Originally posted by GreenishBlue

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.

Yes, together with MMO quality.

If a MMO was worth it, people would pay a subscription.

EvE has 500K paying customers which for an Indie game is an amazing result

500K might not seems a lot (compared t WoW), but it means 5 Million Dollars a month, 60 Million a year..............that's what I call success.

When you do this kind of money you don't need cash shops.

Problem is that very few MMO can reach 500K subs nowadays, basically because they are WoW copy/paste, and they NEED to go F2P to make money

If all MMOs had 500K subs like EvE, you won't see so many of them going F2P, trust me.

Unfortunately today MMOs are watered down version of WoW, which itself it is a watered version of EQ.........so you see how bad the industry is doing and what kind of pattern is following.

I am not surprised to see so many F2P around..............next is TSW

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

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.

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.

How is that different from p2p then? As i stated, they sell boxes too and get money from them. SWTOR is a unique case because of it's insanely stupid production costs, but i believe most mmorpg return profit from the inital burst anyway, so, they didn't fail either.

Unlike SP, mmorpg need to keep pumping content or the player base will leave, which isn't a problem in a sp. Like i said in my post, GW2 needs population on it's servers after the box sales and it faces the same problem as other mmos. Otherwise, p2p can't be defined as fail.

Honestly, as some have already pointed out, IMO the only way to call "fail" on GW2 is if servers start to get empty and abandoned and merged. Also, i really don't care about the financial part of the game as long as i have fun, but this is a discussion after all.

Oh, and i meant f2p after the box. I know it's b2p, no need to use stupid insulting comments.

---

Originally posted by fiontar
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.

---

Sorry if I overlooked your reply mate, I might of just thought that no response was required.

Should i field every reply? i don't know..

Like I said before i don't care weather it fails or succeeds by any standard, what integers me is how well they have positioned themselves financially against failure. and what would cause it.

I would say, for a B2P as big as GW2, anything less than 2M sales in 3 months is a fail.

since they got 1M beta signups under 2 days, I doubt they are going to sell less than 2M anyway.

Originally posted by gaeanprayer

Originally posted by jondifool

Originally posted by heartless

 

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.

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. 
 

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.

I know all this. Its part of the common knowledge for me being an old timer in GW2 and having educated newcomers in +3 years in this forum. Thats part of it being another story!

However the part that is strange is NOT about what you answer.

The part there is strange is if this happend in a situation where they nearly each 1/2 year got 1 million unique new users, meaning that they potential sold several million units at the same time (there was as we all know 3 standalone games and an expansion that each new user potential could buy). I find THAT situation strange.  (but i am also sure thats not what happend - and thats what I have been discussing with mosesZD here). Try to think about what NCsoft would say when ArenaNet comes to them in 2007 and says "see we have GW1 and it gets 1 million new unique users each 1/2 year but we want to make the last expansion- what do you say?"

Basicly from a finacial point of view it would be outright stupid to stop producing expansions to a game that got that many new players in each 1/2 year. But if the 2-3 ...6 million number that we have read about was for units, boxsales and not acounts its not strange at all. because then there is NOT that many new users, and sales to oldtimers goes down and .... and the potential for something new and... and thats another story or the story you tell, the story that make sense. 

tl;dr  I have been discussing if the 7 million sale numbers is unique accounts or units(box sales) , and made a unclear line about AreanNet stopping developing GW1, that some posters had feeled obliged to educate me about. 

Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by fiontar
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.

---

 

Sorry if I overlooked your reply mate, I might of just thought that no response was required.

Should i field every reply? i don't know..

Like I said before i don't care weather it fails or succeeds by any standard, what integers me is how well they have positioned themselves financially against failure. and what would cause it.

Doesn't hurt that you have an avatar as well as a signature that are clearly from TSW...people see that and pretty much think you have an anti-GW2 agenda and this is just a troll thread. You've brought up a few good points though.

Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

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.

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.

