Wat caused AA to fail in the east?

MadDemon64

Originally posted by MMOExposed
What caused AA to fail in the east?

If by fail you mean, "Go from being a subscription based game to a free to play game", that's because subscription games are steadily moving out the door and adopting the free to play model.  I think it might be due to the belief (or possible fact) that games with cash shops can hook people and cause them to spend plenty of money on cash shop items if the cash shop items are good enough and the game is good enough.

Plus I think the world economy is sucking hard enough for people to not really be able to pay subscriptions to games like they used to.

TheLizardbones

Did AA actually fail? I mean the game itself? All we really know is that they changed the payment scheme for the game. If they start making double the money they were making before, does that really count as a failure?

whisperwynd

Originally posted by Ramanadjinn

it is extremely common here to equate a game going free to play with it failing.  why are so many of you guys acting like you don't know about that.  

so many people express their derision for a game and predict its failure before the game releases with comments like "it'll be f2p in 6 months lawl amirite u suk."

i'm not saying its right, but don't act surprised that this dude equates free to play with failure.

All you need to do is look at the OP, the answer becomes clear.

botrytis

Originally posted by SavageHorizon

Originally posted by Eir_S
Maybe because it promised to be a sandbox and ended up a themepark with bad running animations and boring combat.

The only game recently with bad running animations and a terrible theme park is GW2, AA was never sold by the devs as a sandbox mmo, in fact they have said on many occasions that it also is a theme park and a hybrid.

If western reporters and followers label the game a sandbox then that's not the devs fault.

As for AA failing in the east, the OP obviously doesn't know wtf he is talking about.

ArcheAge is now in it's first phase of beta in China, last i heard is that China is in the east.

Closed beta keys are going for y999 which is 160 usd and they are being snapped up.

The OP really make some silly threads without actually doing any research, you would actually benefit from doing the same before making silly comments.

Compared to what? In my opinion, TSW had the worst animations and still does but it is a decent game otherwise. GW2 is fine. If you don't like GW2, that is fine. Just don't pull stuff out that has no basis in fact but is your opinion only.

 

Games developed in the East often times do not make it here. Look at TERA, which is a decent game, did not translate well to the western market.

The other issue with AA is the open-ended nature of the game. Some people like it and some want to herded like cattle from A-B-C-D. 

Doogiehowser

Its funny how people when unable to refute OP's point are attacking him instead of sticking to his original post.

I asked earlier define what is success in terms of AA because it released as a P2P MMO and now had to go F2P because of dwindling numbers. That doesn't look like success to me.

Now if AA was launched as a F2P MMO then no one would question its success. But going from P2P to F2P in sucha  short time is self explanatory.

whisperwynd

Originally posted by Doogiehowser

Its funny how people when unable to refute OP's point are attacking him instead of sticking to his original post.

I asked earlier define what is success in terms of AA because it released as a P2P MMO and now had to go F2P because of dwindling numbers. That doesn't look like success to me.

Now if AA was launched as a F2P MMO then no one would question its success. But going from P2P to F2P in sucha  short time is self explanatory.

 History has shown that going F2P does not kill a game. Even what some believe to be the train wreck SWTOR. Rift also went F2P. By no means does this say it 'failed'.

 What's really funny is how people seem to like crapping over a game they obviously have no interest in. 

botrytis

Originally posted by whisperwynd

Originally posted by Doogiehowser

Its funny how people when unable to refute OP's point are attacking him instead of sticking to his original post.

I asked earlier define what is success in terms of AA because it released as a P2P MMO and now had to go F2P because of dwindling numbers. That doesn't look like success to me.

Now if AA was launched as a F2P MMO then no one would question its success. But going from P2P to F2P in sucha  short time is self explanatory.

 History has shown that going F2P does not kill a game. Even what some believe to be the train wreck SWTOR. Rift also went F2P. By no means does this say it 'failed'.

 What's really funny is how people seem to like crapping over a game they obviously have no interest in. 

That is the way these forums work - anyone can be an expert even when they don't know anything on the topic.

Loktofeit

Originally posted by OG_Zorvan

Originally posted by woolf14

What fail, it's 10th in the list:

http://www.gamenote.com/rank_ongame/

And what does that prove?

Maybe you should bring in xfire and raptr numbers as proof of success next.

Or maybe the game rankings on this very site ( that have been proven to be worthless time and again ).

The difference is that GameNote and Gametrics report actual usage from Net Cafes, which are the primary way most people play online games in South Korea, so there is a good level of reliability there.

 

Loktofeit

Originally posted by Doogiehowser

I asked earlier define what is success in terms of AA because it released as a P2P MMO and now had to go F2P because of dwindling numbers.

Can you link to the source for that?

Amana

The way this is stated simply leads to arguments over whether or not the game has 'failed' or not. You provide no substance for the presumption, OP, so I'm locking this since there's really just a loaded question and nothing of substance to justify a position.