MMOs if they decided to stop playing and focus on real life suddenly.
GG is smoking something crazy saying GW2 is the train, especially after this last weekend. If anything the over 1 million presale $150 CE ToR proved that it's got a lot of potential to be an 800 Gorilla Cat (read 800 lbs beast with 9 lives). Lol, that's like saying WoW had better watch out for the GW1 community six years in the past cause pay to play model failed when WoW released and hasn't been insainly sucessful since. That right there isn't sensible thinking. P2P is a sucessful model, it all depends on what it costs to keep the game up and running with content updates and blah blah blah.
1 million preorders on the $150 CE ToR? Where did you get that number from? I'm pretty sure that is completely incorrect. I doubt it's over 100,000 considering it had a very limited release and sold out almost immediately.
Bioware draws from an entirely different crowd. It is polar opposite to Arenanet's crowd. These two games draw players from different extremes and meet in the middle.
Not sure how: both are touting heavily story-based games that allow an individual to make an impact on the world through their in-game interactions and choices. Seems like a pretty heavy overlap to me.
Maybe you could explain what extreme Bioware is drawing from that ArenaNet isn't, and vice-versa?
Well, Arenanet is drawing from the crowd of people who are fascinated by fantasy concepts like bizarre inhuman races, swords made out of energy, magical healing powers, shooting lightning out of hands, simplistic good vs. evil battles, powerful hero-warriors, mysticism, and stuff like that.
While Bioware is obviously not.
Hmm, do people on the internet usually go out of there way to entirely miss the point?
The subject I commented on was about the type of player base both companies have grown with their previous products. It is this player base they draw upon as their foundation. New players simply following development of their now more similar entries into the genre do not apply ... those would be the middle ground people I mentioned. The uppity ones who yammer on mmo boards as if mmo's and their communities have existed since the dawn of electricity. You know, the ones missing the point and misquoting people without reading previous posts they had drawn their comments from.
To say Arenanet and Bioware had the same core playerbase previous to their current ventures is about as ignorant as you can get.
Oh wait ... I guess all this a computer thingy with some screen thingy so therefore everything and everyone since pong is entirely the same thing. Ah, now what has this multi-billion dollar industry been doing spending so much time and money on pointless marketing when someone who uses a keyboard at work will obviously just pop out and by their game with little more than spontaneous desire.
Point is that a huge percentage of Bioware game players have never played nor ever heard of Arenanet. Not every mmo player actually considered GW1 a real mmo. There is only one main melting pot in the mmo industry and that was a Blizzard product. Bioware and Arenanet are about to clash and finally truly enter an area they had little or no toe hold on (yes even Arenanet to shocking degrees as they self confessed their product wasn't a true mmo but a CORPG).
Bioware is a monster company (with monster backing) throwing their weight at a one sided genre. Their playerbase has a huge base that has never logged into an mmo in their lives and simply love Biowares previous single player games.
Arenanet is making as impact out of shear effort and promise of innovation but truly only with a smaller army of rabid followers and flashy reveals (good for them!). Their playerbase is largely more cross-genre friendly but heavy with free to play access players mainly in it for the pvp and not dedicated premium mmo players.
YOU THINK blizzard would ditch profit from 11.4 million subscribers X $15 a month????
YOUR INSANE.
thats $171,000,000 per month monthly subscription in favor of Guild wars's Buy to play?
yea dude your insane.
It's "you're", sorry pet peeve of mine.
No, I said if GW2 (+ SW:TOR and TSW) starts bleeding out a significant amount of subscribers from WoW (if it becomes the new giant and WoW winds up with lower subscription numbers), then yes, Blizzard may consider a change in their payment models. We wouldn't be talking about 11.4 million, but it's a theoretical scenario here and won't happen for a very long time. I'm not saying it's going to happen in fact I don't think WoW will lose subscribers fast enough so it won't happen, I'm just talking about a theoretical scenario here. The thread was about how ToR or GW2 could effect each other and the market after all.
Hmm, do people on the internet usually go out of there way to entirely miss the point?
I would miss a THOUSAND points, if it gives me the chance to crack wise!
Perhaps you did not realize that my comment was said with tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
It is probably considerably safer for your sanity if you realize that I make comments purely for the sake of amusing myself and those few poor unlucky others who actually derive some sort of deranged enjoyment from the kinds of things I say.
I was not denigrating your comment, I was just enjoying the chance to make comments about magical energy swords.
YOU THINK blizzard would ditch profit from 11.4 million subscribers X $15 a month????
YOUR INSANE.
thats $171,000,000 per month monthly subscription in favor of Guild wars's Buy to play?
yea dude your insane.
Why does that figure keep popping up?
The vast majority of the 11.4 million subscribers isn't paying 15 dollars a month.
The pricing system in China is totally different from the monthly sub.
Because that figure is from blizzard's CEO's mouth to the share holder's meeting in the financial news and yes 11.4 million paying monthly subscribers. Blizzard said they lost 600,000 monthly subscribers, and currently have 11.4 million subscribers.
YOU THINK blizzard would ditch profit from 11.4 million subscribers X $15 a month????
YOUR INSANE.
thats $171,000,000 per month monthly subscription in favor of Guild wars's Buy to play?
yea dude your insane.
Why does that figure keep popping up?
The vast majority of the 11.4 million subscribers isn't paying 15 dollars a month.
The pricing system in China is totally different from the monthly sub.
Because that figure is from blizzard's CEO's mouth to the share holder's meeting in the financial news and yes 11.4 million paying monthly subscribers. Blizzard said they lost 600,000 monthly subscribers, and currently have 11.4 million subscribers.