How is that different from p2p then? As i stated, they sell boxes too and get money from them. SWTOR is a unique case because of it's insanely stupid production costs, but i believe most mmorpg return profit from the inital burst anyway, so, they didn't fail either.

Unlike SP, mmorpg need to keep pumping content or the player base will leave, which isn't a problem in a sp. Like i said in my post, GW2 needs population on it's servers after the box sales and it faces the same problem as other mmos. Otherwise, p2p can't be defined as fail.

Honestly, as some have already pointed out, IMO the only way to call "fail" on GW2 is if servers start to get empty and abandoned and merged. Also, i really don't care about the financial part of the game as long as i have fun, but this is a discussion after all.

Oh, and i meant f2p after the box. I know it's b2p, no need to use stupid insulting comments.

How is it different? It's actually very different, if you think about it. Standard P2P MMOs rely on subscription fees to suplement their box sales. GW2 relies only on box sales. So in short term, ArenaNet can determine if the game is successful or not if they sell a certain amount of clients. I don't know what that number is but I'm sure ANet and NCSoft do. Long term, the can determine how successful their game is by the amount of expansions they sell in comparisson to initial game sales.

Obviously they will be able to tell how many people are active in the game but since there are no subscription fees, they are not really dependent on maintaining a high level of constant subscribers.

Whatever you mean is irrelevent, F2P is not the correct term. The game is B2P. F2P means free client and GW2 clearly requires you to purchase the client. If you know the difference and still used the term F2P, it's obvious that you used it incorrectly on purpose for whatever reason.

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

Originally posted by Blindchance

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.

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.

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.

I have to disagree with this. GW2 is about a lot more than box sales. I fully anticipate that GW2 will produce at least as much year one revenue via the cash shop as they do from box sales. Potentially considerably more. An average monthly cash shop take of $4/account over the course of a year will equal the reported revenue cut that NCSoft gets from each full price box sale.  Some players won't buy anything, some will spend a modest amount and some will spend a lot of money on Gems. My guesstimate is that they could average $10+/month per active account.

We still don't know the expansion strategy. Smaller, twice yearly expansions? Larger Yearly Expansions? Focused expansion content in bite size pieces every few months? Some combination of these?

The metric for success will be the revenue stream. Box sales impact revenue directly and indirectly, as the more accounts sold, the more potential cash shop customers. However, revenue can remain steady based on a stable population that spends money in the cash shop, just as easily as it can explode if driven by ongoing box sales growth and steady per account cash shop expenditures.

Originally posted by Nitth

What would be the fail condition for GW2?

If all their doing is selling boxes to make a profit then its going to be very hard to make a fail condition for the game because you cant see a "sub reduction" or a revenue loss easily.

If after a year, the game only has 10,000 active players its not going matter at all because the boxes have already been sold right?.

Exception to this is the cash shop, But that relies on people actually buying to from there to make a profit anyway.

I'd like a link to where ArenaNet said that they only rely on box sales to accumulate their money back or make a profit?

I think they are relying on boxsales + cash shop to get their money back and make profit.

Also, they will rely on expansions, like GW1, and they'll know if it's worth making any after they see their playerbase numbers after a couple of months.

Yes millions might have bought the game, but only thousands might actually be still playing, which from a business point of view means that possibly only thousands will buy expansions (unless of course you don't need the original game like GW1, unlike WoW where you need all previous games.)

Their are loads of things to be taken into account to determine if this game will be a major success, a moderate success or a failure. 

I do think ArenaNet has a successful game on their hands, not as successful as people on these boards think, but possibly as successful as GW1.

(Still nowhere near WoW which ArenaNet has said they are aiming for, stupidly.)

Anyone have any reliable or semi-reliable figure on the development costs?

Originally posted by Valua

Originally posted by Nitth

What would be the fail condition for GW2?

If all their doing is selling boxes to make a profit then its going to be very hard to make a fail condition for the game because you cant see a "sub reduction" or a revenue loss easily.

