Here is a link to my Big Moria Preview thread:

http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.php?t=158636

Originally posted by green13

Originally posted by openedge1

The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most. LOTRO at this point does not have enough content to keep long term players. People will only play the same thing over before being done.  This starts to dry up between level 35-45 in LOTRO.

PvP would change that. As to your comment on PvMp. It was NOT fun to me, and I have felt WoW and Guild Wars have much better PvP implemntations, and WAR will be if not as good, better.

I never felt LOTRO was a dud either sales wise. It is not as good as it could be. It should really have more. And maybe, as I have said over and over...MoM may fix that.

 

Just to bring us back to where we started when someone flat out accused Open of 'lieing' with reference to this statement.

When asked the question how many hours a day do you play, this many mmo players responded '1-3' hours:

• WoW - 28% (88 out of 316)
• LOTRO - 69% (161 out of 232)

That's an enormous difference and I think it's fair for Open to have made the claim he did based on these figures.

He himself has acknowledged that the survey wasn't 'scientifically' conducted. I could spend several paragraphs outlining criticisms of the survey - but at the end of those I would still say the difference (if not its magnitude) is real and probably replicable.

So, if we roll with the idea that people (except for masochists) tend to spend more time doing things they enjoy, it appears that WoW is more enjoyable than LOTRO. These results gel with the fact that WoW has approximately 30-50 times more subscribers than LOTRO.

WoW is more popular than LOTRO.

There's really nothing special about WoW. It's a very good quality game, but doesn't incorporate any even remotely innovative game features.

LOTRO is quite unique, but has limited appeal, even with the LOTR brand.

To get where the OP wants (i.e. more players), LOTRO needs to head back towards standard mmo conventions. And it's quite clear that they're prepared to compromise their original vision.

We've seen at least three examples:

1. The abandonment of their original plans for "layered instancing" pre-launch
2. The introduction of the Lore-master class pre-launch
3. The introduction of the Rune-keeper class in the upcoming MoM

And from what little I've read of the updates, it seems they might be tweaking other things to make them a little more WoW'esque? But I think Open and others in this thread are right. The change that would have some real impact on subscriptions would be pvp.

They'd just need to implement it in such a way that gameplay on non-pvp servers remains exactly as it is now. And that's not difficult. If eg., an entire non-pvp WoW server had everyone playing on one side, that wouldn't be a problem gamewise. It might be a bit boring for some, but not to current LOTRO players who are quite content with that situation.

The big difficulty would be creating additional content for evil players.

It sounds to me like they invested a huge amount of time creating the existing content, so creating comparable content for an evil faction would be a big task. They're already a fair way along in the LOTR story so going this route would only make sense if they had plans to continue operation for some years after the story plays out.

The much cheaper but less certain solution would be to supersize pvmp. They could potentially make this feature much more popular if monsters were more like regular characters - i.e. improved over time with levels, gear or some other system. Then all they'd need to do is create a few servers where monsters aren't restricted to pvmp areas and they'd have something different but at the same time potentially comparable to WoW's pvp.

 

Actually monsters do get better over time...with ranks, and destiny points which can be used to increase stats and get new skills. You can also play as an elite master as a Troll, which is pretty sweet.

But anyway...Xfire isn't something most casual players would use or even know about. And since a majority of LOTRO's population is casual I don't think it is a good indicator for a game like lotro. But, it is what we have so make of it what you will.

You know none of this argument has anything to do with the OP and really has gone way off track...about 23 pages worth.

If you are playing right now, you have everything up to date.

It could be cool...and I LOVE pixar. A badger would be awesome.

I'll be playing the Moria expansion for LOTRO :)

That would be different for sure.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=218583

LOTRO has always been designed and advertised as more of a casual players MMO. That is why many people who only play 1-3 per day enjoy it alot more. And why people who tend to be more hardcore get sick of it faster and complain of lack of content.

Originally posted by green13

Originally posted by Sharkypal

I can back up my claims, simply put, Openedge says that people DONT play more than 1-2 hours a day. I do, my Kin does and many of the people I interact with do.

 

No, he didn't. I'll grant his wording is a little vague and open to interpretation, but not the interpretation you've slapped on it.

As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most.

Assuming he actually conducted a real study - this statement indicates that he identified a specific group of players within the population whose response to a question like "what is the longest time you will spend playing LOTRO for a single session?" and none of them answered more than 2 hours.

He may also have worded his statement badly and meant that on average, that specific group played for 2 hours at most.

I can see why you think he's said what you think he's said but he hasn't. You're making assumptions about the players whose responses he hasn't mentioned in his statement. He said "the average player who LOVED the game" not "all players".

I have degrees in research and statistics and I know this stuff. Reporting statistics to give a false impression - without actually telling a lie - is a widespread practice. Interpreting any statistic can be tricky.

Personally I'm dubious about this study he conducted, but you really don't have grounds to call him a liar just based on what we have.

