Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Daybreak MMO's status

2

Comments

  • Po_ggPo_gg Member RarePosts: 4,711
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    Yep, it was a weird statement considered DCUO was built for the PS3 and at launch it was a real pain to play it on PC... or that according to their own numbers it has way more players on PS4 than on PC.
    (for the record, I play on PC, and after the first fixes it has decent handling on here as well)
    blueturtle13
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,823
    Galadourn said:
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    I thought this was self-evident
    I thought games like FFXIV proved that a long time ago already ;)
    That is a tired parrot response that is not longer true. 
    ConstantineMerus

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,823
    Po_gg said:
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    Yep, it was a weird statement considered DCUO was built for the PS3 and at launch it was a real pain to play it on PC... or that according to their own numbers it has way more players on PS4 than on PC.
    (for the record, I play on PC, and after the first fixes it has decent handling on here as well)
    Yeah there are a plethora of mmos on consoles nowadays and some even run much better for it, like DCUO, like you said. 
    It is a control scheme stigma I guess? which seems weird considering most mmorpgs really don't require that many buttons and many can be played with a controller even on PC. 
    Some prejudices people can not grow out of I guess
    Po_gg

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,767
    Galadourn said:
    SOE (now Daybreak) missed their chance to revolutionize the genre with EQNext. That would have been a success, imho, similar to WoW's success when in launched back in 2004.
    EQN was all smoke an mirrors. It was NEVER going to deliver and they (SOE) knew it.
    Mendelcraftseeker
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,031
    Po_gg said:
    Galadourn said:
    jusomdude said:

    It's even more damning to EQ that it's only available on PC while the other two are also on console.
    a MMO would never play well on a console though...
    What?
    Yep, it was a weird statement considered DCUO was built for the PS3 and at launch it was a real pain to play it on PC... or that according to their own numbers it has way more players on PS4 than on PC.
    (for the record, I play on PC, and after the first fixes it has decent handling on here as well)
    Yeah there are a plethora of mmos on consoles nowadays and some even run much better for it, like DCUO, like you said. 
    It is a control scheme stigma I guess? which seems weird considering most mmorpgs really don't require that many buttons and many can be played with a controller even on PC. 
    Some prejudices people can not grow out of I guess
    While I do have difficulty with controllers and can understand a controller preference, I think it goes deeper than that.

    There is something about a console being more easily available to everyone, making it available to younger people , that seems to rub some people the wrong way.

    As if everyone who has a console is a kid and therefore will somehow ruin a game based on their age/immaturity.
    blueturtle13



  • Po_ggPo_gg Member RarePosts: 4,711
    edited September 2018
    Yeah there are a plethora of mmos on consoles nowadays and some even run much better for it, like DCUO, like you said. 
    It is a control scheme stigma I guess?
    I found that post weird especially in a thread of DBG (former SOE), since DCUO, 1 of the 4 games for this very thread is notorious about that... it was literally born (ok, not literally by the letter :smiley: ) for the notion of "come on, let's make an MMO for our console, nobody did that before, it will be great - or at least will be a good marketing tool"

    I think not mainly the controls stigma, more the whole console mindset. At launch, on PC when you arrived from other PC MMORPGs, often you wanted to pull your hair out, basic features which are on a dedicated button in other games were 2 or 3 levels deep in a submenu, etc.
    Hell, you had to struggle with menus for simple things like answer to a /tell in chat, or to bring up the chat panel the first place...
    At launch it was a worse console port than GTA IV's PC version, and that tells a lot (since that had issues even with mouse handling until the first patch... /facepalm  idiots missed the fact that PC players prefer the mouse and not all of them want to play with an xbox controller).


    edit: anyways, it was a weird comment. As turtle says there are dozens of games now on console (and lately even on mobile), some of them are almost as good as their PC counterparts.
    And then there's DCUO (a DBG game, for the thread), where you get the "original" experience on PS4 and the PC version is still a bit clunky in places.
    blueturtle13
  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,375
    edited September 2018
    We had a guildmember on the PS3 or 4 I think it was playing FFXIV and he was very quiet because of the keyboard issue. He had to connect that to type so he would not bother about it. It was the same in FFXI too where people hardly typed when they were on consoles.

    I rather have people on PC so they can type freely and participate in conversations. I am not saying PC master race or anything just that the players on consoles seemed less inclined to connect their keyboards to type.

    I guess this is no longer relevant because of chat programs. People hardly read or type in guilds with chat programs. The chat will be empty for hours because people are talking to each other. Makes it lonely while playing.
    image
  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,823
    cheyane said:
    We had a guildmember on the PS3 or 4 I think it was playing FFXIV and he was very quiet because of the keyboard issue. He had to connect that to type so he would not bother about it. It was the same in FFXI too where people hardly typed when they were on consoles.

