It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
My questions strictly ask the previous poster to provide his facts is all. Thanks
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
It's QUALITY over QUANTITY. Seriously. Why would LotRO want to supersize it's McWOW population? Just wondering...
It doesn't want to. It's the last straw left to attack LOTRO, actually.
DB
{ Mod Edit }
Wrong, if you would have read the thread you would have saw this quote:
"I think the goal [for LOTRO] would be over a million subscribers in the west," said Solari, speaking at the COG LiVE event in Warwick, UK, yesterday. "World of Warcraft is such a benchmark now, but if something's going to do it it's going to be a Lord of the Rings brand that lets people play in that environment and experience that content. It's got to have probably the best chance of competing with it."
Please DB, enlighten us "trolls"... just because we have negative things to say about the game doesn't make our points any less valuable than yours. This was a debate about population and success... not whether or not it's a critically-acclaimed game.
I agree. I felt we were all having a VERY good conversation. Too many derails due to people believing we wish to attack the game.
It has nothing to do with that, but what would things have been like if
1. LOTRO had a population even a 1/4 of WoW
2. With how LOTRO is such a huge IP, why does it NOT take more scrips from WoW
3. If people feel Turbine is such a success, and state it as such, where is the proof that Turbine is such a success?
Logicbox9, that is an interesting quote you have there as well. And in all respects, LOTRO should have been THE game to topple WoW, or at least take a million or more.
WAR on the other hand may be that game, and I still think the whole reason revolves around PvP..
If people could have played the evil side in LOTRO, do you think the scrips would have been larger? If some type of PvP existed, do you think it could have done...better?
It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
My questions strictly ask the previous poster to provide his facts is all. Thanks
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
Hope you understand my position.
S
Your position is fine, and well-said. However, even though I no longer play the game... I still have played quite a bit of it, even got a Minstrel to 50. I come on the boards and debate things, thats what these are for. See that little flaming paper icon next to the thread topic, it's because it's a hot issue and people WANT to discuss it.
Also, I'm not quite sure you understand what is meant by the character models being "better" in DX10... in reality, without an entire graphics overhaul... nothing can make those models not look like 10-inch-waisted Ken dolls with body suits. DX10 or DX9, they still look terrible imo...
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
****************************** Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
My questions strictly ask the previous poster to provide his facts is all. Thanks
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
Hope you understand my position.
S
Your position is fine, and well-said. However, even though I no longer play the game... I still have played quite a bit of it, even got a Minstrel to 50. I come on the boards and debate things, thats what these are for. See that little flaming paper icon next to the thread topic, it's because it's a hot issue and people WANT to discuss it.
Also, I'm not quite sure you understand what is meant by the character models being "better" in DX10... in reality, without an entire graphics overhaul... nothing can make those models not look like 10-inch-waisted Ken dolls with body suits. DX10 or DX9, they still look terrible imo...
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
Those areas mean nothing to someone who didn't read the books and only saw the movies... and believe it or not, there are probably millions of people who were introduced to the awesomeness of Tolkien's work because of the movies. They didn't need to put everything in at launch, but it would have been BETTER for them to add something memorable.
Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
Those areas mean nothing to someone who didn't read the books and only saw the movies... and believe it or not, there are probably millions of people who were introduced to the awesomeness of Tolkien's work because of the movies. They didn't need to put everything in at launch, but it would have been BETTER for them to add something memorable.
Ummm...anyone who has seen the movie, will know of the Shire, Bree and weathertop just as much as any other place. It's not like I picked Tom Bombadil or the Old Forest, or something that wasn't even in the movies. The shire, bree and weathertop got plenty of face time in the movies.
****************************** Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
This is where the main issue lies. Just how many scrips are there. Many people come and complain of low population servers (which other players do say is wrong), but if say only 2 or 3 servers are busy, while others are dead, this could be a low pop for sure. Someone has stated between 1000-2000 people searchable on the server during prime time...is this enough to keep the game afloat?
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Never going to stop, so it is an accepted norm. Until someone steals the spotlight, it will always be this way. Now as to attaining it, Turbine needs to see what is being done in other MMO's. LOTRO has a lot of "clone" mentality, but they need to take it further...models, UI, gameplay...then they maybe could reach a larger audience.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
S
I wish LOTRO was better myself. I love the license, and I wanted to like Turbines efforts. Too many issues still exists for it and until Turbine makes major changes, it will stay niche, and even lose to upcoming games..