The figure '171,000,000 per month' was from the CEO's mouth?
I find that unlikely, since last time I checked, every time they mention their rates, if you look really closely, there's usually an asterick about how they determine Chinese 'subbers' as people who have bought game time in the last month.
Don't think they randomly transformed the whole Chinese pricing structure since the last time I checked.
Bioware draws from an entirely different crowd. It is polar opposite to Arenanet's crowd. These two games draw players from different extremes and meet in the middle.
Not sure how: both are touting heavily story-based games that allow an individual to make an impact on the world through their in-game interactions and choices. Seems like a pretty heavy overlap to me.
Maybe you could explain what extreme Bioware is drawing from that ArenaNet isn't, and vice-versa?
Well, Arenanet is drawing from the crowd of people who are fascinated by fantasy concepts like bizarre inhuman races, swords made out of energy, magical healing powers, shooting lightning out of hands, simplistic good vs. evil battles, powerful hero-warriors, mysticism, and stuff like that.
While Bioware is obviously not.
Hmm, do people on the internet usually go out of there way to entirely miss the point?
The subject I commented on was about the type of player base both companies have grown with their previous products. It is this player base they draw upon as their foundation. New players simply following development of their now more similar entries into the genre do not apply ... those would be the middle ground people I mentioned. The uppity ones who yammer on mmo boards as if mmo's and their communities have existed since the dawn of electricity. You know, the ones missing the point and misquoting people without reading previous posts they had drawn their comments from.
To say Arenanet and Bioware had the same core playerbase previous to their current ventures is about as ignorant as you can get.
Oh wait ... I guess all this a computer thingy with some screen thingy so therefore everything and everyone since pong is entirely the same thing. Ah, now what has this multi-billion dollar industry been doing spending so much time and money on pointless marketing when someone who uses a keyboard at work will obviously just pop out and by their game with little more than spontaneous desire.
Point is that a huge percentage of Bioware game players have never played nor ever heard of Arenanet. Not every mmo player actually considered GW1 a real mmo. There is only one main melting pot in the mmo industry and that was a Blizzard product. Bioware and Arenanet are about to clash and finally truly enter an area they had little or no toe hold on (yes even Arenanet to shocking degrees as they self confessed their product wasn't a true mmo but a CORPG).
Bioware is a monster company (with monster backing) throwing their weight at a one sided genre. Their playerbase has a huge base that has never logged into an mmo in their lives and simply love Biowares previous single player games.
Arenanet is making as impact out of shear effort and promise of innovation but truly only with a smaller army of rabid followers and flashy reveals (good for them!). Their playerbase is largely more cross-genre friendly but heavy with free to play access players mainly in it for the pvp and not dedicated premium mmo players.
The differences are palpable.
You say this as though fans of SINGLE-PLAYER games didn't play GW1 as their only exception to their non-MMO stance (whether or not GW1 can be considered an MMO is irrelevant; for a single-player RPG fan the difference is whether or not they need to be on the internet to play), and that these same single-player fans can't find the exact same appeal in GW2, since it is advertising, from a single-player fan perspective, a very similar gameplay experience to SWTOR.
There are PLENTY of GW1 fans for whom GW1 is the only game they play online. You are right; they are not MMO fans. That's why SWTOR and GW2 would compete for these people.
YOU THINK blizzard would ditch profit from 11.4 million subscribers X $15 a month????
YOUR INSANE.
thats $171,000,000 per month monthly subscription in favor of Guild wars's Buy to play?
yea dude your insane.
Why does that figure keep popping up?
The vast majority of the 11.4 million subscribers isn't paying 15 dollars a month.
The pricing system in China is totally different from the monthly sub.
Because that figure is from blizzard's CEO's mouth to the share holder's meeting in the financial news and yes 11.4 million paying monthly subscribers. Blizzard said they lost 600,000 monthly subscribers, and currently have 11.4 million subscribers.
The figure '171,000,000 per month' was from the CEO's mouth?
I find that unlikely, since last time I checked, every time they mention their rates, if you look really closely, there's usually an asterick about how they determine Chinese 'subbers' as people who have bought game time in the last month.
Don't think they randomly transformed the whole Chinese pricing structure since the last time I checked.
Isn't this number irrelevant anyway? I mean, isn't the whole point that WoW has lost 0.6 million subscribers due to what, underperformance of Cataclysm and Rift coming out? And I don't think I'm alone when I say that I don't think Rift is a very good game at all.
Isn't it feasible that even more subs will be cancelled when two extremely high quality games with established IPs get released?
No P2P MMO is going to ditch the subscription model when they still have millions of subs. But we can't look at it like they're going to have those numbers forever. The question is what do they do when their sub numbers get slashed? My guess is probably nothing. Even if they fell all the way down to 500k or 1M subs, that's still plenty of money. Blizzard isn't going to be the one changing the payment paradigm unless people make it clear they're not going to pay for Titan. The only way that can possibly happen is if GW2 is a major success and people start wondering what it is they're paying for.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
If ToR does really well, GW2 could implode. Even if both games have roughly the same amount of box sales, I could see this happening. My reasoning behind this is NCSoft is not going to stand idly by and watch EA rake in triple the profits with the same amount of box sales month after month.
I would not be surprised to see NCSoft start pushing HEAVY rmt campaigns or even a "premium" subscription.
