Why the disappointed don't leave...

[CosmicKat]

The only thing stagnant about the genre CK is your personal view about it.

 

A fluke of timing, opportunity, IP and commercial success called WoW forever changed the paradigm of MMO as a genre (in the west, as east is a different market with different drivers). Others tried to build on the success to prove it could be scaled and leveraged... and failed. Why? Because WoW was not a trend, but a unique event of circumstances and timing (as was Everquest before it, and in scale to the timeframe). SO..... the market adapted and adjusted to find customers, broaden the offerings, and create choices. And a decade later.... the MMO population base is much much larger then it was and creating much much more commercial success in total in the genre....just not in the manner that you personally demand. You are bent that it's evolved (or devolved in your view I bet) to the Hello Kitty generation of short attention span make it easy to do product... but you know what... that is true of many things in the world of entertainment these days.

 

Seriously... you want the old days. Too bad... the old days are gone. You can cry in your beer about it and taunt the forum about it all you want.. but it will change nothing. Products and the markets they serve change over time. In a free market.. they follow consumer demand. You clearly do not represent the current distribution of consumer demand. You are an outlier... for a long as you choose to be an outlier. Adapt or become extinct to the context of MMOs. The choice is yours to make. The beer crys, forum taunting and snarky demands are simply for show on your part IMO.

 

But hey... at least you have your vinyl record collection to play while digging in heels right?

 

So in summary...

 

I am right. There has been no clear-cut successful MMO released in 10 years but I'm also wrong because...

 

If you take out all the ones that failed and were shut down because... they don't count for some reason?

And you take out EQ and WoW, because... they were just lucky?

 

So yes, the MMO market is thriving as long as you forget about everything that didn't thrive, and your definition of "thriving" excludes comparisons to the only two MMO to ever actually thrive.

 

Got it.

[asbalana]

No, the reason why MMOs are at best a dying genre is that the novelty wore off.

 

 

I actually do not think that mmos are a dying genre. I also disagree with the concept that decreasing numbers in "current" games is a manifestation of novelty.

 

In my humble opinion, the issue is that the games being introduced are of poor quality. I also think that game developers are out of touch with their player/customer base and indeed some current mmos almost appear to hold their customers in contempt.

 

Before, at, and soon after launch swtor sold over two million copies. The sales were for a sub based game. That does not say that there was a lack of interest or that the genre is dying. Within six months the number of subs had dropped to lint. That says that most of the people who bought the game rejected it. WOW had twelve million plus accounts (whatever that means) at the end of Wrath, with Cata and Mists they are now (I believe) not many years later at eight plus million players. I don't believe that is due to a dying genre effect or a novelty hit. I think that Buzzard managed to take a product that appealed to many and build one that appealed to much fewer. I was there and remember the complaints on the forum with many of the changes and I remember the contemptuous responses by the devs (GC and others).

 

Although I do not have the numbers, there are currently a ton of people following TESO, W*, and other games that will be released in the future. That does not speak of a dying genre, but more of people not satisfied with the games that they are playing or have played and are still looking for a home.

 

I will end with a concept that I see stated by many people who still play their game of choice be it swtor, WOW, or something else. That is they are still playing that game because there is nothing better out there. Not really a high recommendation for a product.

Edited June 19, 2013 by asbalana

[ZionHalcyon]

So in summary...

 

I am right. There has been no clear-cut successful MMO released in 10 years but I'm also wrong because...

 

If you take out all the ones that failed and were shut down because... they don't count for some reason?

And you take out EQ and WoW, because... they were just lucky?

 

So yes, the MMO market is thriving as long as you forget about everything that didn't thrive, and your definition of "thriving" excludes comparisons to the only two MMO to ever actually thrive.

 

Got it.

 

The deal is, you are wrong because on the whole, the number of people playing the MMO genre has increased substantially, and you also seem to disregard the fact that there are MMOs out there that haven't shut down, or that continue to make money, because they aren't as successful as WoW.