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
****************************** Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
S
Not the point. We are discussing the fact that Funcom in ONE MONTH had 4 times to amount of sales on NPD compared to LOTRO for a whole year. What does that say about the market?
Why has LOTRO not taken off and become a major success if it is doing so well itself?
As to LOTRO beating AoC? Sure, thanks to major flub ups by Funcom. But, LOTRO will NOT do well when WAR releases.
I still think WAR will decide the market for sure. If WoW loses scrips (which i believe it will), LOTRO will also lose. Xfire numbers for LOTRO, EQ2, Vanguard all took a dive when AoC was released. Those numbers have gone up again...
But, what will happen when WAR is out? This should be interesting.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
This imbalance of the amount of people happens in every game. Horde almost always wins in WoW...from what I hear in WAR, destruction outnumbers order 2:1. The evil, bad whatever side always has more. A PVP mentality of somesort.
****************************** Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
But, lets say you have 200k scrips, and say 50% quit due to PvP changes.
Yet, we have a market of 800k players who wanted some form of PvP (I am betting more, which will show when WAR releases) based on AoC's sales.
Lets say they could bring in 50% of those to replace the 50% lost.
100k lost (which could all be lifetimers, their largest fans, i.e: Turbines dead weight that pays nothing), 400k gained (who may either pay monthly or lifetime again...).
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
This imbalance of the amount of people happens in every game. Horde almost always wins in WoW...from what I hear in WAR, destruction outnumbers order 2:1. The evil, bad whatever side always has more. A PVP mentality of somesort.
But, it varies per server. Alliance can be larger on another server, so no matter what, one side on some server is going to suit your style.
Reason for WAR's queue system. If you choose Evil on one server, you also cannot play good on that same server, preserving balance. As well, each server keeps the Evil/Good in check with balances to prevent the Alliance Horde issue (i.e: a "Better" implemented PvP).
WAR's PvP will make or break the PvP question is all I am saying now.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
I think you should try it again. Its fun, but it takes time to master. I think if more people gave it a chance they would actually enjoy it. Saying that, it will never appeal to the people who want to fight one on one. That doesn't appeal to me, so its never been an issue
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
This is where the main issue lies. Just how many scrips are there. Many people come and complain of low population servers (which other players do say is wrong), but if say only 2 or 3 servers are busy, while others are dead, this could be a low pop for sure. Someone has stated between 1000-2000 people searchable on the server during prime time...is this enough to keep the game afloat?
Listen mate, if SWG is still going and EQ1 is still going, LotRo is going to keep going. IMHO, you and several others are a little bit sensationalist on this point. My server pop is fine (Nimrodel), its not overflowing, but there is definitely a decent population.
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Never going to stop, so it is an accepted norm. Until someone steals the spotlight, it will always be this way. Now as to attaining it, Turbine needs to see what is being done in other MMO's. LOTRO has a lot of "clone" mentality, but they need to take it further...models, UI, gameplay...then they maybe could reach a larger audience.
I can agree with that, to an extent. Some of your points dont make sense. An example would be models. WoW models are nothiing special. Again, I really don't think you have enough experience of LotRo to critique the gameplay. There have been statements from you in the past that would indicate that your experience of the game is EXTREMELY limited.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
S
I wish LOTRO was better myself. I love the license, and I wanted to like Turbines efforts. Too many issues still exists for it and until Turbine makes major changes, it will stay niche, and even lose to upcoming games..
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
S
Not the point. We are discussing the fact that Funcom in ONE MONTH had 4 times to amount of sales on NPD compared to LOTRO for a whole year. What does that say about the market?
Why has LOTRO not taken off and become a major success if it is doing so well itself?
As to LOTRO beating AoC? Sure, thanks to major flub ups by Funcom. But, LOTRO will NOT do well when WAR releases.
I still think WAR will decide the market for sure. If WoW loses scrips (which i believe it will), LOTRO will also lose. Xfire numbers for LOTRO, EQ2, Vanguard all took a dive when AoC was released. Those numbers have gone up again...
But, what will happen when WAR is out? This should be interesting.
Again, you go to great ends to contradict yourself. I'm on the WAR beta and doubtless, some people will leave LotRo for WAR. But by your OWN logic, most LotRo fans are hardly going to be enticed by a PvP game. I asked my kin the other night (150 Active, there were about 35 online) if any of them would be leaving for WAR. Not all of them have tried it but all of them said that even though they may try WAR, they wouldn't be leaving LotRo.