He just did a small poll here in this forum, and some people responded including myself.

Also Turbine is a private company and does not in any way, shape or form have to tell anyone about how the company is doing. Funcom on the other hand is a public company and must let shareholders know the ins and outs of how the company is doing.

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by jarish

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by logicbox9

As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game,  and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.

This is a major point.

One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)

 

Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.

 

But, lets say you have 200k scrips, and say 50% quit due to PvP changes.

Yet, we have a market of 800k players who wanted some form of PvP (I am betting more, which will show when WAR releases) based on AoC's sales.

Lets say they could bring in 50% of those to replace the 50% lost.

100k lost (which could all be lifetimers, their largest fans, i.e: Turbines dead weight that pays nothing), 400k gained (who may either pay monthly or lifetime again...).

What an interesting way to look at it...eh?

Still doesn't answer this... Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already? They didn't want a PVP game they wanted to make a PVE game. I agree there would be more people playing it maybe, but I for one probably would not be. That is why I like this game, it fits me perfectly, and many others it seems. It also doesn't fit other peoples playstyle and that is fine too.

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by Sharkypal

 

No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.

The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)

This imbalance of the amount of people happens in every game. Horde almost always wins in WoW...from what I hear in WAR, destruction outnumbers order 2:1. The evil, bad whatever side always has more. A PVP mentality of somesort.

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by logicbox9

As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game,  and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.

This is a major point.

One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)

Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.

Originally posted by logicbox9

Originally posted by jarish

Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game,  and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.

 

What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.

I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.

Those areas mean nothing to someone who didn't read the books and only saw the movies... and believe it or not, there are probably millions of people who were introduced to the awesomeness of Tolkien's work because of the movies. They didn't need to put everything in at launch, but it would have been BETTER for them to add something memorable.

Ummm...anyone who has seen the movie, will know of the Shire, Bree and weathertop just as much as any other place. It's not like I picked Tom Bombadil or the Old Forest, or something that wasn't even in the movies. The shire, bree and weathertop got plenty of face time in the movies.

Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game,  and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.

What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.

I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.

Originally posted by logicbox9

Originally posted by jarish

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by jarish

Originally posted by openedge1

Good stuff. I would concur with this. This makes LOTRO a profitable game as well.

Great facts.

I think pushing anything above 300k is a little off. I think it is 200k active with maybe another 50-100 Lifetimers. We need to include the fact that these are not going to go towards LOTRO's bottom line. They are actually a load on LOTRO's profits. Their numbers will hurt Turbine in the long run, as this group will be worth nothing except for expansions only. I hope it is what Turbine wanted in the short term. It only makes me think their costs to run these servers must be quite minimal.

Maybe they are Linux ..lol.

Anyways, thanks for that data. I LOVE data!

Cheers

 

50-100k lifetimers right? YOu also have to very much consider that lifetimers are also probably guaranteed to buy the expansions as well. And maybe even the collector's edition. So that helps alot too.

Yes...50-100k. And I agree that for sales purposes that the Lifetimers will buy CE as well. always a bigger bonus on the Publishers part...maybe not for Turbine (in so many words, Time Warner will get a nicer cut of that pie)

My worry is that long term the lifetime hurts Turbine for money flow. But, also, they have discussed new avenues of distribution (like an all download model for the expansion...which is a good idea monetarily)

Another avenue Turbine is pursuing is web based tools for the game. Now, this was announced for launch, then pulled with zero word (the features was a way to track your character online like EQ2players.com...), so this could become a pay feature (like EQ2 also) and could offer cash flow.

My concern is how the population will be affected if WAR turns out to be a good game (which it has been said it will be...)..

One month to find out,...

50k lifers x $250(some bought it for $200 some for $300) = $12.5 million. $25 million if its 100k lifers. Not bad to infuse your coffers with up front.

The lifetime can be good for Turbine too...what the avg lifetime for a gamer in an MMO 6 mo. maybe? Takes about 20 mo. to break even or so. So the odds are probably in their favor more than not. Also lets say 50k lifers buy the expansion at $50...thats 2.5 million right there.

Yeah the D/L version for the expansion is great. Cheaper for the player and all that money goes to Turbine. They have also talked more recently about the web based tools, so it is still something they are looking into.

I don't think it will hurt too much. Two different styles of games. AoC didn't hurt LOTRO much at all (of course having problems didn't help). I bet it will really hit WoW hard though.

 

While MMO players may be very fickle, a lifetime sub isn't something that companies normally do... in fact, besides hellgate london (tanked),  I can't really think about any other games that have done lifetime subs. I think, when presented with the lifetime subs, the die hard LoTR fans are going to be the ones that purchased them, or the people who KNOW they are going to be playing this for a long time (think mature casual gamers).

