Discussion in 'WildStar General' started by DKNS, Oct 20, 2013.
Just how hard are you /popcorn'ing right now?
Pointing out that this thread is <REDACTED> isn't fanning the flames, it's dousing them. Fanning the flames is continuing to argue points that are completely unrelated to the OP. Threads should not be mutating.
I'm done. I'm literally done. I just. I think I'm broken now. I'm even considering joining the Exiles. Holy... send help!!!
but seriously, I tried. I'm done. There's just too many contradictions I can't even think straight.
I disagree on two fronts. J-Tal popping in and endorsing the flaming is similar to Ico popping in and saying "This thread is great! /popcorn". Its not good.
The second, I feel that threads should be allowed to wander within limits. Often times what the thread is originally started for is not what the op actually wanted to discuss. Its one of those "players do not actually know what the want". Players are notoriously poor when it comes to communication, often for a variety of reasons. They rarely understand the mechanics themselves, much less how they actually function. They come into systems with varying levels of expectations and experience. They communicate feelings rather than actual facts. Its why so many cry for balance, but balance is not what they actually want because as soon as you fully balance the system they quickly find the best ways of doing things and it becomes boring.
On top of this, often so many things are interrelated to other system that they do not understand the ramifications of what they want. How many issues do you look at in a vacuum and they appear so easy to fix? How many forum fixes do you think are actually reasonable, especially once you look at the game as a whole. Look at the often begged for split between pve and pvp? Blizzard have stated their reasons why that is not really reasonable forever, yet forums still refuse to accept them because they cannot look at the big picture.
Try to post what constructive info I can till I'm sure that we can only kill it with fire. From there I figure such threads always have room to degenerate farther down the troll hole till a mod eventual locks it.
A name and a big company can only mean so much. Even if they had the resources and the expertise, if they didn't, you know, actually use it to improve the game, then all of that would have been for nothing.
You hired the best surgeon in the world! He's had numerous successful surgeries in the past and his name is renowned among the medical community! But if he, you know, doesn't actually perform the surgery you hired him for then what is the use of that reputation of his?
Names are a big factor, but they're not everything. You can slap a name on just about anything, but quality isn't that simple.
Especially when the focus of the game isn't sustain players. The problem with SWTOR was the focus on Story. Like ESO, they are attracting everyone that loves their single player games and everyone who loves MMOs. The problem is that you have to focus the game on MMO players because those single player gamers do not want to pay the sub, the MMO players will keep subbing. I was following SWTOR for a long time before launch and MAN did it lose people like mad cuz of the focus on Story and not progression.
I am in no way saying ESO will do the same, it's just a fact about both games that they draw from two completely different fan bases. Ultimately, MMO fans decide an MMO's fate. If a game has no progression in either PvP or PvE, or both, then MMO fans will leave. This has been proven time and time again.
Some how Starwars e I, e II and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull came to my mind.
I don't see that as a viable example. It fits too well with the cop out. I do not deny that there are people who do buy based on name alone, but I disagree that they are the driving force. Far too many people went to see Episode 1 when it was rereleased in 3d for there not to be a significant number who actually enjoyed it as a movie.
But then the issue with Ethereal's point is quality too is not the measure. There are far too many bad to terrible movies that I enjoy. Starship Troopers for example.
How about FFXiV ARR loot style rolling? The main class can roll Need only on their designated items.
Haha there are few absolutelly horrible movies I enjoy too, and Starship Troopers is one of them. Sometimes bad enough can actually be truly epic.
Conserning big names; I will watch Hobbit 2 in cinema, even tho the first movie was a huge disapointment for me. I will be watching it because I am a Tolkien Fanboy and because I want to stay loyal for the fransise in ups and downs.
My roomate and I use the term terrigood to describe such films, of which we have quite a list.
I too plan to finish the movies, but because I do not like leaving a story unfinished. It takes quite a movie/book/game for me to not finish it. Keep in mind though that I did not see it in the theater, and I did not read the book. My entry to it was much lower. I did not really build up much in the way of expectations outside of being a fan of Freeman and Cumberbatch from Sherlock.
Yes, but TOR was a reasonably high quality game, at least at launch. They didn't keep that up long, but we didn't know that would be the case right away. For all we knew at launch there would be massive, GW2 level content dumps within the first few weeks. Even so, they only sold half as many copies as GW2, which was a much less visible product, and they were hemorrhaging customers IMMEDIATELY, well before it would have been reasonable for people to be "capping out and checking out." The arguments I hear a lot around here about why TOR failed are all perfectly valid ones, for why it would fail after a year or two, but none really explain how it would fail within six months, aside from people not wanting to pay a sub fee to play a game launched in the 2010s, of course.
TOR was in trouble almost immediately, it was giving free months away within the first three months, which means that massive amounts of people were not re-upping even a single paid month. Even people just playing through the single player story mode would have needed longer than that to exhaust the launch content, so this myth that's grown up that TOR failed because of anything that had to do with its endgame is just nonsense.
