Becose thay added new servers? and thay tell new players wich the best servers to go on? sure this game will do great it has alrady dubbel the post on the forum then DND online, that game is doing fine, so im sure this one will to.
Playing:World of Warcraft. Played:Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies. Tried:Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
In the meantime EQII is scrambling to retain customers
Prove it.
The retorics in trying to make it down for EQ2 or even VG doesnt work to make LOTR positives. But I can show that there are atleast good population in EQ2. I think I meet many people around my level in EQ2. All American servers in this screenshot. is on medium taken around 5-10 mins before this post is made.
Still this won't make 172k boxes sold into 1000k boxes sold regardless of the interpretation of the screenshot.
It wont mather if the games sells 1 copie or 100k,
When do you guys get it inside you brains?
fact is that its doing great, for a normal mmo standards.
(World of warcraft is not normal , its more like The sims sucses)
Playing:World of Warcraft. Played:Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies. Tried:Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
It wont mather if the games sells 1 copie or 100k,
When do you guys get it inside you brains?
fact is that its doing great, for a normal mmo standards.
(World of warcraft is not normal , its more like The sims sucses)
Nope it doesn't matter abit at all.
With some exceptions.
Those that have to prove to themself they choosed right MMO. Thay prove this by reading a magazine giving it good grades, they do this by saying it is a smash hit etc etc.
But as you say (I think you say) that it boils down to. If one enjoys to play the game well then one wouldn't have some others to prove to themself that the own opinion made of what is fun for oneself is right.
For me I don't care a bit if I game is the most succesful if I don't like, nor do I care if it is not as long as one likes it. Not all thinks that alot wants to have their feelings acknowledged if that is because if one being insecure, well nvm.
fact is that its doing great, for a normal mmo standards.
I might agree, or more maybe 'good' for normal MMOs. But the fans and Turbine hyped it and continue to talk about it as if it is doing WoW good and that kind of ridiculous hyperbole is just annoying.
Still this won't make 172k boxes sold into 1000k boxes sold regardless of the interpretation of the screenshot.
172K boxes sold in 9 weeks in one market segment. How many were sold in the rest of the world? How many have been sold since?
What constitutes a medium server population, 10 players, 1000 players, 100, 000 players. Medium hmmm a bit vague. Tweak a constant on the server and medium becomes small becomes large and all with the same number logged in. Smoke and mirrors , dog and pony, now you see it now you don't. You and I both know the only really server witha a decent population is on Antonia Bayle. The rest are just there. Been that way since a month after launch.
Lotro 22 servers between Europe and N America all with decent populations.
thanks for playing Vanguard....SOE would like to offer you a FREE copy of EQ2 including the first 3 expansions and first 3 adventure packs...and play for free until 11:59PM September 15th 2007"
Originally posted by Jackdog Lotro 22 servers between Europe and N America all with decent populations.
Is that current and accurate? I am no mind reading evil genious but if they have 22 servers all told they are quite unlikely to have more anywhere near the population fans are suggesting. Isn't the standard around 3k active on a server with a higher total character total. That would mean even if they have a max character per server of as high as 10k (and all of those are unlikely the be one account as many people have multiple characters) that is 220k subs a max if they really pack the servers. With the norm being lower, at least as I understand it, I would say for 22 servers they are not likely to be at more than 100k - 150k or so subs - which would be a sub number fitting the sales figure in the GS article.
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals."
"Extra 30 days of FREE game time!"
LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!"
At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Hi two points have come up in this thread. (Mainly from Agent Smith) That should or have been asked to be addressed.
1) that LoTRO is doing poorly or at best average.
2) that VG sold 200-2500K box in its first month as a comparison to LoTRO 172K for the first 9 weeks in NA. (note the VG numbers may or may not be world wide as I can find no source to confirm this statement many in this thread are posting as fact but have been able to find at least 2 that seem to disprove it.)
You'll have to bear with me but to rebut the 2 points above I'm gonna quote the spinmaster himself (IMO ) Brad McQuad.
A post from Brad on Silky Venom just slightly after VG had been out a month.
I believe I said it needed 200k-300k to be successful, and that I hoped to see 500k after the game was out 1 year, which would make it very profitable. So far we are in the mid 150s which is less than I would have hoped, but still good and still growing.
I have said we released 2-3 months early and that releasing near BC was a mistake, but there was nothing we could do about it. That doesn't mean we were perfect in our development -- we made mistakes -- I talked about in the NYT about how hard it was to manage and organize a team of 100 people when we were used to to EQ 1 (which had about 25 people). So yes, it was harder to schedule and remain as focused and efficient. We also had the switch from MSFT to SOE which slowed us down and caused us to start beta too early.
We also made the mistake of releasing a little early in terms of tech, e.g. we had hoped that computers would be cheaper that could run Vanguard by the time we launched. Time will fix this, but it is hurting us short term. In 20/20 hindsight we probably should have gone a bit lower tech and made a smaller world. But we really felt strongly from the very beginning that part of immersiveness in next gen MMOG was being seamless where you could travel wherever you wanted to, fly anywhere, be able to load any object in the world anywhere in the world, etc. Again, I think longer term as tech is increasing so rapidly, a lot of these problems will go away and having a seamless world with no instancing, ships and flying mounts, etc. will pay off.
I will apolgize for all of the above and the buck stops here. I won't, however, apologize for the team: they worked their asses off and continue to and truly believe in the game (as do I). That said, while I apologize for the mistakes, some of which we made and some of which were out of our hands, we also got the opportunity to make a very ambitious game, the game of our dreams, and were a start-up company that got a 30M+ budget, which is basically unheard of. So while VG does indeed have some issues, I know a lot of people are having fun with it, and a lot more will have fun with it in the future and call it a home. I am also proud to have been part of such an awesome team and to have been able to launch a second MMOG (not something a lot of people can say they have done). So, again, I do apologize for the shortcomings, but am also proud of the game and its potential, and am confident that while it is a successful game now (certainly not a WoW, but not a D&D online either) it will gain momentum as tech catches up, people tire of BC, etc. And also as we through both expansions and the live team add more really cool features to the game over the next year.