 

Short attention-spanned gamers and younger people are less likely to drop 200-300 dollars at once. I think it would be a very bad thing if 50% of their estimated player base are lifetimers, I bet it's closer to 10% (maybe around 20k) of the player base who bought the lifetime option. You can talk all you want about loading up the coffers early on, but how much did they really have to pay to have EXCLUSIVE MMO rights with the LoTR IP? Probably a shitload of money. Also, it will be somewhat disappointing if Turbine decides to sell the expansion for $50... I'm sure you'll hear a lot of complaints about it if that is the case... especially since they planned on releasing a yearly expansion.

 

WAR will have an effect on the PvMP players in LoTRO, which probably aren't much to be honest. I mean, all you have to do is read the official monster play forums to see people are generally disappointed and bored with it. As it's been said before though, this game doesn't focus on PvP at all, which may end up being a bad thing in the end. AoC probably didn't have an effect on LoTRO because it was easy to tell that AoC was garbage in the first 30 days.

I was thinking 50 for the CE...the retail version of the expansion also comes with the original game as well. So thats not bad. Great for new gamers. But here will be a d/l option that will be cheaper too.

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by jarish

Originally posted by openedge1

Good stuff. I would concur with this. This makes LOTRO a profitable game as well.

Great facts.

I think pushing anything above 300k is a little off. I think it is 200k active with maybe another 50-100 Lifetimers. We need to include the fact that these are not going to go towards LOTRO's bottom line. They are actually a load on LOTRO's profits. Their numbers will hurt Turbine in the long run, as this group will be worth nothing except for expansions only. I hope it is what Turbine wanted in the short term. It only makes me think their costs to run these servers must be quite minimal.

Maybe they are Linux ..lol.

Anyways, thanks for that data. I LOVE data!

Cheers

 

50-100k lifetimers right? YOu also have to very much consider that lifetimers are also probably guaranteed to buy the expansions as well. And maybe even the collector's edition. So that helps alot too.

Yes...50-100k. And I agree that for sales purposes that the Lifetimers will buy CE as well. always a bigger bonus on the Publishers part...maybe not for Turbine (in so many words, Time Warner will get a nicer cut of that pie)

My worry is that long term the lifetime hurts Turbine for money flow. But, also, they have discussed new avenues of distribution (like an all download model for the expansion...which is a good idea monetarily)

Another avenue Turbine is pursuing is web based tools for the game. Now, this was announced for launch, then pulled with zero word (the features was a way to track your character online like EQ2players.com...), so this could become a pay feature (like EQ2 also) and could offer cash flow.

My concern is how the population will be affected if WAR turns out to be a good game (which it has been said it will be...)..

One month to find out,...

50k lifers x $250(some bought it for $200 some for $300) = $12.5 million. $25 million if its 100k lifers. Not bad to infuse your coffers with up front.

The lifetime can be good for Turbine too...what the avg lifetime for a gamer in an MMO 6 mo. maybe? Takes about 20 mo. to break even or so. So the odds are probably in their favor more than not. Also lets say 50k lifers buy the expansion at $50...thats 2.5 million right there.

Yeah the D/L version for the expansion is great. Cheaper for the player and all that money goes to Turbine. They have also talked more recently about the web based tools, so it is still something they are looking into.

I don't think it will hurt too much. Two different styles of games. AoC didn't hurt LOTRO much at all (of course having problems didn't help). I bet it will really hit WoW hard though.

Originally posted by openedge1

Good stuff. I would concur with this. This makes LOTRO a profitable game as well.

Great facts.

I think pushing anything above 300k is a little off. I think it is 200k active with maybe another 50-100 Lifetimers. We need to include the fact that these are not going to go towards LOTRO's bottom line. They are actually a load on LOTRO's profits. Their numbers will hurt Turbine in the long run, as this group will be worth nothing except for expansions only. I hope it is what Turbine wanted in the short term. It only makes me think their costs to run these servers must be quite minimal.

Maybe they are Linux ..lol.

Anyways, thanks for that data. I LOVE data!

Cheers

50-100k lifetimers right? YOu also have to very much consider that lifetimers are also probably guaranteed to buy the expansions as well. And maybe even the collector's edition. So that helps alot too.

I'd have to go with LOTRO. D/L the trial and see for yourself.

Originally posted by levsix

I played the game through closed alpha up until months after the release after dx10. Running on max settings on dx9 and max on dx 10 has ONLY one difference -- the quality of shadows cast. The trees, for example, show every leaf in their shadows rather than a more blob like outline. That's it. The water looks a little nicer, perhaps from the shading. It looks better but it is both very minor and subtle.

DX 10 also creates a smooth shore line for the water. Instead of a hard one like DX9. From the screens I've seen I think it looks pretty sweet. What Solareus said is right they have not used all the power of DX10 yet but are adding things as they game progresses. PLayer lighting is something that is going to be emphasised when MoM comes out. And I am sure this will only be enhanced with DX10 and real-time shadoews. They also said that when these new technologies become available, they will be implemented in the old zones as well. So the old content wont look older than the new.

The biggest difference you can see in the game is to use the Hi-rez client compared to the standard one. That difference is huge.