Trending Games | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn | Guild Wars 2 | Neverwinter | World of Warcraft
Network: Gamertube FPSguru RTSguru
| 134 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
6/26/12 1:30:02 PM#101
Fail condition is easy--"because I said so", all that's ever been required, endless repetition plus bluster. Success condition is much, much harder. There doesn't seem to actually be one, in the current gamer universe. -Nearly every single bad trend in MMO development was started by the developers.--Wordiz |
|
|
6/26/12 1:32:27 PM#102
hmm lets see...They have gotten 1million signups for a beta in just 2days, what does that tell you? Even if it disappoints people, they still got the people from guild wars 1 and i think we can all agree gw2 > gw1 so they are fine as it is |
|
|
heartless
 Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
6/26/12 1:36:13 PM#103
Originally posted by The_Korrigan And you know, I am perfectly fine with this. The older I get, the less time I have to devote to mindless grinding associated with this genre and being able to log on for an hour or two and have a good time is right up my alley. So a win for ArenaNet would be large box and expansion sales and of course cash shop purchases. For me personally, a win would be a fun game that I can play on and off for years, like I did (and still do) with GW1.
|
|
6/26/12 1:40:56 PM#104
Originally posted by Icewhite Completely disagree. I've seen just as many spout their game is a resounding success regardless the hard numbers, server closures, lack of media/updates, and/or payment changes. Simply a matter of perspective. Hell an argument can even be made that companies differ on what they consider a success or not. 1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical. 2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself. 3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose. |
|
|
6/26/12 1:45:42 PM#105
Originally posted by MosesZD So the statement from ArenaNet mention UNITS every time they hit another million is actual talking about accounts ? Then they are really messing words up. http://www.guildwars.com/events/press/releases/pressrelease-2009-04-24.php could you provide a link where this is clarified because francly it simply doesn't look like its accounts. even ArenaNets own wiki about NCsoft says the franchise numbers, not the accounts http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/NCsoft April 22, 2003 - NCsoft and ArenaNet announce Guild Wars, then expected to be released during the second half of 2004.
Why would NCsoft stop developing a game that still sold a million new accounts each 1/2 years. That doesn't make sense. And personally i would expect the game to be less empty in 2008-2009 if there where 1 million new users entering the world? And when have franchise become an account?
read how to create a succesfull mmo before posting about GW2. And read tao of ArenaNet before talking about innovation in GW2 |
|
|
heartless
Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
6/26/12 2:44:48 PM#106
Originally posted by jondifool They didn't stop developing it. They still have a team working on new content for GW1 but the main focus has shifted to GW2, which is understandable. Anet is moving the franchise forward and having full support for a 7 year old game is pointless. Also, as far as I know, the 7million number is for total box sales across all campaigns. Which is still pretty impressive.