The only way Anet will be able to keep GW2 truly b2p is if it blows ToR out of the water in box sales. If that happens I could see the pendulum swinging the other way and ToR either lowering its monthly fee or getting rid of it altogether and adopting a cash shop.
The backlash of fans from either of these scenarios happening is going to be pretty significant.
So from a certain point of view, one game's success is the other game's failure. Whoever flinches first is going to set the stage for a chain reaction. Sort of like a game of chicken. 2012 is going to be an interesting year for the MMO from a business perspective.
{mod edit}
haha! I stand by my OP. Its a hypothetical situation. Some people enjoy talking about that kind of stuff, others take it too seriously. But Im keeping that quote!
I don't think the business models are in intense competition. Western mmorpg market: Yes, but price No and game design not as much either. I think it's more middle-market mmorpgs that release after GW2 that will suffer, instead of AAA-A mmorpgs such as SWTOR that have a good chance of outcompeting regular p2p sub mmorpgs.
Man, I don't even know where to start with the OP. Saying GW2 would do anything at all because of ToR is silly itself. GW2 Going premium because of the sales ToR makes? Thats like a mouse deciding one day that it wants to be a lawyer for airplanes.
I think mmo veterans (people that actually realize there were other mmos before WoW came along) will be getting GW2 and ignoring ToR (unless they're a star wars fans and/or a bioware sheep that want to buy 60 dollar "good stories"). Personally, I think theres a good chance people thing ToR is crappy because the devs and publishers are counting on the Star Wars brand to carry most of the way. I could be completely wrong though, but I stand by the fact that its possible. GW2 has nothing to depend on but box sales and continued playing so that players will make use of the micro transaction and exspansions. Guess which one is most likely trying to be a better game? We'll see though.
Man, I don't even know where to start with the OP. Saying GW2 would do anything at all because of ToR is silly itself. GW2 Going premium because of the sales ToR makes? Thats like a mouse deciding one day that it wants to be a lawyer for airplanes.
I think mmo veterans (people that actually realize there were other mmos before WoW came along) will be getting GW2 and ignoring ToR (unless they're a star wars fans and/or a bioware sheep that want to buy 60 dollar "good stories"). Personally, I think theres a good chance people thing ToR is crappy because the devs and publishers are counting on the Star Wars brand to carry most of the way. I could be completely wrong though, but I stand by the fact that its possible. GW2 has nothing to depend on but box sales and continued playing so that players will make use of the micro transaction and exspansions. Guess which one is most likely trying to be a better game? We'll see though.
Wow way to try and project your opinions as fact.
I think most people will buy ToR because they dont want another Arena net chat room and instance lobby that passes for a game. See what I did there.
Fact is MMO veterans is a fallacy anyway, there are mmo gamers and non mmo gamers both of whome are highly interested in ToR. GW meanwhile appeals to a niche of players. Now personally I will try both games and likely enjoy both games, though judging by the posters who like your self seem to want to paint GW 2 as real competition to what will be the big 2 mmos the community in GW 2 will suck as much as HoN and LoLs.
Tor has to rely on people paying £15 a month to continue after box sales, and when I look at the heros in the GW 1 shop and see the stupid prices they are charging for something that does directly affect ingame power I start to wonder if all in subscriptions are actually the better idea. But I have hope and a little faith in both studios to produce a good game, without the need to turn it into a who can pee higher up the wall contest.
Try it. If you genuinely try to find reasons for the games coming out to be good, rather than trying to validate your fanboyism by trashing the others, you will find that your life in mmo world gets a lot better.
But that would be too sensible for some internet people to try eh?
Its amazing that the judgement of success is often related to subs, Some of the best games, tv shows and films are not the ones grabbing the highest revenues, its all about critical acclaim.
Avatar for some reason is the highest grosing film of all time, when it was realistically a poor mans FernGully
I will be opting for both games, SWTOR from what we are seeing so far, is no gameplay gem, it is however a content gem. Admittadely it is a high price to pay for good story, but it is just about worth it with the average yesteryear combat and progression systems. plus hey I like star wars.
Now Guild Wars 2 is just plain doing things differently, its called progression the gameplay footage looks fresher, more enticing, graphically its frankly a lot superior particularly in world design, Bioware never really has cut it with level/world design, it was always character driven so where they were standing was second fiddle.
Now I doubt that the masses will be able to come to terms with the changes and adjust to something new in time for GW2 to outgross tor. but the point is that frankly it doesn't have to, If it provides more action orientated combat, relieves a tired trinity model and manages to create a living briefing world, where choices matter (choices the things SWTOR was all about and has slowly redrawn itself to appeal to more people).
sure ncsoft want to make money, but if gaming history tells you anything its that the greed of EA is far greater.
Man, I don't even know where to start with the OP. Saying GW2 would do anything at all because of ToR is silly itself. GW2 Going premium because of the sales ToR makes? Thats like a mouse deciding one day that it wants to be a lawyer for airplanes.
I think mmo veterans (people that actually realize there were other mmos before WoW came along) will be getting GW2 and ignoring ToR (unless they're a star wars fans and/or a bioware sheep that want to buy 60 dollar "good stories"). Personally, I think theres a good chance people thing ToR is crappy because the devs and publishers are counting on the Star Wars brand to carry most of the way. I could be completely wrong though, but I stand by the fact that its possible. GW2 has nothing to depend on but box sales and continued playing so that players will make use of the micro transaction and exspansions. Guess which one is most likely trying to be a better game? We'll see though.
Wow way to try and project your opinions as fact.
The only thing he stated as fact is that it's a possibility. Which it is.