 

Which is idiotic. Would you say Burger King and Wendys and Taco Bell and other well known, branded fast food joints are "failures" because they aren't AS successful as McDonalds?

 

The problem lies with your very narrow definition of what qualifies an MMO as a success.

[AlienEyeTX]

The deal is, you are wrong because on the whole, the number of people playing the MMO genre has increased substantially, and you also seem to disregard the fact that there are MMOs out there that haven't shut down, or that continue to make money, because they aren't as successful as WoW.

 

Which is idiotic. Would you say Burger King and Wendys and Taco Bell and other well known, branded fast food joints are "failures" because they aren't AS successful as McDonalds?

 

The problem lies with your very narrow definition of what qualifies an MMO as a success.

 

Exactly.

 

The MMO genre is growing and will continue to do so for another decade. More people are playing, but the player base is fragmented and spread across more products. EQ and WoW were successful, to be sure, but there also just weren't many alternatives in the genre at the time. Now there are many to choose from, so gaining a sustained base of players really should be defined as "success."

[CosmicKat]

Exactly.

 

The MMO genre is growing and will continue to do so for another decade. More people are playing, but the player base is fragmented and spread across more products. EQ and WoW were successful, to be sure, but there also just weren't many alternatives in the genre at the time. Now there are many to choose from, so gaining a sustained base of players really should be defined as "success."

 

Still waiting for an answer as to why, if MMO's are so successful, they must give them away for nothing to beat numbers EQ achieved 15 years ago... when far, far less people had the capacity (in PC power and net connectivity) to even play MMO's.

 

"The market changed" is PR nonsense. The games changed to become more mainstream and it didn't work so "give it away for free" became the safety valve to keep the genre afloat.

[Arkerus]

Is that why nobody has released an MMO in 10 years that has succeeded without having to give the game away for free? Many of them have failed outright.

 

When there hasn't been a single, concrete success in a decade, the genre is stagnant.

 

Looks like my counterpoint has already been covered. That and the fact that you call all free to play conversions failures basically proves you haven't kept up with market trends and the major paradigm shift in the mmo genre. Welcome to 2013.

[AlienEyeTX]

Still waiting for an answer as to why, if MMO's are so successful, they must give them away for nothing to beat numbers EQ achieved 15 years ago... when far, far less people had the capacity (in PC power and net connectivity) to even play MMO's.

 

"The market changed" is PR nonsense. The games changed to become more mainstream and it didn't work so "give it away for free" became the safety valve to keep the genre afloat.

 

It's likely quite a few factors, all in motion. I'll give this a quick stab, though.

 

Casual gamers are used to plunking down $50-60 for a game and playing for a few weeks or a couple of months until they "beat" the game. Occasionally, they will go back and play the game again... no additional charge. Some casuals become interested in MMOs now that better licenses or better gameplay is available. They are reluctant to buy a game at full price, plus continue paying for it... A) Because they didn't have to do that before, and B) because they fear commitment to something that they might not like.

 

So, you give them the game. They can try it and commit the money if they want to stay long-term. Or, they can improve their game experience a little bit at a time with small, easily digestible transactions. They don't feel ripped-off and they still don't feel tied-down because their investment is relatively small. If they keep playing, they will continue to make small transactions when something comes up that is important to them, or they will sub if they really get into it.

 

[Arkerus]

So in summary...

 

I am right. There has been no clear-cut successful MMO released in 10 years but I'm also wrong because...

 

If you take out all the ones that failed and were shut down because... they don't count for some reason?

And you take out EQ and WoW, because... they were just lucky?

 

So yes, the MMO market is thriving as long as you forget about everything that didn't thrive, and your definition of "thriving" excludes comparisons to the only two MMO to ever actually thrive.

 

Got it.

 

More products means less person on each product even though MORE people are playing MMOs. I swear sometimes CK you just don't want to listen. You have your mind made up and thats it.

 

cable television has the same problem. Awesome new TV shows but well never, ever see the numbers we had in the 80s or even 90s on a single show because the product market is so wide. So many choices.

