General Discussion
The Pub at MMORPG.COM » Why do games like UO, DOAC, Ashrons call continue to exist?
| Thread (29 posts) | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Solusek 8/13/06 10:12:32 AM
|
||
|
Novice Member
Joined: 8/09/06 |
Instead of the company taking the money on improving those games i mean once a mmorpgs subscription base goes beloooow the point of no return then whats the point of investing time and money into it? I mean you are not going to get ALOT of subscriptions again etc.
Take EQ2 for example while its much better then it is was, and all the time and money SOE put back into it, its never going to see a huge population again, what i mean by huge population i dont mean in WoW terms but i mean a population were you can see people almost in every area, and dont have to wait HOURS to get a group even if you are a healer. So whats the point of continuing to put money and effort into old mmorpgs were the subscriptions are just declining? Why dont the companys put these old classics into retirement now and start working on better sequels. I know ashrons call had a sequel but if maybe they didnt juggle between the two ashrons call 2 would still be here. |
|
| Im bringin sexy back. |
||
|
Wolfjunkie 8/13/06 10:13:37 AM
|
||
Novice Member
Joined: 1/26/06 |
The remaining fanbase have been loyal. And it's great that the company returns this favour, by being loyal to them.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Solusek 8/13/06 10:14:39 AM
|
||
|
Novice Member
Joined: 8/09/06 |
Its not the matter of being loyal, even loyal members end up leaving eventually. UOs fanbase is declining alot, EQs fanbase is declining alot, if it wasnt for the progression servers bringing some life into it.
|
|
| Im bringin sexy back. |
||
|
Gameloading 8/13/06 10:25:55 AM
|
||
Elite Member
Joined: 2/27/04 |
Everquest 2 actually has a very nice subscriber base.
about the old mmo'ss, as long as they still make money, why not? the reason they are not working on sequals is because creating a new game costs a lot of money. the development costs of AC, UO etc have already been taken care of in their golden ages. now all they need is the little content every now and then and server upkeep. |
|
| Looking forward to: |
||
|
trillah 8/13/06 10:27:51 AM
|
||
|
Novice Member
Joined: 5/25/04 |
Ill take daoc for exemple. There is not THAT many people playing, maybe lets say 15, 000 paying account. Take these accounts x 14$ a month. They still making money and still can improved the game for the fanbase that been playing for almost 5 years and are still enjoying the game and putting 40 hours a week playing (for some) Why WoW has 5 millions customer and dark age only 15,000 .I really dont know WoW: About 8 class and race, boring pvp, boring end game, repeat same damn dungeon over again, cool tradeskill Daoc: Around 24 class and races, better graphic, normal server has great pve with ml's and artifact and pvp is the best out there and boring tradeeskill. Nonsense people , nonsense |
|
| |
||
|
Greyface 8/13/06 11:23:51 AM
|
||
|
Novice Member
Joined: 5/23/04 |
Also, keep in mind that after a game makes back the development costs, a huge percentage of the subscription fees goes straight to profit. |
|
| "The Dude Abides." |
||
|
Elnator 8/13/06 12:11:56 PM
|
||
Novice Member
Joined: 1/19/04
"Honor before Glory... Duty before Honor" |
First of all your original premise is incorrect. UO, EQ1, and DAOC all have over 100k players. They are well ABOVE the point of no return. As a matter of fact they are making insane profits off these titles because the initial investment in the game is long since paid for. EVERYTHING they make now, after paying minimal operating costs, is pure profit. A Video game, once it pays for it's development, really only needs about 30k players, 20k if they really cut back on staff, to be profitable. Below that and you have to start getting very creative to stay in the plus collumn. But anything over 30k is profitable. All of these titles paid off their initial development costs eons ago.
Second, why wouldn't they keep them running when they are still profitable? As to that: UO is the only one of the three that DOESNT have a sequel because EA are a bunch of morons when it comes to the MMO market. DAOC's "sequel" is going to be WAR. EQ1's sequel is EQ2 (which isn't even 3 years old yet, sheez) which is still growing. AC1's sequel was AC2, which flopped and Turbine is currently producing DDO and LOTRO so they can't exactly make an AC3 right now. They need to recoup their expenditures on DDO and LOTRO (which isn't exactly a given) before they can try anything else. EQ2 was a BAD example because it's still growing, by the way, and it's a relatively new MMORPG in the grand scheme of things. It's not even 3 years old yet... LOL As to why put money into a game who's subscriber base is slowly declining? It's called subscriber loyalty. If they treat the players right the players will come back to the next title they make. If they cut them off it breeds resentment. Look at the folks who have been irked by EA. EA is FAMOUS for closing games down that have declining subscriber bases and they've developed THE WORST reputation on the market. SOE isn't far behind from their treatment of SWG players but at least they only jerked one of their 5 playerbases over. They learned from that one I think. Bottom line: As long as the game is cutting a huge profit there's no reason to stop improving it. Even if it's numbers are slowly dwindling. |
|
| Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. |
||
|
Elnator 8/13/06 12:13:09 PM
|
||
|
Novice Member
Joined: 1/19/04
"Honor before Glory... Duty before Honor" |
Dude you are completely out in left field. DAOC has 130,000 active subscribers. Hell at peak time on a friday there are more than 15,000 people online. UO has 125,000 subscribers AC1 currently has anywhere between 15,000 and 30,000 active subscribers. (This one IS in danger of closing, it's right about where Turbine canned AC2) EQ1 has over 100,000 active subscribers. EQ2 has 175,000 active subscribers and growing. Source: MMORPGCHART.COM and the DAOC official site: www.camelotherald.com |
|
| Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. |
||
|
Pantastic 8/13/06 1:09:39 PM
|
||
|
Apprentice Member
Joined: 2/25/06 |
What makes you think they're investing outside money in the games? I'm pretty sure that the reason they keep the older games running is that they still make money on them, and that the money for new patches etc. comes from what the game makes, not from elsewhere in the company. In fact, the old games are probably more profitable than they were when they were new, because by this point they've already paid off all of the initial development expenses. I find talking about EQ2 especially silly, since EQ2 is still selling new boxed expansions. |
|
| |
||
|
acidworm 8/13/06 1:21:39 PM
|
||