Also things like teleporters, experience rates, better LFG tools, etc. are all being looked at and you will see changes soon. I don't have the details yet, but we are listening and the game will get better and the areas where we messed up (large world, but too hard to find a group, etc.) will be addressed. - Brad McQuaid
Ok point #1 Is LoTRO a success? Well it seems a fact that VG had a budget of 30 million + as Brad states above. Last I heard LoTRO's budget was less then that. (If you have a link to prove me wrong I will of course concede this point. So if LoTRO has 500K subscriptions after a year (having less debt to start with) it would be considered in Brads own words "very profitable" ( He states a success would be 200-300k subs). I use Brads words because I assume as a recent MMO Developer he has some understanding rather then just comparing LoTRO's success to weither it kills WoW or not.
Unfortunately we don't know what LoTRO subscriptions are currently at (if someone does please link it ) All we have is the 172K boxes sold for the first 9 weeks in NA. A number that no one here seems to be able to actually prove is accurate. (and few disagree though its quoted as fact) with 3 more quarters to grow on and the rest of the worlds numbers as well as NA digital downloads that have not been counted AFAIK. I do not find it impoossible to believe LoTRO could make the 500K mark in a years time and thus be "very profitable" Time will tell, I can wait However I figure that is not what AS wants to hear so I will concede with its IP yes LoTRO could be doing better, but that does not really mean its a failure or just average just yet.
As to point #2 many posters here have stated that the LoTRO fanbois spin the numbers but that their own posts are accurate and fact filled. Thus the VG sold 200k-250K boxes in its first month vs LoTRO only sold 172k in 9 weeks. (90% of all statistics are made up by 10% of the poulation on a whim or to win a debate 98% of the time Its a joke!)
Anway back to the point, if 200K+ boxes were sold in the first month why are the subscriber numbers as told by Brad himself (The master of spin ) during what would still be the free trial lower then 200K. Sure I can see a few people maybe being busy and putting off installing but 50K?? Lets also add that the 150K Brad mentions may well also have been buddy key subs thus no boxes sold . I remember seeing mentioned that SOE stated VG sells for the first 3 months were only 200K. (Though in truth I haven't bothered to track it down so I might be wrong feel free to prove/disprove it) Obviously if only 200K were sold in the first 3 months, then 200K weren't all sold in the first month with no further sells afterward.
Last of all in closing for any that are still with me, standards of success are different in many peoples eyes. So I have a question. Who here views AO by funcom a success? It been going for what 4-5 years, has a number of expansions, the companies made enough of a profit to stay in business and indeed to develop a second MMO (AoC) So success, failuire, average?
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals." "Extra 30 days of FREE game time!" LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!" At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Hehe your tag line says it all.
No Really so now everyone playing LoTRO is a poor misguided child? Ah and I bet your here to save us from the evil that is Turbine?
Because of course large free expansion like oh say what EQ2/SOE did with the return of Neriak is a sign of Despiration. Yes , yes I can see how we are soo wrong we should all be forced to pay another 40 dollars for a expansion that basically gives almost nothing but one character class (the deathknight) which is only playable for what 12 levels? (oh yeah huge content add there) Like the Good people at Blizzard are doing??
I may not agree with Agent Smith but at least he does try and put forth a reasoned debate. You Gules are just a hating troll whose probably upset because your gold farming account was permaband for botting.
Honestly, I wasn't trying to say whether LotRO was a success or not, as I said earlier in this thread only turbine can make that assessment. I even said turbine seems responsible in matters of business so I would imagine they can make money where others couldn't as evidenced by DDO. I was more measuring the hype and claims of Turbine and fans against the reported number, and also against other things people have brought up in this thread like the 22 servers or the VG first month sales). Clearly LoTRO cost less than VG (as Turbine used their own engine, same on for DDO which is a savings of 3 to 5 mill over developing on from scratch and they re-used a number of assets as well) which was on the high end of typical. Nevertheless, it is hard to see how LotRO could have cost less than 20 million given it is an IP licensed game. My point in this thread is that whatever the facts are, 172k NA boxes sold in the first quarter after launch is not a big raving success, nowhere near WoW type success (which alot of people including Turbine have claimed/projected), and given the circumstances it could even be considered not so good. of course, if that number is bogus than that statement is meaningless but if we look at what an LotRO proponent has said, 22 servers worldwide, we can easily say it is unlikely the game has more subs that an average success MMO would have so even if GS is unreliable the number does seem to fit with the server count.
I am not claiming LotRO is a failure - not in the least. I just think that there are several tidbits (the GS number, the server count, the lack of proclamation from Turbine at hitting notable sub milestones, etc) that indicate the game is not what so many fans and the general hype suggest it is, a type raving massive success - it seems average if anything.
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals." "Extra 30 days of FREE game time!" LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!" At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals." "Extra 30 days of FREE game time!" LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!" At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
First off, the part about the free expensions and game time was simply a retort to Jackdog's claim the EQ2 is desperate because they're trying to move disenfranchised Vanguard people over to the game. Just a point that free time and free stuff don't mean jack in that context.
As for Turbine? Nothing really personal- they just suck, from the CEO right down to the janitor. They took the two greatest opportunities ever given any company- the DnD universe and Middle-Earth- and turned out the two worst, kiddieland, dumbed down POS games ever conceived. So yeah- I hate them. I hope the go bankrupt and the same day their server farm explodes into 5 million pieces. It's a crap company staffed by lying, scumsucking devs and PR spin doctors that will tell you one thing while actively doing another. I repeat- they suck, and make SOE look like saints. I know I can't effect them in any way, and never will, but yeah- I feel better having a place to vent after the way they stabbed everyone in the back with the piece of Candyland crap they call LOTRO.
Still this won't make 172k boxes sold into 1000k boxes sold regardless of the interpretation of the screenshot.
172K boxes sold in 9 weeks in one market segment. How many were sold in the rest of the world? How many have been sold since?
What constitutes a medium server population, 10 players, 1000 players, 100, 000 players. Medium hmmm a bit vague. Tweak a constant on the server and medium becomes small becomes large and all with the same number logged in. Smoke and mirrors , dog and pony, now you see it now you don't. You and I both know the only really server witha a decent population is on Antonia Bayle. The rest are just there. Been that way since a month after launch.
You saying that a medium definiton on AB is correct and true but the medium definition on other servers are not correct? (If one doesn't find the screenshoot it showed all but one server on medium that ofcourse including Antonia Bayle.)