    I rather have people on PC so they can type freely and participate in conversations. I am not saying PC master race or anything just that the players on consoles seemed less inclined to connect their keyboards to type.

    I guess this is no longer relevant because of chat programs. People hardly read or type in guilds with chat programs. The chat will be empty for hours because people are talking to each other. Makes it lonely while playing.
    Plus you can buy chat pads for controllers. 

    https://www.amazon.com/Keyboard-Lyyes-Wireless-Gamepad-Controller/dp/B07DSWRGVD/ref=sr_1_2_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1537631965&sr=8-2-spons&keywords=ps4+chatpad+sony&psc=1

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,271
    Utinni said:
    I played EQ1 on a progression server for a few months earlier this year and there were guilds with 300+ active users, so I can't see 150-200 total players being anywhere close. It's still extremely small though, probably 10-12k total subs across all servers.
    Anytime you log into EQ1, check the number of users signed onto the General channel.  It's almost always between 150 and 300 people, even after a hard server reset.  People could not log into the General channel (by default it is ON).  The 150-300 number seems to be a relatively reliable count of the number of people playing EQ1 (including AFK alts) on a particular server at any one time.  A bit of simple math would suggest that there might be 1800-3600 on a particular server for any day (given 2 hour play sessions).  With 24 servers, this indicates about 43200-86400 active accounts for the all EQ1 servers combined (assuming populations are roughly equally distributed across servers).

    This number is a very rough guideline for how many people are actively involved with EQ1.  This estimate includes F2P as well as paid accounts.  This number may also not account for All Access accounts that don't play EQ1, so there may be additional subscriptions outside my numbers.  My belief is that the actual population is closer to the 43200 end of this spectrum than the high end.

    So, if we're looking strictly at EQ1 subscriptions, my guesstimate would be somewhere between 0 (all F2P) and 43200 (all subs).  10-12k subs might not be a bad guess, but I think those numbers might be a bit low.  My guess would be 18-20k subs plus 21-23k F2Ps.



    blueturtle13Blueliner

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • GaladournGaladourn Member RarePosts: 1,802
    edited September 2018
    I'm not saying the hardware in a console is not able to run a MMO; But the game controls in consoles are premised on different type of games, more action-oriented and less chat-friendly.
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,446
    edited September 2018
    Kids now just run directly at the NEW popular flavor.They were all over Fortnite and anything new like batman or the new nhlpa game.

    Wow is not even popular because this new era of gamer wasn't around back then,so Wow is just a game to them  and not the popular NEW kid on the block.

    In general i don't hear kids talking about RPG's at all,again rpg's go way back,they are not something NEW,they like all these goofy ideas like the Fortnite's or as we witnessed the Pokemon Go and stuff like that.

    As to Daybreak,ever see them do ANY advertising?You don't go out and buy a gaming studio and do literally nothing,well not unless the true intent was NOT about gaming at all.

    Eq1 was only popular because there was no competition and EQ2 really was only ever mildly popular but because Wow was the marketed brand that is where all the NEW  online gamer's ran to.

    I already mentioned that  Daybreak should be folding up shop soon but i also believe that is a business more involved outside of gaming and why it might hang around ..just because of other reasons.Do not expect anything good to ever come out of Daybreak,better cross your fingers and pray for only ONE developer if you want an immersive mmorpg and even then it would be a longshot "Square Enix".Nobody is risking big money mmorpg's.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • BluelinerBlueliner Member UncommonPosts: 158
    Mendel said:
    Utinni said:
    I played EQ1 on a progression server for a few months earlier this year and there were guilds with 300+ active users, so I can't see 150-200 total players being anywhere close. It's still extremely small though, probably 10-12k total subs across all servers.
    Anytime you log into EQ1, check the number of users signed onto the General channel.  It's almost always between 150 and 300 people, even after a hard server reset.  People could not log into the General channel (by default it is ON).  The 150-300 number seems to be a relatively reliable count of the number of people playing EQ1 (including AFK alts) on a particular server at any one time.  A bit of simple math would suggest that there might be 1800-3600 on a particular server for any day (given 2 hour play sessions).  With 24 servers, this indicates about 43200-86400 active accounts for the all EQ1 servers combined (assuming populations are roughly equally distributed across servers).

    This number is a very rough guideline for how many people are actively involved with EQ1.  This estimate includes F2P as well as paid accounts.  This number may also not account for All Access accounts that don't play EQ1, so there may be additional subscriptions outside my numbers.  My belief is that the actual population is closer to the 43200 end of this spectrum than the high end.