I think most people will buy ToR because they dont want another Arena net chat room and instance lobby that passes for a game. See what I did there.
Fact is MMO veterans is a fallacy anyway, there are mmo gamers and non mmo gamers both of whome are highly interested in ToR. GW meanwhile appeals to a niche of players. Now personally I will try both games and likely enjoy both games, though judging by the posters who like your self seem to want to paint GW 2 as real competition to what will be the big 2 mmos the community in GW 2 will suck as much as HoN and LoLs.
Fact is, MMO veterans is NOT a fallacy. The mmo players that were around during pre-WoW have a very different understand than those who came with / after WoW. It amazes me just how true that is sometimes. Just because you are unaware of this does not make it false.
Tor has to rely on people paying £15 a month to continue after box sales, and when I look at the heros in the GW 1 shop and see the stupid prices they are charging for something that does directly affect ingame power I start to wonder if all in subscriptions are actually the better idea. But I have hope and a little faith in both studios to produce a good game, without the need to turn it into a who can pee higher up the wall contest.
I'm puzzled as to how you come to this conclusion. The hero packs give you some extra customization, but you get all the heros you need in the game by doing the storylines. The game also also been out for over 6 years now, and the hero pack was one of the last things added (well after Eye of the North expansion). If you think this somehow shines negatively on a 6year old game that's still running strong, especially when most current MMOs seem to go directly to a cash shop after only a few months of live, then I would love to see that train of thought.
Try it. If you genuinely try to find reasons for the games coming out to be good, rather than trying to validate your fanboyism by trashing the others, you will find that your life in mmo world gets a lot better.
But that would be too sensible for some internet people to try eh?
I actually do agree with this last statement, but it goes both ways. I still don't get the whole polarized threads towards TOR and GW2. The simple truth is they are very different MMOs which are not really competing with each other. This has been explicitly shown, especially when you look at GW1's launch as a benchmark. MMO vets seem to realize this better than most, primarilly because we were actually there and remember when the game was released and how it had no bearing on WoW's success, just as WoW had no bearing on GW1's.
Its amazing that the judgement of success is often related to subs, Some of the best games, tv shows and films are not the ones grabbing the highest revenues, its all about critical acclaim.
Avatar for some reason is the highest grosing film of all time, when it was realistically a poor mans FernGully
I will be opting for both games, SWTOR from what we are seeing so far, is no gameplay gem, it is however a content gem. Admittadely it is a high price to pay for good story, but it is just about worth it with the average yesteryear combat and progression systems. plus hey I like star wars.
Now Guild Wars 2 is just plain doing things differently, its called progression the gameplay footage looks fresher, more enticing, graphically its frankly a lot superior particularly in world design, Bioware never really has cut it with level/world design, it was always character driven so where they were standing was second fiddle.
Now I doubt that the masses will be able to come to terms with the changes and adjust to something new in time for GW2 to outgross tor. but the point is that frankly it doesn't have to, If it provides more action orientated combat, relieves a tired trinity model and manages to create a living briefing world, where choices matter (choices the things SWTOR was all about and has slowly redrawn itself to appeal to more people).
sure ncsoft want to make money, but if gaming history tells you anything its that the greed of EA is far greater.
I'd just like to point out that both Avatar (metacritic 83, a very high score) and WoW (metacritic 93, universally acclaimed) were critically acclaimed also, regardless of your opinion of them. Same goes for movies like Titantic, the new Harry Potter, and The Dark Knight. Same goes pretty much for TV shows, the ones with higher scores are almost always popular.
Generally when something becomes critically acclaimed it will garner a lot more attention and sales than something that wasn't. For example movies like Pan's Labyrinth, that had a limited release, started getting picked up by major theaters after it received positive reviews from critics. Same goes for small indie titles that likely would have only sold a few thousand copies selling well into the tens of thousands even hundreds of thousands.
Success is measured by how well something sells. If it's critically acclaimed and doesn't sell it, it really didn't do much for the filmmakers/developers of the product aside from maybe add something nice they could put on their resume after they go bankrupt.
I think both games will be good in their own way and very successful. Personally I don't think SWTOR will retain subscribers as well as Guild Wars 2, but I doubt it will be a flop. They'll make plenty of money on box sales alone. I don't think either game will have an effect on either game's subscription numbers, though GW2 has the potential for a long term change in the paradigm of MMO subscription plans if it becomes a blockbuster success.
Its amazing that the judgement of success is often related to subs, Some of the best games, tv shows and films are not the ones grabbing the highest revenues, its all about critical acclaim.
Avatar for some reason is the highest grosing film of all time, when it was realistically a poor mans FernGully
I will be opting for both games, SWTOR from what we are seeing so far, is no gameplay gem, it is however a content gem. Admittadely it is a high price to pay for good story, but it is just about worth it with the average yesteryear combat and progression systems. plus hey I like star wars.
Now Guild Wars 2 is just plain doing things differently, its called progression the gameplay footage looks fresher, more enticing, graphically its frankly a lot superior particularly in world design, Bioware never really has cut it with level/world design, it was always character driven so where they were standing was second fiddle.
Now I doubt that the masses will be able to come to terms with the changes and adjust to something new in time for GW2 to outgross tor. but the point is that frankly it doesn't have to, If it provides more action orientated combat, relieves a tired trinity model and manages to create a living briefing world, where choices matter (choices the things SWTOR was all about and has slowly redrawn itself to appeal to more people).
sure ncsoft want to make money, but if gaming history tells you anything its that the greed of EA is far greater.