|
|
6/26/12 2:48:30 PM#107
Originally posted by seridan This is the reason why my signature says what it says. |
|
|
6/26/12 3:26:07 PM#108
Originally posted by Nitth Nitth, I actually gave you a pretty honest answer to the fail state question very early in the thread, with no acknowledgement, comment or reply. It's easy to see why some might think you have an agenda if you appear to be more interested in stirring the pot in an attempt to paint the game in a negative light, rather than actually discuss what metric for success/failure should be applied to the game. As to the thread discussion about GW1 sales metrics, it has to be boxes because there is no clean way to represent sales otherwise. All the expansions but Eye of the North were stand alone, which could be used to create an account, or could be applied to an existing account to unlock content there. As time progressed, Arenanet began selling more and more boxes that combined two or more campaigns for one price. These also could be the basis for a new account, be added to an old account and occassionally the package price was so good that people might buy the box and apply the key to an existing account even if they already owned one or more of the campaigns already. So, it has to be boxes. Each box can represent more than one campaign being purchased. Each, (except for an EotN only box), can be used to create an account and some players may have more than one account. The game has no subscribers, so there is no metric for that. The game has also offered trial accounts and to Arenanet's credit they have never issued a number of total GW1 accounts, which they could have inflated by including trial accounts. Many other companies have no qualms about publishing account numbers that include free trials in the number as a representation of the player base. A franchise with over 7 million box sales is considered a success. Considering how small Arenanet was over the course of the development of the game and it's expansions, it's easy to assume the game has been profitable. Now GW2 has over 275 employees working on it, so you know the expense is going to be a lot higher than for GW1, thus the game is going to have to sell a heck of a lot more than 7 million purchases over the course of it's life time. However, I don't see that as a problem. Also, there is potential for the Gem Store to produce very health quarterly revenue, perhaps enough to match or exceed to total quarterly revenues an average "fairly successful" MMORPG produces via subs. (Maybe less per player, but population levels of "engaged players" should be higher, or even much, much higher, than the industry average). Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated |
|
|
6/26/12 3:55:41 PM#109
Originally posted by Nitth Probably the same as for SWTOR and other recent MMOs. An organized effort to throw dissention in the game and on the forums. Post repeated poor negative reviews online over and over again till either folks don't buy the box or leave out of disgust on how poor the community because with all the whiners. We had a guild member who did that. We kicked him out for rabid flaming and the next and next guilds he joined he did the same darn thing. I hope not with GW2 but it seems an industry standard these days. You can't beat the competition by having a quality game, beat them through espionage. I honestly think the game will suceed as long as it's given a chance to. |
|
|
6/26/12 3:58:49 PM#110
monthly sub model is dying.. don't you remember what happened to AoC? It went F2P. NExt to follow the same trend? SWTOR and TSW.  |
|
|
6/26/12 4:03:46 PM#111
Originally posted by Nitth Not giving us a release date or not releasing the game this year would be a major fail! |
|
|
6/26/12 4:04:40 PM#112
I think Guild Wars already has proven to its devs it can finance itself for years. I actually bet GW2 will survive on the market longer then TSW you obviously prefer. It is nothing personal, I find TSW setting and atmosphere interesting, but I doubt I would pay for it longer then a month or two. Tradional MMORPG simply don't offfer enough fun to keep their population high. |
|
|
heartless
Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
6/26/12 4:11:35 PM#113
Originally posted by Blindchance Just to add to your point. Apparently GW2 is the 4th most pre-ordered game in the US as far as retail sales go. So I think it's pretty safe to say that so far, it's doing pretty good for itself. Edit: TSW is 42nd.
|
|
6/26/12 4:19:24 PM#114
No part of OP's post seems trollish, not sure why people are harping on him. I don't see a fail condition for GW2. They considered GW1 a huge, highly profitable success just from selling 6-7mill boxes in the time it's been live, and GW2 has a MUCH larger audience than GW1 did. The cash shop sales are going to be what helps supplement income in order for them to work on content, and keep the game alive and supported, but I have no doubt that the bulk of their money is going to come from actually selling content, a la GW1's mission bonus packs and the expansions (which they've already said they're aiming for every 6 months to a year on that). OP is right, the payment plan for GW2 is set up for success. Because it's not a sub, the box is an easy thing to accept, and then people can pick and choose the expansions they like. However, I think it's obvious that people are generally going to end up with all of the expansions, how many people do you know just buy one option out of the many expansions for games like WoW, EQ1/2, GW1, etc? It's usually all or nothing, even if they have to wait for it to go on sale. They already have the appeal to hit the mass market, and it's going to be the constantly updating content that keeps people interested. The only way I could see this failing is if they pull an SWG and somehow change the entire game with a future expansion, leaving people playing an entirely different game. I don't see that happening, though. "Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions." |