 

You either accept this reality or choose to be ignorant.

[ZionHalcyon]

Still waiting for an answer as to why, if MMO's are so successful, they must give them away for nothing to beat numbers EQ achieved 15 years ago... when far, far less people had the capacity (in PC power and net connectivity) to even play MMO's.

 

"The market changed" is PR nonsense. The games changed to become more mainstream and it didn't work so "give it away for free" became the safety valve to keep the genre afloat.

 

Changing economies means changing needs of the consumer base. A flexible format allows for this day and age's consumers to have access to what MMOs offer.

 

Or have you had your head up your butt for say the last 5-6 years and don't realize the world's in a recession/depression and countries are nearing bankruptcy left and right? Do you fail to comprehend what a much more competitive job market means for people? People are having to do more while making less in general. Its not how it was in the 80's and 90's. This means a pure sub model in this economic climate is entirely stupid.

Edited June 19, 2013 by ZionHalcyon

[Andryah]

Still waiting for an answer as to why, if MMO's are so successful, they must give them away for nothing

 

LOL at the desperation in your virtual voice.

 

1) they don't give them away. They implement a freemium model that is designed to successfully extract revenue from the player base? Why? BECAUSE THE MARKET CHANGED.... players learned from their silly mobile phones and from one smaller but innovative MMO company that you could play games on a flexible economic model and they demanded the same in other segments of the market.

 

2) LOTRO took an innovative risk and launched the modern era of the Freemium MMO model. They did it because they launched during WoWs peak in the market and were being lost in the noise. So... they SHIFTED THE MARKET and were very successful at it. They innovated in response to the market and profited and thrived. They set the standard in many regards for how to do a Freemium MMO successfully for both customers and the company.

 

3) THE MARKET HAS CHANGED. No amount of squealing and breath holding on your part can change this. No amount of protesting or deflecting with snarky comments can change this. You need to tattoo that in reverse on your forehead so you can read it every time you look in the mirror IMO:) . OR, just quit MMOs....because apparently in your little world view... they quit you. Might as well complete the divorce papers and file them IMO.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Andryah

[MrJurgens]

LOL at the desperation in your virtual voice.

 

1) they don't give them away. They implement a freemium model that is designed to successfully extract revenue from the player base? Why? BECAUSE THE MARKET CHANGED.... players learned from their silly mobile phones and from one smaller but innovative MMO company that you could play games on a flexible economic model and they demanded the same in other segments of the market.

 

2) LOTRO took an innovative risk and launched the modern era of the Freemium MMO model. They did it because they launched during WoWs peak in the market and were being lost in the noise. So... they SHIFTED THE MARKET and were very successful at it. They innovated in response to the market and profited and thrived. They set the standard in many regards for how to do a Freemium MMO successfully for both customers and the company.

 

3) THE MARKET HAS CHANGED. No amount of squealing and breath holding on your part can change this. No amount of protesting or deflecting with snarky comments can change this. You need to tattoo that in reverse on your forehead so you can read it every time you look in the mirror IMO:) . OR, just quit MMOs....because apparently in your little world view... they quit you. Might as well complete the divorce papers and file them IMO.

You sure do love using "freemium". Yup, keep sugarcoating it, honey. That'll surely make me feel a whole lot better about this game and the market in general.

 

[asbalana]

Changing economies means changing needs of the consumer base. A flexible format allows for this day and age's consumers to have access to what MMOs offer.

 

Or have you had your head up your butt for say the last 5-6 years and don't realize the world's in a recession/depression and countries are nearing bankruptcy left and right? Do you fail to comprehend what a much more competitive job market means for people? People are having to do more while making less in general. Its not how it was in the 80's and 90's. This means a pure sub model in this economic climate is entirely stupid.

 

Nope, did a lot of work with corporate clients identifying products that excel in down cycles. MMO gaming was not an area that they addressed, but I would think that it is a good candidate.