    So, if we're looking strictly at EQ1 subscriptions, my guesstimate would be somewhere between 0 (all F2P) and 43200 (all subs).  10-12k subs might not be a bad guess, but I think those numbers might be a bit low.  My guess would be 18-20k subs plus 21-23k F2Ps.



    that is not even remotely accurate. most people in EQ1 turn off general chat and most all public channels. Also the public channels have a cap of 300 so when you see 300 in the channel, there are more that tried and couldn't get in.
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,271
    Blueliner said:
    Mendel said:
    Utinni said:
    I played EQ1 on a progression server for a few months earlier this year and there were guilds with 300+ active users, so I can't see 150-200 total players being anywhere close. It's still extremely small though, probably 10-12k total subs across all servers.
    Anytime you log into EQ1, check the number of users signed onto the General channel.  It's almost always between 150 and 300 people, even after a hard server reset.  People could not log into the General channel (by default it is ON).  The 150-300 number seems to be a relatively reliable count of the number of people playing EQ1 (including AFK alts) on a particular server at any one time.  A bit of simple math would suggest that there might be 1800-3600 on a particular server for any day (given 2 hour play sessions).  With 24 servers, this indicates about 43200-86400 active accounts for the all EQ1 servers combined (assuming populations are roughly equally distributed across servers).

    This number is a very rough guideline for how many people are actively involved with EQ1.  This estimate includes F2P as well as paid accounts.  This number may also not account for All Access accounts that don't play EQ1, so there may be additional subscriptions outside my numbers.  My belief is that the actual population is closer to the 43200 end of this spectrum than the high end.

    So, if we're looking strictly at EQ1 subscriptions, my guesstimate would be somewhere between 0 (all F2P) and 43200 (all subs).  10-12k subs might not be a bad guess, but I think those numbers might be a bit low.  My guess would be 18-20k subs plus 21-23k F2Ps.



    that is not even remotely accurate. most people in EQ1 turn off general chat and most all public channels. Also the public channels have a cap of 300 so when you see 300 in the channel, there are more that tried and couldn't get in.
    Just logged into General chat channel on Cazic Thule.  The game reports 326 people in that channel.  I believe the chat channel cap was fixed a couple of years ago.



    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,823
    Blueliner said:
    Mendel said:
    Utinni said:
    I played EQ1 on a progression server for a few months earlier this year and there were guilds with 300+ active users, so I can't see 150-200 total players being anywhere close. It's still extremely small though, probably 10-12k total subs across all servers.
    Anytime you log into EQ1, check the number of users signed onto the General channel.  It's almost always between 150 and 300 people, even after a hard server reset.  People could not log into the General channel (by default it is ON).  The 150-300 number seems to be a relatively reliable count of the number of people playing EQ1 (including AFK alts) on a particular server at any one time.  A bit of simple math would suggest that there might be 1800-3600 on a particular server for any day (given 2 hour play sessions).  With 24 servers, this indicates about 43200-86400 active accounts for the all EQ1 servers combined (assuming populations are roughly equally distributed across servers).

    This number is a very rough guideline for how many people are actively involved with EQ1.  This estimate includes F2P as well as paid accounts.  This number may also not account for All Access accounts that don't play EQ1, so there may be additional subscriptions outside my numbers.  My belief is that the actual population is closer to the 43200 end of this spectrum than the high end.

    So, if we're looking strictly at EQ1 subscriptions, my guesstimate would be somewhere between 0 (all F2P) and 43200 (all subs).  10-12k subs might not be a bad guess, but I think those numbers might be a bit low.  My guess would be 18-20k subs plus 21-23k F2Ps.



    that is not even remotely accurate. most people in EQ1 turn off general chat and most all public channels. Also the public channels have a cap of 300 so when you see 300 in the channel, there are more that tried and couldn't get in.
    Most people turn off general chat? and most all public channels?

    source?

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,543
    I don't know what the cap is on General chat when I log into EQ which I still play occasionally today there are many many times when I cannot get onto the general chat.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,033
    Galadourn said:
    SOE (now Daybreak) missed their chance to revolutionize the genre with EQNext. That would have been a success, imho, similar to WoW's success when in launched back in 2004.
    Thats a pretty big assumption...really they had nothing other than a name and some ideas that were pretty far fetched.
  • strykr619strykr619 Member UncommonPosts: 273
    Galadourn said:
    SOE (now Daybreak) missed their chance to revolutionize the genre with EQNext. That would have been a success, imho, similar to WoW's success when in launched back in 2004.
    Sad part is they had a blockbuster in the making with the next gen minecraft version of the game (landmark) also which would of made them cash, instead they shit canned it. Screw Theybreak.... 
    Galadourncraftseeker
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,694
    edited September 2018
    DCUO is probably my favorite of their MMOs right now, but I've also been playing some EQ2, I think if they added radio/newspaper missions to DCUO like CoX had, that would be a step in the right direction.
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,033
    Logged into EQ1 last night....I play on two of the older servers and both are pretty much dead....The people that still play most likely are just doing the progression servers now.
  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,694
    Yeah, if you look at their reported server populations, you can see that the progression ones have medium or higher while all others are perpetually low. My characters are on one of the older servers, and I don't really have any desire to play progression stuff.
  • BrunlinBrunlin Member UncommonPosts: 78
    edited September 2018
    jusomdude said:
    I recently started playing pretty much all their MMO's again and was curious to see how populated each of them are. 