|
|
6/26/12 4:21:51 PM#115
Originally posted by heartless you are replying to a post discussing if the 7 million was box sales or as MosesZD states its accounts and thinking its boxes is a big internet lie- I argue that they stopped developing it, meaning they stopped develop expansions thats earns them money. A choice made in 2007 that becomes rather strange if the game still got 1 million unique new users that 1/2 year they made the decission. The team that develope on it afterwards actual provide alot of revenue with cashshops sales, but thats another story. read how to create a succesfull mmo before posting about GW2. And read tao of ArenaNet before talking about innovation in GW2 |
|
|
6/26/12 4:27:26 PM#116
Originally posted by Blindchance But that problem still applies to GW2. There's a finite amount of content that will eventually run out. yes, i know Anet said they'd update, but that happens with all mmorpg (how fast will it happen, i don't know). Please correct me if i'm wrong, but won't box sales go to NCSoft first anyway. And regardless, P2P games still sell boxes too. All mmos need a good pop in player numbers. Anyway, this is whole failure thing is almost impossibl to define. We can't define GW2's sucess by box sales, since P2P games have them too. Turning f2p is considered failure for p2p, but this game is f2p right fromthe start. Even funnier, if a p2p converted start making good amounts of money as free, it's still many times call fail because of the conversion itself, like LOTRO. For the record, i think GW2 will do fine. Most mmos don't really fail IMO and turn profit for their companies and i believe the same will hapen to Anet. |
|
|
heartless
Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
6/26/12 4:29:20 PM#117
Originally posted by jondifool They were actually working on a 4th campaign called Utopia when they decided to scrap it, convert some of it to Eye of the North and switch development to GW2. Now they have a small live team working on free content updates for GW1 called "Guild Wars Beyond" and the rest of the studio is working on GW2. It makes sense when you consider the fact that Anet was a much smaller studio back then and could not effectively support full development of both games.
|
|
heartless
Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
6/26/12 4:32:35 PM#118
Originally posted by FredomSekerZ Actually we can define failure by box sales just fine. Unlike subscription based games, GW2 is only dependent on box sales to make profit which actually makes defining success or failure very easy. ANet obviously knows how many box sales they need to consider the game a success and are not dependent on keeping an X amount of active subscribers to offset the loss of box sales. It's really no different than a single player game. How do you define whether or not CoD or Skyrim are success or a failure? The amount of boxes sold. Same thing with GW2. Edit: BTW GW2 is not F2P. Educate yourself.
|
|
6/26/12 4:34:07 PM#119
I have been MMOing for 14 years and I can honestly say after playing about 60hr of game play. This is the next MMO to beat. Only way GW2 flops is if someone offers a better product at a cheaper price. Ooo wait no monthly subs. As for the OP I am sure ANet will publish how many people have logged in over a set time frame. Also as someone already said server population will be the real tell of this game. I am sure fans like me will be taking screens of servers showing a good population every time this thread comes up again. |
|
|
6/26/12 4:39:29 PM#120
Originally posted by jondifool Actually it's not strange at all if you understand what all is going on. Like someone else mentioned, they wanted to continue development with an expansion called Utopia, but realized they couldn't do all the neat things they wanted to within the game already created, without over-bloating it with new mechanics, not to mention yet more skills which were already becoming a nightmare to balance. That's when they decided instead to make a whole new game. However, they continued developing new content for GW1 in the form of smaller, free content updates like Winds of Change post-GWEN, and are working on the Elona version now. Further, after the success of War in Kryta, they sent out a survey after as you mentioned, they got a huge influx of players and people loved the new content, asking how everyone would feel about continuing to create content for GW1. The general response was positive. I think it's really that Anet is underestimating the appeal GW1 has for people, they seemed surprised by the success of the post-GWEN updates themselves. Right now all their resources, for the most part, are dedicated to GW2. However, I would bet money it's not going to stay that way. When GW2 launches and the dust settles and they're once again making more money than they're spending, I'd bet you're going to see that GW1 team grow again. "Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions." |
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 21, 2013 2:09 PM
- Page Created in 0.984 seconds -