 

People crave and need entertainment and release and MMOs offer a great deal for very little money to people who cannot afford alternate routes.

 

Compare the MMO sub fee,to a night at the movies, a date, a ball game, a trip to a bar with friends, and on and on and it is an entertainment bargain. Gads, a trip to McDonalds for two will cost almost as much as a months sub.

 

Sub fees are not stupid, but to charge one you have to offer a product that people are willing to buy. That is the catch.

[SteelPiranha]

You sure do love using "freemium". Yup, keep sugarcoating it, honey. That'll surely make me feel a whole lot better about this game and the market in general.

 

 

Definition of 'Freemium'

A combination of the words "free" and "premium" used to describe a business model that offers both free and premium services. The freemium business model works by offering simple and basic services for free for the user to try and more advanced or additional features at a premium. This is a common practice with many software companies, who offer basic software free to try but with limited capabilities.

 

The word is being used correctly.

[ZionHalcyon]

Nope, did a lot of work with corporate clients identifying products that excel in down cycles. MMO gaming was not an area that they addressed, but I would think that it is a good candidate.

 

People crave and need entertainment and release and MMOs offer a great deal for very little money to people who cannot afford alternate routes.

 

Compare the MMO sub fee,to a night at the movies, a date, a ball game, a trip to a bar with friends, and on and on and it is an entertainment bargain. Gads, a trip to McDonalds for two will cost almost as much as a months sub.

 

Sub fees are not stupid, but to charge one you have to offer a product that people are willing to buy. That is the catch.

 

You realize you just said you did work with corporate clients as an expertise qualifier, and then admitted they didn't work in MMO gaming.

 

So why include that at all? It was a pointless red herring.

[Jandi]

The biggest issue with any game with a cash shop, regardless of business model, is that if the numbers start to drop and they need cash, the investors may demand the devs to start selling power on the cash shop. At that point the game is irreversibly ruined for the sake of short term profit, which is all those investing in games care about as shown time and time again.

 

The ethics, principles or previous statements of developers mean nothing when the person(s) with the power and money in the company tells the devs to sell power.

[Pernicia]

Because there's nothing better at the moment :-/ The day EQ Next drops, I'm out until that bores me (and if they use EQ1 mechanics that will be 5-10 years)

 

I won't say that I hate this game, but for me I keep playing precisely "Because there's nothing better at the moment". I've tried a lot of the newer games. Most had aspects I liked. All of them, however, had some game breaking flaw that turned me away after 2 months or less.

 

Wall of text regarding said other games

 

TSW was fun overall, but the combat resource system was dull, end game could be reached in under a week, and grinding the same few dungeons for a month to get 10.4/10.4 gear or airport runs for AP got very boring very fast. Funcom also annoyed me the first time I found out I still had to buy the DLC even though I was a sub.

 

I had mixed feelings about the action-RPG combat style of Tera. It was fun as a warrior, but ranged and especially healing classes were just awful. Add to that that each class save warrior could only fulfill one role and I barely made it to level 30 before giving up on that game.

 

Now I know I'm one of a very small group, but I actually loved the PvE leveling content in Aion. Every mob could potentially kill you if you didn't mind your surroundings, use defensive abilities, watch your resources, and time abilities between auto attacks for max damage output. Where the game fell apart for me was being constantly ganked while fighting said mobs, the incredibly grindy feel, and no PvE content to look forward to and end game.

 

Rift, at release, was an awesome game. I loved doing the rifts and fighting off the city invasions when there were enough people around to do so. Sadly, I had other stuff going on at the time and had to put it down for a few months. I came back to deserted zones and found myself avoiding all of the content I loved at first. I lasted maybe a week or so more before moving on.

 

My girlfriend convinced me to play GW2. I tried it out during the open beta weekends and almost immediately despised it. For her sake I agreed not to cancel my pre-order. I think I lasted maybe a week or so into official release before she saw I was never going to have fun playing it and gave up.