    Both EQs don't seem to be doing that well with daily CCUs around 150-300. EQ 1 is only pulling ahead by a bit. DCUO is doing a little better with around 600 daily CCUs, and Planetside 2 is their leading MMO with around 1700 daily CCUs.

    This is all according to steamspy, so not totally accurate, but it gives a general idea how each of their MMOs are doing.

    Pretty sad to see that the true MMORPGs... EQ 1 and 2 are the least popular, IMO, kids are too stimuli addicted to get immersed in actual MMORPGs these days and need stuff like shooters to keep them entertained.
       I am a Everquest player who like many people are taking a break atm. I have been playing the game off and on since 1999. 
     
      Everquest isnt doing as bad as you are making out, though since you seem to be counting Steam players I can see why you are making this observation. Most people who play Everquest do not play through Steam. Most who do are just people who see it and download and try it as a free to play. Most of us veterans just sub and do not play it as a free to play.

     If you log on any of the live servers (servers with normal rule sets), the populations are sparse, but if you sub and join one of the TLP, like Agnaar or Coirnav than you will find where most of the people play this game. There are a lot of good raiding guilds on these two servers taking down some very good raid targets, most of these are peeps that love a game that is a little bit harder than modern mmos but is not as hardcore as EQ use to be. (there has been a lot of Quality of life improvements including raid instances)

     As for the free to play live servers, there are a few people who play here as well, doing raids in the most current content but this is a different kind of game and a different kind of community than what I play on a TLP. I havent played on a live server in years, though i have made plenty of friends playing on a TLP, that still does. 
    if they were to merge all servers with the same rules set, the free to play servers would be as populated if not more so than the 2 most populated TLPS.

     You mention, kiddies playing shooters, and I agree with that. If you ever play on Everquest and become a member of one of our communities, you will realize that most of the people playing are in their 30's are above. The younger members are early 30's, most of us are middle aged and I even know a few people in their 60's and 70's playing this game.

     Also, like I said, I am on hiatus...but Everquest is a revolving door kind of mmo. thousands of us will take a break for awhile, while we play other games, while thousands are still playing the game. When we are coming back to our known communities we will meet people that we have played for years while others are now taking their break, and on and on it goes. Everquest is a steady money maker that can survive for years to come as long as the company that controls it is responsible with the game are games. 

     Of course there is always a fear that one day EQ will become like City of Heroes, which would be terrible for the different communities that exist here. Nothing last forever though and eventually it will come to an end hopefully we may have another decade or so. 

     Oh and H1Z1 King of the Kill,though not a mmorpg is their top game not Planetside 2.
     
    El-Hefe

    If at first you don’t succeed, call it version 1.0

  • sausagemixsausagemix Member UncommonPosts: 76
    Daybreak is just... weird. Im not fan of cash grabs or shitty games but they could have already made strides to increase their revenue by creating a relatively simple mobile game that would make a return. Instead they just seem to just... sit there. The Columbus Nova denial was bizarre and there newest ownership is odd on top of that.
    blueturtle13craftseeker
  • El-HefeEl-Hefe Member UncommonPosts: 760
    edited September 2018
    EQ is dead despite what any of you say.  Daybreak is a clusterfuck of a studio right now.  #endthread #micdrop.   

    Edit:  Everquest lore  is so irrelevant that SOE was like, no.....you lose!


    I've got the straight edge.

  • inmysightsinmysights Member UncommonPosts: 397
    I started playing EQ again because of the Pantheon streams just got me so excited! I play on Antonius Bayle and it is shocking how many people still play EQ still right now. It is still thriving and still a helluva lot of fun!
    blueturtle13

    I am so good, I backstabbed your face!

  • jusomdudejusomdude Member RarePosts: 2,694
    TBH, I don't really care what happens to EQ1... it's just way too dated for me to enjoy it for anything other than a hit of nostalgia even though my play time on it is super low.

    I would like to see EQ2 stick around though.
    blueturtle13
Sign In or Register to comment.