I'd just like to point out that both Avatar (metacritic 83, a very high score) and WoW (metacritic 93, universally acclaimed) were critically acclaimed also, regardless of your opinion of them. Same goes for movies like Titantic, the new Harry Potter, and The Dark Knight. Same goes pretty much for TV shows, the ones with higher scores are almost always popular.
Generally when something becomes critically acclaimed it will garner a lot more attention and sales than something that wasn't. For example movies like Pan's Labyrinth, that had a limited release, started getting picked up by major theaters after it received positive reviews from critics. Same goes for small indie titles that likely would have only sold a few thousand copies selling well into the tens of thousands even hundreds of thousands.
Success is measured by how well something sells. If it's critically acclaimed and doesn't sell it, it really didn't do much for the filmmakers/developers of the product aside from maybe add something nice they could put on their resume after they go bankrupt.
I think both games will be good in their own way and very successful. Personally I don't think SWTOR will retain subscribers as well as Guild Wars 2, but I doubt it will be a flop. They'll make plenty of money on box sales alone. I don't think either game will have an effect on either game's subscription numbers, though GW2 has the potential for a long term change in the paradigm of MMO subscription plans if it becomes a blockbuster success.
I agree that high grossing films often tally with being reasonably good, (except for Avatar, which is a very very very average film at best). WoW is a good game for what it is, and was for its time too, especially on release that is without question.
however It doesn't neccessarily mean that the highest grossing are in fact the best definatevely! which is what seems to be in most peoples opinion here. If you go to metacritic or rotten tomato you will often see that the film of the years/current top rated movies are not the highest grossing.
this is the highest rated films over the last decade and this year. you are hardly seeing a mirror with each years highest grossing, admitadely this doesn't correlate as well in the video game industry since critical reviewers for films and tv are not reliant on advertising directly from those sectors in advertising.
I also agree with your last paragraph both will have a fair bit of financial success SWTOR potentially doing better, although i doubt I will enjoy it as much as GW2.
"Success is measured by how well something sells. If it's critically acclaimed and doesn't sell it, it really didn't do much for the filmmakers/developers of the product aside from maybe add something nice they could put on their resume after they go bankrupt."
I do disagree with this entirely though, Obviously you are taking it to the extreme as if it is a critical success it will make some money. If Arena Net or Bioware have a critically acclaimed master piece I believe they will sleep easy regardless of anything else. EA and NC Soft on the other hand will want to be seeing the $$$ as you quite rightly point out.
all and all we will have two healthy popular titles, one a familiar title built on content the other challenging boundaries and needing to deliver.
Arguing the audience targeting and comparable isn't necessary. The only point that matters here is what amount of financial influx does GW2 need to be "successful" to Anet. There is no question GW2 will sell many box copies, but how many do they need to sell to canabalize the costs of maintaining a full MMORPG with servers, developers, etc?
I anticipate GW2 to do fine in sales and supplement with "advanture packs" a la EQ2 that can be purchased via RMT. Or, they will skip right over the adventure packs and release "expansion packs" 1-2 times years.
While the market is somewhat saturated, both games will do well in initial sales, but TOR has a dependency on sub volume for commercial success - GW2 doesn't.
Arguing the audience targeting and comparable isn't necessary. The only point that matters here is what amount of financial influx does GW2 need to be "successful" to Anet. There is no question GW2 will sell many box copies, but how many do they need to sell to canabalize the costs of maintaining a full MMORPG with servers, developers, etc?
I anticipate GW2 to do fine in sales and supplement with "advanture packs" a la EQ2 that can be purchased via RMT. Or, they will skip right over the adventure packs and release "expansion packs" 1-2 times years.
While the market is somewhat saturated, both games will do well in initial sales, but TOR has a dependency on sub volume for commercial success - GW2 doesn't.
One look at GW's Cash shop shows that while it doesnt have a dependancy on subs, it will still require people to spend money on an ongoing basis to be viable and successful. They did not contrary to what many people would have you believe simply launch GW and give you everything free. To get the full GW experience from new would have set you back around £120 and that was quite a while back. (£30 GW Prophecies, £30 Nightfall £30 Factions and £30 eye of the north) not to mention buying the addon packs and the mercenaries in the cash shop). Thats just the basic editions by the way, on release day from Game.
Now the fact is they will likely do the same with GW 2 which means ongoing it will still require people to spend money, maybe not the same way as a Subscription game, but it does get a little tiresome that people try to make out that Anet are some kind of saints that are not at all interested in money.
Fact is the will want people to continue to spend after initial box purchases.
Arguing the audience targeting and comparable isn't necessary. The only point that matters here is what amount of financial influx does GW2 need to be "successful" to Anet. There is no question GW2 will sell many box copies, but how many do they need to sell to canabalize the costs of maintaining a full MMORPG with servers, developers, etc?
I anticipate GW2 to do fine in sales and supplement with "advanture packs" a la EQ2 that can be purchased via RMT. Or, they will skip right over the adventure packs and release "expansion packs" 1-2 times years.
While the market is somewhat saturated, both games will do well in initial sales, but TOR has a dependency on sub volume for commercial success - GW2 doesn't.
One look at GW's Cash shop shows that while it doesnt have a dependancy on subs, it will still require people to spend money on an ongoing basis to be viable and successful. They did not contrary to what many people would have you believe simply launch GW and give you everything free. To get the full GW experience from new would have set you back around £120 and that was quite a while back. (£30 GW Prophecies, £30 Nightfall £30 Factions and £30 eye of the north) not to mention buying the addon packs and the mercenaries in the cash shop). Thats just the basic editions by the way, on release day from Game.