Lotro 22 servers between Europe and N America all with decent populations.
thanks for playing Vanguard....SOE would like to offer you a FREE copy of EQ2 including the first 3 expansions and first 3 adventure packs...and play for free until 11:59PM September 15th 2007"
Sort of screams desperation doesn't it?
I have seen some SOE advertising for the fan faire I have not seen any advertising for EQ2. Not even a campaign after that offer that you quoted from.
You are using the offer from SOE regarding EQ2 to former players of VG as a sign of desperacy. Then what is it when Turbine despite the massive campaigns about LOTR release. They do this kind of things and offerings that would be a quite a big scream of desperation.
"You'll get an extra 30 days of FREE game time in addition to the 30 days of FREE game time you receive with your purchase of the game - that's a total of 60 days of FREE game time."
"For every friend that buys the retail edition of the game, registers a retail product key at myaccount.turbine.com, and subscribes to the game, you'll get a referral credit that can be redeemed for 30 days of FREE game time that can be added to your subscription to that game! If you're already a Lifetime Member we'll issue you a 30 day game card key to give to a friend who is a game subscriber."
The very validity of the 172k is indeed paramount to this argument. If it is fabricated (which it is), then I can just as well throw out a 500k number. Let's discuss whether 500k is good or not? Oh, but you are fixated on THAT number. Why not 50k?
As for the financial reports...Agent Smith, you should really look at the records, the supplimental filings (the .pdfs). It lists the PC sales quite plainly. This can only be PC sales (not the corporate jet). Previous quarters in which no or low profile PC titles shipped indicate sales in the 100k range. The fact is $10 million in sales for Q2 by and large LOTRO sales. Midway HAS to report other sales, if only in a good-faith effort to keep its shareholders informed. The 172k number is clearly unsubstantiated and arguing whether it is a good number or not is like arguing whether, just for fun, the earth being flat is good or bad (even though we know it's round). Your foundational premise is wrong, thus discussing it is foolish.
_____________________________ Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
The very validity of the 172k is indeed paramount to this argument. If it is fabricated (which it is), then I can just as well throw out a 500k number. Let's discuss whether 500k is good or not? Oh, but you are fixated on THAT number. Why not 50k? As for the financial reports...Agent Smith, you should really look at the records, the supplimental filings (the .pdfs). It lists the PC sales quite plainly. This can only be PC sales (not the corporate jet). Previous quarters in which no or low profile PC titles shipped indicate sales in the 100k range. The fact is $10 million in sales for Q2 by and large LOTRO sales. Midway HAS to report other sales, if only in a good-faith effort to keep its shareholders informed. The 172k number is clearly unsubstantiated and arguing whether it is a good number or not is like arguing whether, just for fun, the earth being flat is good or bad (even though we know it's round). Your foundational premise is wrong, thus discussing it is foolish.
The financials really do not provide any info we can draw numbers from - there is no way to tell where thier revenue came from or anything of the sort. As for the number, in spirit I can see your point but let me 'argue' with you in this way...
Ah, 500k boxes sold in the first quarter in NA - that would be pretty good but I have to question if that is accurate because the source is kind of unreliable.
That is a valid response to a 'questionable' number. Aside from that, it is valid to look at the GS number and take into account oher things to see if they go together. The financials are a good example, had they shown a really low number it would tend to say that sales couldn't have been very good, as it is they show a number that is unclear at best because companies get revenue from all sorts of products not just those released in that period. The number of servers is a good indicator, as I mentioned above it is unlikely they have 10k accounts per server but even if we assume they do 22 servers times 10k accounts per server is only 200k subs which is nowhere near what would be necessary for LotRO to meet the hype and hyperbole hear and elsewhere.
In the end I can agree on things being more assumptive that interpretaive and I will acknowledge that the GS number is not the given fact that it might have seemed to be at first (allthough I remain ssuspect but tending to accept it until I have evidence otherwise). That being said, I should think those on the other side can acknowledge that there is little to no evidence that LotRO is on its way to a million subs or WOW type success and chime down the retorect accordingly as, if anything, it seems LotRO is likely to be a moderate to average success at this point based on some reported numbers and server count and the fact that Turbine would certainly be likely to brag about 500k subs or more (even 300k would be quite marketable to announce).
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals." "Extra 30 days of FREE game time!" LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!" At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
First off, the part about the free expensions and game time was simply a retort to Jackdog's claim the EQ2 is desperate because they're trying to move disenfranchised Vanguard people over to the game. Just a point that free time and free stuff don't mean jack in that context.
As for Turbine? Nothing really personal- they just suck, from the CEO right down to the janitor. They took the two greatest opportunities ever given any company- the DnD universe and Middle-Earth- and turned out the two worst, kiddieland, dumbed down POS games ever conceived. So yeah- I hate them. I hope the go bankrupt and the same day their server farm explodes into 5 million pieces. It's a crap company staffed by lying, scumsucking devs and PR spin doctors that will tell you one thing while actively doing another. I repeat- they suck, and make SOE look like saints. I know I can't effect them in any way, and never will, but yeah- I feel better having a place to vent after the way they stabbed everyone in the back with the piece of Candyland crap they call LOTRO.
Okay, and with that I would suggest you remove phrases like "stabbed everyone in the back" and replace it with "stabbed me in the back" - it's still meters thick on the melodrama, but at least you're only speaking for yourself, which is the only person you really should presume to speak for anyway.
Secondly, that they turned DnD and LoTRO into anything is entirely subjective. No matter how strongly you feel about it, it's your opinion and, again, you should only speak for yourself. And if you believe your views somehow represent everyone else's, or are the only ones that "matter", you are seriously delusional.
So, no one's saying you have to like anything Turbine does, or the company itself, but at least have enough of a grasp on reality to acknowledge that your point-of-view is not equal to or greater than anyone else's.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Here`s the EQ2 servers at about 1:26AM EST... i don't think EQ2 is in danger at all.
Why would EQ2 be in danger???
Even EQ1, Star wars Galaxies , Van Guard and The Matrix Online are still up and running.
Playing:World of Warcraft. Played:Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies. Tried:Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
Here`s the EQ2 servers at about 1:26AM EST... i don't think EQ2 is in danger at all.