 

 

Then there's SWTOR. I was here for release, stuck it out through EV/KP while many of my friends quit. Things were looking up with EC, TFB, and the much needed QoL improvements made. I honestly liked the CM at first too. I got $6 per month "for free" to spend on convenience unlocks like added inventory space, rocket boots, ship upgrades, etc. Even Makeb, IMO, was worth the $10 I spent on it. Slowly but surely though, EA is driving me away from the game with their perceived focus on said CM. And while SnV is still relatively fresh and fun, good grief, just let TFB die already. No matter what difficulty tweaks get done, it's still the same instance we've had for 9 months now, and they're trying to sell it as new content.

 

The game I'm most looking forward to is FFXIV. I had a chance to play in the beta last weekend and read the beta tester forums most of the week waiting for servers to come back up again. The game play feels a lot more like an FF title than an MMO. The quest givers are amusing if you take the time to read everything. What's selling me most on the game though is the attitude of the developers. They're passionate about making a great game and they listen to player feedback.

[asbalana]

You realize you just said you did work with corporate clients as an expertise qualifier, and then admitted they didn't work in MMO gaming.

 

So why include that at all? It was a pointless red herring.

 

LOL, scratches head and grips reality a little tighter.

 

I worked with a client that ordered a study ahead of a down cycle that they believed was approaching. The study (not by my firm, we participated in the implementation) concluded that people use a great deal more toilet paper during economic hard times which I found very funny at first. My client was not in the TP business, but careful review of the study led to the conclusion that it was right on. So my client, with my participation, acquired a generic TP company. Needless to say, a severe down turn did occur and they cleaned up.

 

No red herring or any other fish type here. The principles employed and analysis would be the same. It is a business and social concept endeavor and not specifically product related.

 

Actually, your dismissal of the point that I was making is a little fishy and not much on point.

Edited June 19, 2013 by asbalana

[Baalzamon]

I dont hate I just want to be able to transfer from EU > NA server.

[CosmicKat]

Definition of 'Freemium'

A combination of the words "free" and "premium" used to describe a business model that offers both free and premium services. The freemium business model works by offering simple and basic services for free for the user to try and more advanced or additional features at a premium. This is a common practice with many software companies, who offer basic software free to try but with limited capabilities.

 

The word is being used correctly.

 

Definition of Newspeak:

 

The use of positive words to infer something is a positive when it is often not.

Example: "Lay-offs" is bad, "Right sizing" is also bad, but sounds good.

[CosmicKat]

LOL at the desperation in your virtual voice.

 

1) they don't give them away. They implement a freemium model that is designed to successfully extract revenue from the player base? Why? BECAUSE THE MARKET CHANGED.... players learned from their silly mobile phones and from one smaller but innovative MMO company that you could play games on a flexible economic model and they demanded the same in other segments of the market.

 

2) LOTRO took an innovative risk and launched the modern era of the Freemium MMO model. They did it because they launched during WoWs peak in the market and were being lost in the noise. So... they SHIFTED THE MARKET and were very successful at it. They innovated in response to the market and profited and thrived. They set the standard in many regards for how to do a Freemium MMO successfully for both customers and the company.

 

3) THE MARKET HAS CHANGED. No amount of squealing and breath holding on your part can change this. No amount of protesting or deflecting with snarky comments can change this. You need to tattoo that in reverse on your forehead so you can read it every time you look in the mirror IMO:) . OR, just quit MMOs....because apparently in your little world view... they quit you. Might as well complete the divorce papers and file them IMO.

 

And... back to /ignore you go.

 

You would be banned from these boards in 30 seconds flat for your constant insults if not for the fact that you always defend every decision EA/BW makes.

Edited June 19, 2013 by CosmicKat

[CosmicKat]

Changing economies means changing needs of the consumer base. A flexible format allows for this day and age's consumers to have access to what MMOs offer.

 

Or have you had your head up your butt for say the last 5-6 years and don't realize the world's in a recession/depression and countries are nearing bankruptcy left and right? Do you fail to comprehend what a much more competitive job market means for people? People are having to do more while making less in general. Its not how it was in the 80's and 90's. This means a pure sub model in this economic climate is entirely stupid.