Now the fact is they will likely do the same with GW 2 which means ongoing it will still require people to spend money, maybe not the same way as a Subscription game, but it does get a little tiresome that people try to make out that Anet are some kind of saints that are not at all interested in money.
Fact is the will want people to continue to spend after initial box purchases.
Don't most mmo's charge a sub and a charge for expansions, so to get the full experience of say WoW you'd need to buy WoW, burning crusade, wrath of the lich king and cataclysm, as well as spending a monthly sub over the time period you play. you also have the beauty in GW1 of being able to play with other people in the expansion you own for as long as you like, still having access to most elements of pvp and never being outleveled because you didn't spend out on an expansion. Not having a sub gives you options, you don't feel obliged to play.
We also need to leave Bioware and Arena net out of the cash part of this, the money hungry EA and NC soft are the ones wanting the $$$ the development teams want to make a good game that people enjoy, if it makes more money they will get to do this for longer but they will not be the ones examing margins and putting pressure on explotiing the community.
Comments
Of the three major MMOs coming soon (GW2, TOR, and TSW, I left Archeage out because the US release could years from now and isn't on the radar quite as much here on the West) they each share completely different art styles, themes, and game mechanics. I don't really think there will be much competition here from any of them.
If anything GW2 will have more of an effect on the market. If GW2 is successful, it could very well prevent others from buying into subscription games due to not having enough time to play their second MMO to make up for the subscription cost, but on the other hand if SW:TOR is more successful people who enjoyed a game like GW2 will be able to purchase the boxed copy and still play it without having to worry about maintaining a monthly fee on the GW2, so they could play it casually and get their money's worth.
In fact, it's possible GW2 could have an effect on all current subscription based MMOs everywhere. If it's the next big thing, and starts bleeding out enough WoW subscribers, Blizzard and other MMO developers will likely follow the B2P payment model and ditch the subscription plan (or leave it as optional with benefits).
I don't think anyone should worry. If anything the effects of TOR and GW2 will be positive for the industry as a whole. If one eclipses another in sales and player retention, then it shouldn't cause any negative effects on the market. GW2 will likely keep it's subscription model even if it does poorly (which as far as I'm concerned from the looks of it there is no way in hell that is going to happen), as they already had success in GW with it, and even if they implement a cash shop expect it to be for bonus content (DLC) and costumes that have no effect on gameplay.
GW2's payment plan is also a big reason many people are going to try it, just like GW. I have a couple friends who swore off MMOs years ago due to the time investment required in them, but plan on buying GW2 just because they don't have to maintain a subscription to it like other MMOs if they decided to stop playing and focus on real life suddenly.
YOU THINK blizzard would ditch profit from 11.4 million subscribers X $15 a month????
YOUR INSANE.
thats $171,000,000 per month monthly subscription in favor of Guild wars's Buy to play?
yea dude your insane.
1 million preorders on the $150 CE ToR? Where did you get that number from? I'm pretty sure that is completely incorrect. I doubt it's over 100,000 considering it had a very limited release and sold out almost immediately.
Hmm, do people on the internet usually go out of there way to entirely miss the point?
The subject I commented on was about the type of player base both companies have grown with their previous products. It is this player base they draw upon as their foundation. New players simply following development of their now more similar entries into the genre do not apply ... those would be the middle ground people I mentioned. The uppity ones who yammer on mmo boards as if mmo's and their communities have existed since the dawn of electricity. You know, the ones missing the point and misquoting people without reading previous posts they had drawn their comments from.
To say Arenanet and Bioware had the same core playerbase previous to their current ventures is about as ignorant as you can get.
Oh wait ... I guess all this a computer thingy with some screen thingy so therefore everything and everyone since pong is entirely the same thing. Ah, now what has this multi-billion dollar industry been doing spending so much time and money on pointless marketing when someone who uses a keyboard at work will obviously just pop out and by their game with little more than spontaneous desire.
Point is that a huge percentage of Bioware game players have never played nor ever heard of Arenanet. Not every mmo player actually considered GW1 a real mmo. There is only one main melting pot in the mmo industry and that was a Blizzard product. Bioware and Arenanet are about to clash and finally truly enter an area they had little or no toe hold on (yes even Arenanet to shocking degrees as they self confessed their product wasn't a true mmo but a CORPG).
Bioware is a monster company (with monster backing) throwing their weight at a one sided genre. Their playerbase has a huge base that has never logged into an mmo in their lives and simply love Biowares previous single player games.
Arenanet is making as impact out of shear effort and promise of innovation but truly only with a smaller army of rabid followers and flashy reveals (good for them!). Their playerbase is largely more cross-genre friendly but heavy with free to play access players mainly in it for the pvp and not dedicated premium mmo players.
The differences are palpable.
You stay sassy!
Why does that figure keep popping up?
The vast majority of the 11.4 million subscribers isn't paying 15 dollars a month.
The pricing system in China is totally different from the monthly sub.
It's "you're", sorry pet peeve of mine.
No, I said if GW2 (+ SW:TOR and TSW) starts bleeding out a significant amount of subscribers from WoW (if it becomes the new giant and WoW winds up with lower subscription numbers), then yes, Blizzard may consider a change in their payment models. We wouldn't be talking about 11.4 million, but it's a theoretical scenario here and won't happen for a very long time. I'm not saying it's going to happen in fact I don't think WoW will lose subscribers fast enough so it won't happen, I'm just talking about a theoretical scenario here. The thread was about how ToR or GW2 could effect each other and the market after all.