At the risk of getting myself reported for going off topic I will reply to this. This horse is dead and the thread long ago lost any resemblence to a rational discussion anyway. Should be locked imho
quick question. What comprises medium and heavy? Is 10 players medium and 100 heavy, or 100 medium and 500 heavy or 500 medium and 1000 heavy. Answer is only SOE knows and they can make light, medium and heavy whatever they need to at the time and I can guarantee you will never know what the true numbers are unless you are a SOE programmer or a SOE executive.
I remember when Vanguard went from closed beta to open beta they changed the system to the light, medium, and heavy system. I wish all game s would use DAoC's system to where it showed exact numbers. EQII will never die though, it will never be more than a second string player either though. I played it from beta to last November on AB, the server was never what you would call "packed" even in the best of times. Good thing is you never had to worry about lag.
Oh and Orphes we still have have 17 left in our EQII branch, and about 60 over in WoW. LoTRO is 47 mains as of this morning, about 30 of which were ex EQII, and maybe 8 are from our WoW group. For some reason the WoW people did not like LoTRO as much as the EQII people did. Of course our WoW'ers are hard core raiders and the EQII people are/were more casual.
Mostof our WoW players are drooling over WAR and some are still anticipating AoC ( myself included).
Here`s the EQ2 servers at about 1:26AM EST... i don't think EQ2 is in danger at all.
At the risk of getting myself reported for going off topic I will reply to this.
quick question. What comprises medium and heavy? Is 10 players medium and 100 heavy, or 100 medium and 500 heavy or 500 medium and 1000 heavy. Answer is only SOE knows and they can make light, medium and heavy whatever they need to at the time and I can guarantee you will never know what the true numbers are unless you are a SOE programmer or a SOE executive.
I remember when Vanguard went from closed beta to open beta they changed the system to the light, medium, and heavy system. I wish all game s would use DAoC's system to where it showed exact numbers. EQII will never die though, it will never be more than a second string player either though. I played it from beta to last November on AB, the server was never what you would call "packed" even in the best of times. Good thing is you never had to worry about lag.
Oh and Orphes we still have have 17 left in our EQII branch, and about 60 over in WoW. LoTRO is 47 mains as of this morning, about 30 of which were ex EQII, and maybe 8 are from our WoW group. For some reason the WoW people did not like LoTRO as much as the EQII people did. Of course our WoW'ers are hard core raiders and the EQII people are/were more casual.
Mostof our WoW players are drooling over WAR and some are still anticipating AoC ( myself included).
Thougth you was more profound then that, 10/100 low/medium. Regardin VG did they change the name of their status to lw/medium/heavy or did they change the definition.
Dont know if the definition is same for EQ2 but 940 is stated as medium in EQ now. That figure is not counting anyone with anonymous flag on.
But there is no reason to doubt that the medium/high flag for server is set to show representative logged in population for the servers to what the servers can hold. Not to any profund as 10 or 100 people to make it medium.
But then again maybe they mix with /who also... Nah.
------
So what this say If one don't try to make things up like SOE is fiddling with the online population definition. It is not saying that EQ2 has more subscribers nor is it saying LOTR has more subscribers that is not the issue with this sidetrack. It is an argument against stating that EQ2 does not have a good population, a healthy one. It is also in that matter an arguement against saying that SOE is panicing because EQ2 population is or has drastically dropped now.
It is saying that at the moment EQ2 is doing good.
Thougth you was more profound then that, 10/100 low/medium. Regardin VG did they change the name of their status to lw/medium/heavy or did they change the definition. Anyway regarding VG low<1000, medium>1000, high>2000. Dont know if the definition is same for EQ2 but 940 is stated as medium in EQ now. That figure is not counting anyone with anonymous flag on. But there is no reason to doubt that the medium/high flag for server is set to show representative logged in population for the servers to what the servers can hold. Not to any profund as 10 or 100 people to make it medium. But then again maybe they mix with /who also... Nah.
Unless you are a SOE employee you are just speculating Orphes. And they did change from solid number to the low/medium/high system about a week after the "open" beta began. Any closed beta tester knows that. As far as why, it is sales psychology. Who wants to play a unpopular game, no one likes a loser. Also they probably want the population to even out on the less populated servers. AB has always been EQII's most popular server.
EQIi is not dying by any means but it sure isn't thriving either. SOE should shut Vanguard down completly and give all of it's players a years free sub to EQII with the stipulation they all go to one server other than AB. Alternativly merge all of EQII's servers down to three or four.
Thougth you was more profound then that, 10/100 low/medium. Regardin VG did they change the name of their status to lw/medium/heavy or did they change the definition. Anyway regarding VG low<1000, medium>1000, high>2000. Dont know if the definition is same for EQ2 but 940 is stated as medium in EQ now. That figure is not counting anyone with anonymous flag on. But there is no reason to doubt that the medium/high flag for server is set to show representative logged in population for the servers to what the servers can hold. Not to any profund as 10 or 100 people to make it medium. But then again maybe they mix with /who also... Nah.
Unless you are a SOE employee you are just speculating Orphes. And they did change from solid number to the low/medium/high system about a week after the "open" beta began. Any closed beta tester knows that. As far as why, it is sales psychology. Who wants to play a unpopular game, no one likes a loser. Also they probably want the population to even out on the less populated servers. AB has always been EQII's most popular server.
EQIi is not dying by any means but it sure isn't thriving either. SOE should shut Vanguard down completly and give all of it's players a years free sub to EQII with the stipulation they all go to one server other than AB. Alternativly merge all of EQII's servers down to three or four.
No I'm not speculating /who all count 1 10, /who all vount 11 20 and doing a manually search for classes at 70 shows that figures. That is not speculating you are speculating that SOE is fiddling with the definition.
940+ (recalculating that figure is wrong) people on medium in EQ2 is not speculating. The definition on VG low<1000/medium>1000/high>2000 is not speculating.
Comments
Becose thay added new servers? and thay tell new players wich the best servers to go on? sure this game will do great it has alrady dubbel the post on the forum then DND online, that game is doing fine, so im sure this one will to.
Playing: World of Warcraft.
Played: Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies.
Tried: Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
Prove it.The retorics in trying to make it down for EQ2 or even VG doesnt work to make LOTR positives. But I can show that there are atleast good population in EQ2. I think I meet many people around my level in EQ2. All American servers in this screenshot. is on medium taken around 5-10 mins before this post is made.