 

The price of stand alone games has not got down. The price of movies has not gone down. The price of cable TV has not gone down.

 

In theory, the base for MMO's should increase in tough times as they are a very cheap entertainment option. The movie industry historically sees boom times whenever the economy is on the downside.

 

The games are the problem, not the economy or changing consumer habits. Two million people bought TOR knowing it was a subscription based game. The cost of the subscription may have some impact on people's decisions to keep or cancel their sub but the game itself will have far more impact.

[Floredon]

free to play is a marketing strategy. players are paying, many pay more than they would have originally as a subscriber only. it's much like the pricing strategy of "buy one get one free". people like the word free, even though it usually doesn't mean what they think it means Edited June 19, 2013 by Floredon

[WSRB]

Andryah... CosmicKat... You're both right.

 

First, not only has the market changed, but the whole world has changed. Today, there are more ways to spend your entertainment money, and you probably have less of it, thus it makes more peole want to try before they buy. Giving away the base content of your video game is a way to get people to try it out and entice them to spend their money on it. And in the realm of MMOs, the subscription fee has always been a big sticking point for many people: I'm sure there's tons of reasons that could be listed, but I've always believed that a large number of people will simply refuse to accept that they don't actually own the software they buy and subscription fees slap that denial in the face. So there are very valid reasons why the pure subscription model has started to become outdated. You simply can't deny these elements as being a large factors in the move towards the "freemium" model (gah... I hate that term, but does the job of describing what the business model is in one word).

 

However, CosmicKat is 100% right that people have abandoned all of the big MMO releases in droves simply because of the games themselves. Ultimately, pretty much every MMO release in the last five years or so has been WoW with a different skin on it; and yes, that does include SWTOR. So these games have been starting out with massive numbers that flee in droves within 60 to 90 days after launch because they're essentially playing WoW without ten years of content additions: why would you pay the same amount to play a version of WoW without ten years of content additions that you would pay to play WoW with the 10 years of content? It doesn't matter that SWTOR is set in the Star Wars universe, in the end it's just a slick version of WoW, and this is the same reason that a game like Battlefield sells a third of what Call of Duty does: what's the point playing a slicker version of an older game, when there's still millions of people playing that older one?

 

So yes... the MMO world has changed... but we're still playing the same MMO that we have been for the last ten years. It looks like we've got a new class of games on the horizon that are all looking to be different, all utilizing the free to play model; but the MMOs of 2007-2012 all graduated from "WoW Clone High" and their move to F2P is purely for survival.

Edited June 20, 2013 by WSRB

[Grayseven]

Being critical does not negate enjoyment of what is.

 

Critical discussion is simply an attempt to ensure a better experience.

 

Were we to just sit back because we find some aspects of the game enjoyable regardless of how much other aspects suck, nothing would be improved. If the company isn't challenged to improve they will not bother. Why fix something if people accept it? As long as they get paid, the product is working. But if there are things that might chase people away and they say nothing about it, the company can't fix it.

 

I like SWTOR. I like the people I game with. There are a number of things, however, that I hate about EA/BW and this game and have no reservations about voicing them because if I don't, the powers that be will have no idea that there might be an issue. If these issues finally cause me to leave the game, but I've said nothing about these issues, it is my own fault that they weren't fixed.

 

If I say things about issues, and they don't get fixed, now the onus of responsibility is on the company. We've seen this with many long term bugs that not only haven't been fixed, but communication on those issues is also missing. Some people are leaving, some are staying and trying to fight the good fight but eventually they too may give up. The responsibility belongs to EA/BW to stem the tide of cancellations by addressing the issues...something they have been very, very lax in lately.

[LordArtemis]

Andryah... CosmicKat... You're both right..

 

THIS

 

Sorry guys, but your actually not on opposite sides here. You both have valid points you have made. So in essence you are both correct IMO.