I would miss a THOUSAND points, if it gives me the chance to crack wise!
Perhaps you did not realize that my comment was said with tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
It is probably considerably safer for your sanity if you realize that I make comments purely for the sake of amusing myself and those few poor unlucky others who actually derive some sort of deranged enjoyment from the kinds of things I say.
I was not denigrating your comment, I was just enjoying the chance to make comments about magical energy swords.
Because that figure is from blizzard's CEO's mouth to the share holder's meeting in the financial news and yes 11.4 million paying monthly subscribers. Blizzard said they lost 600,000 monthly subscribers, and currently have 11.4 million subscribers.
The figure '171,000,000 per month' was from the CEO's mouth?
I find that unlikely, since last time I checked, every time they mention their rates, if you look really closely, there's usually an asterick about how they determine Chinese 'subbers' as people who have bought game time in the last month.
Don't think they randomly transformed the whole Chinese pricing structure since the last time I checked.
I kinda hope GW2 cannibalizes everything so I can stop paying these damn monthly fees.
You say this as though fans of SINGLE-PLAYER games didn't play GW1 as their only exception to their non-MMO stance (whether or not GW1 can be considered an MMO is irrelevant; for a single-player RPG fan the difference is whether or not they need to be on the internet to play), and that these same single-player fans can't find the exact same appeal in GW2, since it is advertising, from a single-player fan perspective, a very similar gameplay experience to SWTOR.
There are PLENTY of GW1 fans for whom GW1 is the only game they play online. You are right; they are not MMO fans. That's why SWTOR and GW2 would compete for these people.
Isn't this number irrelevant anyway? I mean, isn't the whole point that WoW has lost 0.6 million subscribers due to what, underperformance of Cataclysm and Rift coming out? And I don't think I'm alone when I say that I don't think Rift is a very good game at all.
Isn't it feasible that even more subs will be cancelled when two extremely high quality games with established IPs get released?
No P2P MMO is going to ditch the subscription model when they still have millions of subs. But we can't look at it like they're going to have those numbers forever. The question is what do they do when their sub numbers get slashed? My guess is probably nothing. Even if they fell all the way down to 500k or 1M subs, that's still plenty of money. Blizzard isn't going to be the one changing the payment paradigm unless people make it clear they're not going to pay for Titan. The only way that can possibly happen is if GW2 is a major success and people start wondering what it is they're paying for.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
haha! I stand by my OP. Its a hypothetical situation. Some people enjoy talking about that kind of stuff, others take it too seriously. But Im keeping that quote!
I don't think the business models are in intense competition. Western mmorpg market: Yes, but price No and game design not as much either. I think it's more middle-market mmorpgs that release after GW2 that will suffer, instead of AAA-A mmorpgs such as SWTOR that have a good chance of outcompeting regular p2p sub mmorpgs.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Man, I don't even know where to start with the OP. Saying GW2 would do anything at all because of ToR is silly itself. GW2 Going premium because of the sales ToR makes? Thats like a mouse deciding one day that it wants to be a lawyer for airplanes.
I think mmo veterans (people that actually realize there were other mmos before WoW came along) will be getting GW2 and ignoring ToR (unless they're a star wars fans and/or a bioware sheep that want to buy 60 dollar "good stories"). Personally, I think theres a good chance people thing ToR is crappy because the devs and publishers are counting on the Star Wars brand to carry most of the way. I could be completely wrong though, but I stand by the fact that its possible. GW2 has nothing to depend on but box sales and continued playing so that players will make use of the micro transaction and exspansions. Guess which one is most likely trying to be a better game? We'll see though.
Wow way to try and project your opinions as fact.
I think most people will buy ToR because they dont want another Arena net chat room and instance lobby that passes for a game. See what I did there.
Fact is MMO veterans is a fallacy anyway, there are mmo gamers and non mmo gamers both of whome are highly interested in ToR. GW meanwhile appeals to a niche of players. Now personally I will try both games and likely enjoy both games, though judging by the posters who like your self seem to want to paint GW 2 as real competition to what will be the big 2 mmos the community in GW 2 will suck as much as HoN and LoLs.
Tor has to rely on people paying £15 a month to continue after box sales, and when I look at the heros in the GW 1 shop and see the stupid prices they are charging for something that does directly affect ingame power I start to wonder if all in subscriptions are actually the better idea. But I have hope and a little faith in both studios to produce a good game, without the need to turn it into a who can pee higher up the wall contest.
Try it. If you genuinely try to find reasons for the games coming out to be good, rather than trying to validate your fanboyism by trashing the others, you will find that your life in mmo world gets a lot better.
But that would be too sensible for some internet people to try eh?
/thread
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
Its amazing that the judgement of success is often related to subs, Some of the best games, tv shows and films are not the ones grabbing the highest revenues, its all about critical acclaim.
Avatar for some reason is the highest grosing film of all time, when it was realistically a poor mans FernGully
I will be opting for both games, SWTOR from what we are seeing so far, is no gameplay gem, it is however a content gem. Admittadely it is a high price to pay for good story, but it is just about worth it with the average yesteryear combat and progression systems. plus hey I like star wars.
Now Guild Wars 2 is just plain doing things differently, its called progression the gameplay footage looks fresher, more enticing, graphically its frankly a lot superior particularly in world design, Bioware never really has cut it with level/world design, it was always character driven so where they were standing was second fiddle.