Still this won't make 172k boxes sold into 1000k boxes sold regardless of the interpretation of the screenshot.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
It wont mather if the games sells 1 copie or 100k,
When do you guys get it inside you brains?
fact is that its doing great, for a normal mmo standards.
(World of warcraft is not normal , its more like The sims sucses)
Playing: World of Warcraft.
Played: Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies.
Tried: Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
Nope it doesn't matter abit at all.
With some exceptions.
Those that have to prove to themself they choosed right MMO. Thay prove this by reading a magazine giving it good grades, they do this by saying it is a smash hit etc etc.
But as you say (I think you say) that it boils down to. If one enjoys to play the game well then one wouldn't have some others to prove to themself that the own opinion made of what is fun for oneself is right.
For me I don't care a bit if I game is the most succesful if I don't like, nor do I care if it is not as long as one likes it. Not all thinks that alot wants to have their feelings acknowledged if that is because if one being insecure, well nvm.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
I might agree, or more maybe 'good' for normal MMOs. But the fans and Turbine hyped it and continue to talk about it as if it is doing WoW good and that kind of ridiculous hyperbole is just annoying.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
172K boxes sold in 9 weeks in one market segment. How many were sold in the rest of the world? How many have been sold since?
What constitutes a medium server population, 10 players, 1000 players, 100, 000 players. Medium hmmm a bit vague. Tweak a constant on the server and medium becomes small becomes large and all with the same number logged in. Smoke and mirrors , dog and pony, now you see it now you don't. You and I both know the only really server witha a decent population is on Antonia Bayle. The rest are just there. Been that way since a month after launch.
Lotro 22 servers between Europe and N America all with decent populations.
www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/140129
thanks for playing Vanguard....SOE would like to offer you a FREE copy of EQ2 including the first 3 expansions and first 3 adventure packs...and play for free until 11:59PM September 15th 2007"
Sort of screams desperation doesn't it?
I miss DAoC
Is that current and accurate? I am no mind reading evil genious but if they have 22 servers all told they are quite unlikely to have more anywhere near the population fans are suggesting. Isn't the standard around 3k active on a server with a higher total character total. That would mean even if they have a max character per server of as high as 10k (and all of those are unlikely the be one account as many people have multiple characters) that is 220k subs a max if they really pack the servers. With the norm being lower, at least as I understand it, I would say for 22 servers they are not likely to be at more than 100k - 150k or so subs - which would be a sub number fitting the sales figure in the GS article.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
"The Turbine Referral Program lets paying subscribers of The Lord of the Rings Online™: Shadows of Angmar™ refer friends to play the game and receive free game time for successful referrals."
"Extra 30 days of FREE game time!"
LOREBOIS: "All the content expansions are free!"
At not even 120 days after release, THAT is the definition of desperation. Big difference is that everyone at Turbine is too lazy and twinkie-stuffed to do their job, so they sucker the poor misguided children playing their crap game into marketing for them. Unless they're offering all that to make up for the rest of their craptastic game lineup by giving free time in this craptastic game, like SOE is doing....
Bite me, Turbine.
Hi two points have come up in this thread. (Mainly from Agent Smith) That should or have been asked to be addressed.
1) that LoTRO is doing poorly or at best average.
2) that VG sold 200-2500K box in its first month as a comparison to LoTRO 172K for the first 9 weeks in NA. (note the VG numbers may or may not be world wide as I can find no source to confirm this statement many in this thread are posting as fact but have been able to find at least 2 that seem to disprove it.)
You'll have to bear with me but to rebut the 2 points above I'm gonna quote the spinmaster himself (IMO
) Brad McQuad.
A post from Brad on Silky Venom just slightly after VG had been out a month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe I said it needed 200k-300k to be successful, and that I hoped to see 500k after the game was out 1 year, which would make it very profitable. So far we are in the mid 150s which is less than I would have hoped, but still good and still growing.
I have said we released 2-3 months early and that releasing near BC was a mistake, but there was nothing we could do about it. That doesn't mean we were perfect in our development -- we made mistakes -- I talked about in the NYT about how hard it was to manage and organize a team of 100 people when we were used to to EQ 1 (which had about 25 people). So yes, it was harder to schedule and remain as focused and efficient. We also had the switch from MSFT to SOE which slowed us down and caused us to start beta too early.
We also made the mistake of releasing a little early in terms of tech, e.g. we had hoped that computers would be cheaper that could run Vanguard by the time we launched. Time will fix this, but it is hurting us short term. In 20/20 hindsight we probably should have gone a bit lower tech and made a smaller world. But we really felt strongly from the very beginning that part of immersiveness in next gen MMOG was being seamless where you could travel wherever you wanted to, fly anywhere, be able to load any object in the world anywhere in the world, etc. Again, I think longer term as tech is increasing so rapidly, a lot of these problems will go away and having a seamless world with no instancing, ships and flying mounts, etc. will pay off.
I will apolgize for all of the above and the buck stops here. I won't, however, apologize for the team: they worked their asses off and continue to and truly believe in the game (as do I). That said, while I apologize for the mistakes, some of which we made and some of which were out of our hands, we also got the opportunity to make a very ambitious game, the game of our dreams, and were a start-up company that got a 30M+ budget, which is basically unheard of. So while VG does indeed have some issues, I know a lot of people are having fun with it, and a lot more will have fun with it in the future and call it a home. I am also proud to have been part of such an awesome team and to have been able to launch a second MMOG (not something a lot of people can say they have done). So, again, I do apologize for the shortcomings, but am also proud of the game and its potential, and am confident that while it is a successful game now (certainly not a WoW, but not a D&D online either) it will gain momentum as tech catches up, people tire of BC, etc. And also as we through both expansions and the live team add more really cool features to the game over the next year.
Also things like teleporters, experience rates, better LFG tools, etc. are all being looked at and you will see changes soon. I don't have the details yet, but we are listening and the game will get better and the areas where we messed up (large world, but too hard to find a group, etc.) will be addressed. - Brad McQuaid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok point #1 Is LoTRO a success? Well it seems a fact that VG had a budget of 30 million + as Brad states above. Last I heard LoTRO's budget was less then that. (If you have a link to prove me wrong I will of course concede this point. So if LoTRO has 500K subscriptions after a year (having less debt to start with) it would be considered in Brads own words "very profitable" ( He states a success would be 200-300k subs). I use Brads words because I assume as a recent MMO Developer he has some understanding rather then just comparing LoTRO's success to weither it kills WoW or not.