I agree with all of this, although I'm not sure what the relevance is. It's true that a game with a name and a big company, but having no name and a small company is no guarantee of success either. The big name and company give you a head start, but TOR didn't even get a good enough head start, because people knew going in that it would require a subscription fee they would not pay.
You know, maybe that's because the content didn't grab them enough to carry them to endgame. I never played SWTOR and my attempt failed because of a crappy launcher and Philippine ISP, but from the looks of it, the focus of SWTOR was on a single-player story mode--which you can pretty much get from many, many, many games, by paying a one-time fee, for less than a continued subscription, and have much, much higher quality to boot. (More convenient, too; you don't need internet to play it.)
You could subscribe to TOR for the single player story... but I don't really see why you would unless you really, really love the TOR story.
The issue with TOR, methinks, is wrong mentality for an MMO. MMOs are about progression, competition, and the community; if the focus is majority on the single-player campaign, what incentive do they have to keep paying for more content if they could just buy a different, non-MMO specifically designed for solo play?
Now that I think about it, wasn't the launch plagued with bugs, imbalances, and content that was never fixed, arrived late, or was nixed altogether? It sounds like there was a lot more problems than the subscription fee, namely: you weren't delivering enough to justify the price, you were breaking a lot of promises, and you shoved out a half-baked product for the price and with the box display of a well-done one.
I saw Barrack Obama eat a corn-dog right before Katrina hit the US.
Clearly democracy is the cause of hurricanes.
The quality was alright as you were leveling, but the issue was that once the story was all said and done players found a watered down version of warcraft. Endgame, while not non existent, boiled down to some tiring dailies and raid encounters that ranged from stupid easy to hair pullingly hard (but mainly due to bugs).
The game was very buggy, it lacked a lot of features like LFG that many players can't stand to play mmo's without, and it's big pvp feature in Ilum became a huge joke. People don't stick around for that kinda <REDACTED> in a sub mmo. Top it all off with the large number of servers at launch and now you've got a domino effect where people leaving the game are causing others to leave as well due to poor server population.
Bioware released a half assed game and advertised it as a AAA title.
Yes, and as I said, that's a perfectly valid argument as to why the game would have started failing six months or more in, but it started failing well before most players reached that endgame phase that so many were whinging about. It was burning way too fast and bright for endgame to be the cause.
GW2 did not have an LFG tool for the first year, and yet they sold twice as many copies as the Star Wars/Bioware game, and retained a much larger percentage of their customers. The PvP elements were largely derided as well.
They had no fewer servers than they needed for launch, I remember the queues, they just lost so many players that after the free month they seemed empty.
How long does it really take to get to endgame? I take my sweet ass time leveling toons and even then it took me no more than two months to hit max level. Some gamers don't care one bit for leveling or story and burn through content to get straight to raiding. What did they find when they got there?
Just where is this evidence of GW2 retaining a large percentage of their customers? All I've seen so far is that they sold around 3 1/2 million boxes and had as many as 460,000 players at any one time. At what time did they have those 460,000? Near launch probably, but it didn't tell you.
That's the biggest issue with trying to determine the success of a f2p or b2p game. The numbers can be so misleading. DCUO could tell you right now that they have over 20 million accounts, but doesn't tell you how many of them actually play regularly or how many of them logged in for an hour and have never returned.
They made a mistake of not anticipating a fallout. Every mmo has it. They focused on the here and now by opening up more servers, but once the fallout started all those servers started to fall apart. They should have at least rode the storm of complaints like they did with early access. The queue times would have leveled out.
It was an example of Bioware's lack of experience with the genre, and it cost them.
Dude, you clearly need a job in the MMO industry. Your points are so good that I think every company should listen to them to make the most money possible and be the most successful game in history.
So you believe that multimedia can't be niche marketing? Hmm.. well I think you need to actually read up on what niche marketing is.
TOR is a perfect example of one of those cash grab MMOs that relied solely on it's IP. Launch a B2P game with a subscription model. Updates and even bug fixes were nonexistent. Casual content with no real end game with Free epics everywhere! The whole game was essentially single player story mode experience. What as there to grab the players and keep them there? Nothing! Then they change the model to freemium to milk the few people left playing.
Lucky to sell a million boxes?! Any MMO worth a quarter of a squat will hit the market and sell at least a million boxes. Even Carbine has said this. You would have to have a really bad game not to be able to do 1+million sales.
WoW retained players back in vanilla without even having huge sales, and they are still doing it! You are denying reality. Its like the conservatives saying universal health care doesn't work, when you can look all over the world and see it functioning. Again, there is a difference between player retention MMOs, and cash grab MMOs.
Who is 'everyone else'?
What is this fantasy is based on exactly?
F2P is a misnomer in almost all cases!
The true model of these games is predominantly P2W.