Now I doubt that the masses will be able to come to terms with the changes and adjust to something new in time for GW2 to outgross tor. but the point is that frankly it doesn't have to, If it provides more action orientated combat, relieves a tired trinity model and manages to create a living briefing world, where choices matter (choices the things SWTOR was all about and has slowly redrawn itself to appeal to more people).
sure ncsoft want to make money, but if gaming history tells you anything its that the greed of EA is far greater.
I'd just like to point out that both Avatar (metacritic 83, a very high score) and WoW (metacritic 93, universally acclaimed) were critically acclaimed also, regardless of your opinion of them. Same goes for movies like Titantic, the new Harry Potter, and The Dark Knight. Same goes pretty much for TV shows, the ones with higher scores are almost always popular.
Generally when something becomes critically acclaimed it will garner a lot more attention and sales than something that wasn't. For example movies like Pan's Labyrinth, that had a limited release, started getting picked up by major theaters after it received positive reviews from critics. Same goes for small indie titles that likely would have only sold a few thousand copies selling well into the tens of thousands even hundreds of thousands.
Success is measured by how well something sells. If it's critically acclaimed and doesn't sell it, it really didn't do much for the filmmakers/developers of the product aside from maybe add something nice they could put on their resume after they go bankrupt.
I think both games will be good in their own way and very successful. Personally I don't think SWTOR will retain subscribers as well as Guild Wars 2, but I doubt it will be a flop. They'll make plenty of money on box sales alone. I don't think either game will have an effect on either game's subscription numbers, though GW2 has the potential for a long term change in the paradigm of MMO subscription plans if it becomes a blockbuster success.
I agree that high grossing films often tally with being reasonably good, (except for Avatar, which is a very very very average film at best). WoW is a good game for what it is, and was for its time too, especially on release that is without question.
however It doesn't neccessarily mean that the highest grossing are in fact the best definatevely! which is what seems to be in most peoples opinion here. If you go to metacritic or rotten tomato you will often see that the film of the years/current top rated movies are not the highest grossing.
2011
Phil Ochs: There But For Fortune
2010
Waste Land
2009
Last Train Home
2008
Man on Wire
2007
Taxi to the Dark Side
2006
Deliver Us From Evil
2005
Street Fight
2004
Live-in Maid (Cama adentro)
2003
Rivers and Tides, (Fluß der Zeit)
2002
Bus 174 (Ônibus 174)
2001
My Voyage to Italy
2000
Le Gout Des Autres (The Taste of Othe
this is the highest rated films over the last decade and this year. you are hardly seeing a mirror with each years highest grossing, admitadely this doesn't correlate as well in the video game industry since critical reviewers for films and tv are not reliant on advertising directly from those sectors in advertising.
I also agree with your last paragraph both will have a fair bit of financial success SWTOR potentially doing better, although i doubt I will enjoy it as much as GW2.
"Success is measured by how well something sells. If it's critically acclaimed and doesn't sell it, it really didn't do much for the filmmakers/developers of the product aside from maybe add something nice they could put on their resume after they go bankrupt."
I do disagree with this entirely though, Obviously you are taking it to the extreme as if it is a critical success it will make some money. If Arena Net or Bioware have a critically acclaimed master piece I believe they will sleep easy regardless of anything else. EA and NC Soft on the other hand will want to be seeing the $$$ as you quite rightly point out.
all and all we will have two healthy popular titles, one a familiar title built on content the other challenging boundaries and needing to deliver.
Arguing the audience targeting and comparable isn't necessary. The only point that matters here is what amount of financial influx does GW2 need to be "successful" to Anet. There is no question GW2 will sell many box copies, but how many do they need to sell to canabalize the costs of maintaining a full MMORPG with servers, developers, etc?
I anticipate GW2 to do fine in sales and supplement with "advanture packs" a la EQ2 that can be purchased via RMT. Or, they will skip right over the adventure packs and release "expansion packs" 1-2 times years.
While the market is somewhat saturated, both games will do well in initial sales, but TOR has a dependency on sub volume for commercial success - GW2 doesn't.
One look at GW's Cash shop shows that while it doesnt have a dependancy on subs, it will still require people to spend money on an ongoing basis to be viable and successful. They did not contrary to what many people would have you believe simply launch GW and give you everything free. To get the full GW experience from new would have set you back around £120 and that was quite a while back. (£30 GW Prophecies, £30 Nightfall £30 Factions and £30 eye of the north) not to mention buying the addon packs and the mercenaries in the cash shop). Thats just the basic editions by the way, on release day from Game.
Now the fact is they will likely do the same with GW 2 which means ongoing it will still require people to spend money, maybe not the same way as a Subscription game, but it does get a little tiresome that people try to make out that Anet are some kind of saints that are not at all interested in money.
Fact is the will want people to continue to spend after initial box purchases.
Don't most mmo's charge a sub and a charge for expansions, so to get the full experience of say WoW you'd need to buy WoW, burning crusade, wrath of the lich king and cataclysm, as well as spending a monthly sub over the time period you play. you also have the beauty in GW1 of being able to play with other people in the expansion you own for as long as you like, still having access to most elements of pvp and never being outleveled because you didn't spend out on an expansion. Not having a sub gives you options, you don't feel obliged to play.
We also need to leave Bioware and Arena net out of the cash part of this, the money hungry EA and NC soft are the ones wanting the $$$ the development teams want to make a good game that people enjoy, if it makes more money they will get to do this for longer but they will not be the ones examing margins and putting pressure on explotiing the community.
How is what the OP described at all 'parasitic'?