Unfortunately we don't know what LoTRO subscriptions are currently at (if someone does please link it
) All we have is the 172K boxes sold for the first 9 weeks in NA. A number that no one here seems to be able to actually prove is accurate. (and few disagree though its quoted as fact) with 3 more quarters to grow on and the rest of the worlds numbers as well as NA digital downloads that have not been counted AFAIK. I do not find it impoossible to believe LoTRO could make the 500K mark in a years time and thus be "very profitable" Time will tell, I can wait 
However I figure that is not what AS wants to hear so I will concede with its IP yes LoTRO could be doing better, but that does not really mean its a failure or just average just yet.
As to point #2 many posters here have stated that the LoTRO fanbois spin the numbers but that their own posts are accurate and fact filled. Thus the VG sold 200k-250K boxes in its first month vs LoTRO only sold 172k in 9 weeks. (90% of all statistics are made up by 10% of the poulation on a whim or to win a debate 98% of the time
Its a joke!)
Anway back to the point, if 200K+ boxes were sold in the first month why are the subscriber numbers as told by Brad himself (The master of spin
) during what would still be the free trial lower then 200K. Sure I can see a few people maybe being busy and putting off installing but 50K?? Lets also add that the 150K Brad mentions may well also have been buddy key subs thus no boxes sold . I remember seeing mentioned that SOE stated VG sells for the first 3 months were only 200K. (Though in truth I haven't bothered to track it down so I might be wrong feel free to prove/disprove it) Obviously if only 200K were sold in the first 3 months, then 200K weren't all sold in the first month with no further sells afterward.
Last of all in closing for any that are still with me, standards of success are different in many peoples eyes. So I have a question. Who here views AO by funcom a success? It been going for what 4-5 years, has a number of expansions, the companies made enough of a profit to stay in business and indeed to develop a second MMO (AoC) So success, failuire, average?
No Really so now everyone playing LoTRO is a poor misguided child? Ah and I bet your here to save us from the evil that is Turbine?
Because of course large free expansion like oh say what EQ2/SOE did with the return of Neriak is a sign of Despiration. Yes , yes I can see how we are soo wrong we should all be forced to pay another 40 dollars for a expansion that basically gives almost nothing but one character class (the deathknight) which is only playable for what 12 levels? (oh yeah huge content add there) Like the Good people at Blizzard are doing??
I may not agree with Agent Smith but at least he does try and put forth a reasoned debate. You Gules are just a hating troll whose probably upset because your gold farming account was permaband for botting.
Honestly, I wasn't trying to say whether LotRO was a success or not, as I said earlier in this thread only turbine can make that assessment. I even said turbine seems responsible in matters of business so I would imagine they can make money where others couldn't as evidenced by DDO. I was more measuring the hype and claims of Turbine and fans against the reported number, and also against other things people have brought up in this thread like the 22 servers or the VG first month sales). Clearly LoTRO cost less than VG (as Turbine used their own engine, same on for DDO which is a savings of 3 to 5 mill over developing on from scratch and they re-used a number of assets as well) which was on the high end of typical. Nevertheless, it is hard to see how LotRO could have cost less than 20 million given it is an IP licensed game. My point in this thread is that whatever the facts are, 172k NA boxes sold in the first quarter after launch is not a big raving success, nowhere near WoW type success (which alot of people including Turbine have claimed/projected), and given the circumstances it could even be considered not so good. of course, if that number is bogus than that statement is meaningless but if we look at what an LotRO proponent has said, 22 servers worldwide, we can easily say it is unlikely the game has more subs that an average success MMO would have so even if GS is unreliable the number does seem to fit with the server count.
I am not claiming LotRO is a failure - not in the least. I just think that there are several tidbits (the GS number, the server count, the lack of proclamation from Turbine at hitting notable sub milestones, etc) that indicate the game is not what so many fans and the general hype suggest it is, a type raving massive success - it seems average if anything.
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
going to buy my lotro copy today!
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
First off, the part about the free expensions and game time was simply a retort to Jackdog's claim the EQ2 is desperate because they're trying to move disenfranchised Vanguard people over to the game. Just a point that free time and free stuff don't mean jack in that context.As for Turbine? Nothing really personal- they just suck, from the CEO right down to the janitor. They took the two greatest opportunities ever given any company- the DnD universe and Middle-Earth- and turned out the two worst, kiddieland, dumbed down POS games ever conceived. So yeah- I hate them. I hope the go bankrupt and the same day their server farm explodes into 5 million pieces. It's a crap company staffed by lying, scumsucking devs and PR spin doctors that will tell you one thing while actively doing another. I repeat- they suck, and make SOE look like saints. I know I can't effect them in any way, and never will, but yeah- I feel better having a place to vent after the way they stabbed everyone in the back with the piece of Candyland crap they call LOTRO.
Bite me, Turbine.
172K boxes sold in 9 weeks in one market segment. How many were sold in the rest of the world? How many have been sold since?
What constitutes a medium server population, 10 players, 1000 players, 100, 000 players. Medium hmmm a bit vague. Tweak a constant on the server and medium becomes small becomes large and all with the same number logged in. Smoke and mirrors , dog and pony, now you see it now you don't. You and I both know the only really server witha a decent population is on Antonia Bayle. The rest are just there. Been that way since a month after launch.
You saying that a medium definiton on AB is correct and true but the medium definition on other servers are not correct? (If one doesn't find the screenshoot it showed all but one server on medium that ofcourse including Antonia Bayle.)
Lotro 22 servers between Europe and N America all with decent populations.
They have?
www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/140129
thanks for playing Vanguard....SOE would like to offer you a FREE copy of EQ2 including the first 3 expansions and first 3 adventure packs...and play for free until 11:59PM September 15th 2007"
Sort of screams desperation doesn't it?
I have seen some SOE advertising for the fan faire I have not seen any advertising for EQ2. Not even a campaign after that offer that you quoted from.