If after a year, the game only has 10,000 active players its not going matter at all because the boxes have already been sold right?.

Exception to this is the cash shop, But that relies on people actually buying to from there to make a profit anyway.

 

I'd like a link to where ArenaNet said that they only rely on box sales to accumulate their money back or make a profit?

I think they are relying on boxsales + cash shop to get their money back and make profit.

 I'll see if I can find the quote, but they talked about this quite a long time ago. I think the confusion here is that they anticipate the box sales alone will make their money back & turn a small profit. The cash shop is basically there purely for profit, and to help kickstart the addition of new content. Keep in mind that GW1 didn't have a cash shop until an expansion or 2 in. They made their money off the box sales alone, but the cash shop helped them continue to churn out new free content (like winds of change), and also help fund future projects (gw2). All indicators also point to this being also true for GW2.

Also, they will rely on expansions, like GW1, and they'll know if it's worth making any after they see their playerbase numbers after a couple of months.

 We'll honestly have to wait & see how they handle expansions, but if they implement it at all like the first, expansions will basically take care of themselves. Again, they can keep themselves going off the cashshop alone, but the addition of expansions not only keep the game fresh & people interested, but it also increases their revenue enough that they don't have to struggle to release new content.

Yes millions might have bought the game, but only thousands might actually be still playing, which from a business point of view means that possibly only thousands will buy expansions (unless of course you don't need the original game like GW1, unlike WoW where you need all previous games.)

 Again, this comes down to how they plan on implementing them. In the first game, you only needed the original game for the expansions. All of the expansions were independant of each other, and I met quite a few players who purchased one, but not the other, etc.

- From a business standpoint this game doesn't care about active users nearly as much. As long as there is enough for the dynamic content, the game will be fine. Like what happened in GW1, it's also not uncommon to see players who enjoy the game, take a break, and then come back for each new expansion. This is something that even happens in games like WoW.

Their are loads of things to be taken into account to determine if this game will be a major success, a moderate success or a failure. 

 I think financially the game is already looking to be a success. For what they managed to put into the game, this wasn't even one of the most expensive MMOs to make. Yet, they've already recouped millions off the preorders. The real issue will be how well their new mechanics hold up over time.

I do think ArenaNet has a successful game on their hands, not as successful as people on these boards think, but possibly as successful as GW1.

 And here's the funny thing.. GW1 sold 7 million units (yes this includes the various expansions). However, that is extremely impressive. Most MMOs don't do that. Even SWTOR didn't come anywhere close to that, and they have one of the easiest IPs to sell on the market.

If GW2 is 'only as successful as GW1' then it is already a colossal success in the MMO genre.

(Still nowhere near WoW which ArenaNet has said they are aiming for, stupidly.)

EDIT: and I agree about the WoW comment. Not sure it was a smart decision on their part, but then again they are smarter than a lot of people want to give them credit for. So maybe we are the naive ones. It is clear, though, that WoW is no longer at its 15m player status, though. They probably won't beat WoW @ it's prime, but they have a much better chance of stacking up to it in it's current state. I know a lot of former WoW players are making the shift.

Originally posted by gestalt11

Anyone have any reliable or semi-reliable figure on the development costs?

in 2007 Jeff Strain says the following .

 If you are starting today and don't have at least three years and $30 million dollars, consider developing in another genre

(he also btw estimates that WOW costed at least 40 mill) . so 5 years  and from 140 to double the staff now. IF and its purely speculation, but if thesse numbers are related so that he actual talks about GW2 spending 10 mill a year with 140 people, in 5 years , with more money spend last years it could be 60+ million.  Still not reliable or even semi-reliable.

Originally posted by DiSpLiFF

GW2 will fail until they add open pvp. 

Maybe in your eyes, but when it comes to my money and play-time, your eyes are irrelevant. :)

Originally posted by gestalt11

Anyone have any reliable or semi-reliable figure on the development costs?

I doubt that we'll know any time soon. Developers don't really disclose that information unless they absolutely have to.