You are using the offer from SOE regarding EQ2 to former players of VG as a sign of desperacy. Then what is it when Turbine despite the massive campaigns about LOTR release. They do this kind of things and offerings that would be a quite a big scream of desperation.
"You'll get an extra 30 days of FREE game time in addition to the 30 days of FREE game time you receive with your purchase of the game - that's a total of 60 days of FREE game time."
"For every friend that buys the retail edition of the game, registers a retail product key at myaccount.turbine.com, and subscribes to the game, you'll get a referral credit that can be redeemed for 30 days of FREE game time that can be added to your subscription to that game! If you're already a Lifetime Member we'll issue you a 30 day game card key to give to a friend who is a game subscriber."
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
The very validity of the 172k is indeed paramount to this argument. If it is fabricated (which it is), then I can just as well throw out a 500k number. Let's discuss whether 500k is good or not? Oh, but you are fixated on THAT number. Why not 50k?
As for the financial reports...Agent Smith, you should really look at the records, the supplimental filings (the .pdfs). It lists the PC sales quite plainly. This can only be PC sales (not the corporate jet). Previous quarters in which no or low profile PC titles shipped indicate sales in the 100k range. The fact is $10 million in sales for Q2 by and large LOTRO sales. Midway HAS to report other sales, if only in a good-faith effort to keep its shareholders informed. The 172k number is clearly unsubstantiated and arguing whether it is a good number or not is like arguing whether, just for fun, the earth being flat is good or bad (even though we know it's round). Your foundational premise is wrong, thus discussing it is foolish.
_____________________________
Currently Playing: LOTRO; DDO
Played: AC2, AO, Auto Assault, CoX, DAoC, DDO, Earth&Beyond, EQ1, EQ2, EVE, Fallen Earth, Jumpgate, Roma Victor, Second Life, SWG, V:SoH, WoW, World War II Online.
Games I'm watching: Infinity: The Quest for Earth, Force of Arms.
Find the Truth: http://www.factcheck.org/
The financials really do not provide any info we can draw numbers from - there is no way to tell where thier revenue came from or anything of the sort. As for the number, in spirit I can see your point but let me 'argue' with you in this way...
Ah, 500k boxes sold in the first quarter in NA - that would be pretty good but I have to question if that is accurate because the source is kind of unreliable.
That is a valid response to a 'questionable' number. Aside from that, it is valid to look at the GS number and take into account oher things to see if they go together. The financials are a good example, had they shown a really low number it would tend to say that sales couldn't have been very good, as it is they show a number that is unclear at best because companies get revenue from all sorts of products not just those released in that period. The number of servers is a good indicator, as I mentioned above it is unlikely they have 10k accounts per server but even if we assume they do 22 servers times 10k accounts per server is only 200k subs which is nowhere near what would be necessary for LotRO to meet the hype and hyperbole hear and elsewhere.
In the end I can agree on things being more assumptive that interpretaive and I will acknowledge that the GS number is not the given fact that it might have seemed to be at first (allthough I remain ssuspect but tending to accept it until I have evidence otherwise). That being said, I should think those on the other side can acknowledge that there is little to no evidence that LotRO is on its way to a million subs or WOW type success and chime down the retorect accordingly as, if anything, it seems LotRO is likely to be a moderate to average success at this point based on some reported numbers and server count and the fact that Turbine would certainly be likely to brag about 500k subs or more (even 300k would be quite marketable to announce).
--------------------------------
Achiever 60.00%, Socializer 53.00%, Killer 47.00%, Explorer 40.00%
Intel Core i7 Quad, Intel X58 SLi, 6G Corsair XMS DDR3, Intel X-25 SSD, 3 WD Velociraptor SATA SuperTrak SAS EX8650 Array, OCZ 1250W PS, GTX 295, xFi, 32" 1080p LCD
Umm... every single expansion for Lineage 2 - "Prelude", 5 Chronicles and now "Interlude" - all significant additions in terms of content - has been released for free. Never have charged a penny over the normal subscription fee for them. Would you say NC Soft are desperate for business in that game? I really hope you say no, or at least "I'm not real familiar with Lineage 2".
Also, let's put this in perspective, shall we? First, sure initial box sales are a big thing, but it's the on-going subscriptions, beyond that first included 30 days, that give a game longevity - as long as they have enough monthly subscriptions generating enough revenue to continue supporting the game, it's a success enough to justify keeping it going. As AgtSmith stated very well - only Turbine can determine if it's a success or not. All signs seem to indicate that it is.
And it really doesn't take as many subscriptions to break even, or even do well, as some people may believe. I don't remember where I read it, or if it holds true in this case, but I remember reading that if a company can maintain at least 75-100k active, paying monthly subscriptions, they're usually doing well enough to cover the costs of keeping the game going. With LoTRO at $14.99/mnth , and not accounting for anything other than monthly subscriptions, that would be between $1,124,250 - $1,499,000 per month in recurring membership income - and then you can multiply that out over 12 months. That's nothing to sneeze at. I'd hardly call that a "failure".
I'm not about to make any absolute statements (especially not in *this* thread lol), but I'd be surprised if they don't at least have somewhere in that 75-100k range. This is why the whole idea that you have to have "WoW-like numbers" to be truly successful is so mistaken. You don't need nearly WoW's numbers to be doing well on a monthly subscription rate.
It's a bit, umm... curious... the amount of venom you have toward Turbine, Gules. You'd think they kidnapped your children, stole your wife and burned down your house with the hatred you seem to hold toward them. I'm sure you realize that your opinion here, nor on your website, really doesn't affect them in the least. But I suppose if it helps you feel better to let the world know you feel betrayed by a video game... more power to ya.
First off, the part about the free expensions and game time was simply a retort to Jackdog's claim the EQ2 is desperate because they're trying to move disenfranchised Vanguard people over to the game. Just a point that free time and free stuff don't mean jack in that context.As for Turbine? Nothing really personal- they just suck, from the CEO right down to the janitor. They took the two greatest opportunities ever given any company- the DnD universe and Middle-Earth- and turned out the two worst, kiddieland, dumbed down POS games ever conceived. So yeah- I hate them. I hope the go bankrupt and the same day their server farm explodes into 5 million pieces. It's a crap company staffed by lying, scumsucking devs and PR spin doctors that will tell you one thing while actively doing another. I repeat- they suck, and make SOE look like saints. I know I can't effect them in any way, and never will, but yeah- I feel better having a place to vent after the way they stabbed everyone in the back with the piece of Candyland crap they call LOTRO.
Okay, and with that I would suggest you remove phrases like "stabbed everyone in the back" and replace it with "stabbed me in the back" - it's still meters thick on the melodrama, but at least you're only speaking for yourself, which is the only person you really should presume to speak for anyway.
Secondly, that they turned DnD and LoTRO into anything is entirely subjective. No matter how strongly you feel about it, it's your opinion and, again, you should only speak for yourself. And if you believe your views somehow represent everyone else's, or are the only ones that "matter", you are seriously delusional.
So, no one's saying you have to like anything Turbine does, or the company itself, but at least have enough of a grasp on reality to acknowledge that your point-of-view is not equal to or greater than anyone else's.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
http://img364.imageshack.us/img364/1467/eqserversha9.jpg
Here`s the EQ2 servers at about 1:26AM EST... i don't think EQ2 is in danger at all.
eqnext.wikia.com
Why would EQ2 be in danger???
Even EQ1, Star wars Galaxies , Van Guard and The Matrix Online are still up and running.
Playing: World of Warcraft.
Played: Lord of the Rings Online, Starwars Galaxies.
Tried: Starwars the Old Republic, Everquest 2, Guild Wars, Vanguard, Age of Conan, Aion.
Why would EQ2 be in danger???
Because Jackdogs guild almost completely left EQ2.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
At the risk of getting myself reported for going off topic I will reply to this. This horse is dead and the thread long ago lost any resemblence to a rational discussion anyway. Should be locked imho
quick question. What comprises medium and heavy? Is 10 players medium and 100 heavy, or 100 medium and 500 heavy or 500 medium and 1000 heavy. Answer is only SOE knows and they can make light, medium and heavy whatever they need to at the time and I can guarantee you will never know what the true numbers are unless you are a SOE programmer or a SOE executive.
I remember when Vanguard went from closed beta to open beta they changed the system to the light, medium, and heavy system. I wish all game s would use DAoC's system to where it showed exact numbers. EQII will never die though, it will never be more than a second string player either though. I played it from beta to last November on AB, the server was never what you would call "packed" even in the best of times. Good thing is you never had to worry about lag.
Oh and Orphes we still have have 17 left in our EQII branch, and about 60 over in WoW. LoTRO is 47 mains as of this morning, about 30 of which were ex EQII, and maybe 8 are from our WoW group. For some reason the WoW people did not like LoTRO as much as the EQII people did. Of course our WoW'ers are hard core raiders and the EQII people are/were more casual.
Mostof our WoW players are drooling over WAR and some are still anticipating AoC ( myself included).
I miss DAoC
At the risk of getting myself reported for going off topic I will reply to this.
quick question. What comprises medium and heavy? Is 10 players medium and 100 heavy, or 100 medium and 500 heavy or 500 medium and 1000 heavy. Answer is only SOE knows and they can make light, medium and heavy whatever they need to at the time and I can guarantee you will never know what the true numbers are unless you are a SOE programmer or a SOE executive.
I remember when Vanguard went from closed beta to open beta they changed the system to the light, medium, and heavy system. I wish all game s would use DAoC's system to where it showed exact numbers. EQII will never die though, it will never be more than a second string player either though. I played it from beta to last November on AB, the server was never what you would call "packed" even in the best of times. Good thing is you never had to worry about lag.
Oh and Orphes we still have have 17 left in our EQII branch, and about 60 over in WoW. LoTRO is 47 mains as of this morning, about 30 of which were ex EQII, and maybe 8 are from our WoW group. For some reason the WoW people did not like LoTRO as much as the EQII people did. Of course our WoW'ers are hard core raiders and the EQII people are/were more casual.
Mostof our WoW players are drooling over WAR and some are still anticipating AoC ( myself included).
Thougth you was more profound then that, 10/100 low/medium. Regardin VG did they change the name of their status to lw/medium/heavy or did they change the definition.
Anyway regarding VG low<1000, medium>1000, high>2000.
Dont know if the definition is same for EQ2 but 940 is stated as medium in EQ now. That figure is not counting anyone with anonymous flag on.
But there is no reason to doubt that the medium/high flag for server is set to show representative logged in population for the servers to what the servers can hold. Not to any profund as 10 or 100 people to make it medium.
But then again maybe they mix with /who also... Nah.
------
So what this say If one don't try to make things up like SOE is fiddling with the online population definition. It is not saying that EQ2 has more subscribers nor is it saying LOTR has more subscribers that is not the issue with this sidetrack. It is an argument against stating that EQ2 does not have a good population, a healthy one. It is also in that matter an arguement against saying that SOE is panicing because EQ2 population is or has drastically dropped now.
It is saying that at the moment EQ2 is doing good.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
Unless you are a SOE employee you are just speculating Orphes. And they did change from solid number to the low/medium/high system about a week after the "open" beta began. Any closed beta tester knows that. As far as why, it is sales psychology. Who wants to play a unpopular game, no one likes a loser. Also they probably want the population to even out on the less populated servers. AB has always been EQII's most popular server.
EQIi is not dying by any means but it sure isn't thriving either. SOE should shut Vanguard down completly and give all of it's players a years free sub to EQII with the stipulation they all go to one server other than AB. Alternativly merge all of EQII's servers down to three or four.
I miss DAoC
Unless you are a SOE employee you are just speculating Orphes. And they did change from solid number to the low/medium/high system about a week after the "open" beta began. Any closed beta tester knows that. As far as why, it is sales psychology. Who wants to play a unpopular game, no one likes a loser. Also they probably want the population to even out on the less populated servers. AB has always been EQII's most popular server.
EQIi is not dying by any means but it sure isn't thriving either. SOE should shut Vanguard down completly and give all of it's players a years free sub to EQII with the stipulation they all go to one server other than AB. Alternativly merge all of EQII's servers down to three or four.
No I'm not speculating /who all count 1 10, /who all vount 11 20 and doing a manually search for classes at 70 shows that figures. That is not speculating you are speculating that SOE is fiddling with the definition.
940+ (recalculating that figure is wrong) people on medium in EQ2 is not speculating. The definition on VG low<1000/medium>1000/high>2000 is not speculating.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"