I think you underestimate the fact that many people have invested a great deal of time in LotRo and aren't just going to jump ship because there is a new game to play. We all like MMOs, it is not unreasonable to try a new game for a couple of weeks at launch. I tried AoC, that didn't mean I ever had any intention of leaving LotRo.
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
But, lets say you have 200k scrips, and say 50% quit due to PvP changes.
Yet, we have a market of 800k players who wanted some form of PvP (I am betting more, which will show when WAR releases) based on AoC's sales.
Lets say they could bring in 50% of those to replace the 50% lost.
100k lost (which could all be lifetimers, their largest fans, i.e: Turbines dead weight that pays nothing), 400k gained (who may either pay monthly or lifetime again...).
What an interesting way to look at it...eh?
Still doesn't answer this... Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already?They didn't want a PVP game they wanted to make a PVE game. I agree there would be more people playing it maybe, but I for one probably would not be. That is why I like this game, it fits me perfectly, and many others it seems. It also doesn't fit other peoples playstyle and that is fine too.
****************************** Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
I can agree with that, to an extent. Some of your points dont make sense. An example would be models. WoW models are nothiing special. Again, I really don't think you have enough experience of LotRo to critique the gameplay. There have been statements from you in the past that would indicate that your experience of the game is EXTREMELY limited.
This is an interesting comment when not much earlier I stated my overall experience with the game. It would show you as being incorrect. The only thing I have not done in LOTRO is hit max level. Reason? I kept being pulled away by games that were more fun, entertaining and better to look at is all.
Someone does not need to get to max level to know if a game is any good. 40 levels was enough to know that the game was not working. This does not mean it will not in the future if changes are made.
DDO for example really has made headway. The playability and performance of that game has increased 10 fold. So, I think we need to state upfront, it is not that I do not have confidence in Turbine either..
Contrary to the constant attitudes I get here, I for one would like to see LOTRO become something worth playing. It is why I bother to even come here.
I always read posts to gather the information on if something has happened or changed. When I see all the comments of how much each book improved the game, I went back and tried it for myself. When I saw no change, I left.
The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most. LOTRO at this point does not have enough content to keep long term players. People will only play the same thing over before being done. This starts to dry up between level 35-45 in LOTRO.
PvP would change that. As to your comment on PvMp. It was NOT fun to me, and I have felt WoW and Guild Wars have much better PvP implemntations, and WAR will be if not as good, better.
I never felt LOTRO was a dud either sales wise. It is not as good as it could be. It should really have more. And maybe, as I have said over and over...MoM may fix that.
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
Of note...LOTRO will launch in Asia also. But, as has been proven many times over, Asian audiences LOVE PvP based games, and this could hurt LOTRO in the long run.
Age of Conan is not only catering to Asian audiences, but already have a Russian version being worked on. If Funcom could only pull their heads out long enough to fix their issues, they could be a major success there...
Why?
PVP...
DDO though is looking to do a relaunch. If the work they are doing now comes through and makes the game more fun, then DDO could finally become profitable for them.
All of this is just a waiting game for now, as I still feel WAR may prove to developers what players want (please note, I may mention WAR a lot, but I am not an advocate or a fanboy, just feel it may answer a lot of questions on PvP sales viability)
I can agree with that, to an extent. Some of your points dont make sense. An example would be models. WoW models are nothiing special. Again, I really don't think you have enough experience of LotRo to critique the gameplay. There have been statements from you in the past that would indicate that your experience of the game is EXTREMELY limited.
This is an interesting comment when not much earlier I stated my overall experience with the game. It would show you as being incorrect. The only thing I have not done in LOTRO is hit max level. Reason? I kept being pulled away by games that were more fun, entertaining and better to look at is all.
Someone does not need to get to max level to know if a game is any good. 40 levels was enough to know that the game was not working. This does not mean it will not in the future if changes are made.
DDO for example really has made headway. The playability and performance of that game has increased 10 fold. So, I think we need to state upfront, it is not that I do not have confidence in Turbine either..
Contrary to the constant attitudes I get here, I for one would like to see LOTRO become something worth playing. It is why I bother to even come here.
I always read posts to gather the information on if something has happened or changed. When I see all the comments of how much each book improved the game, I went back and tried it for myself. When I saw no change, I left.
The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most. LOTRO at this point does not have enough content to keep long term players. People will only play the same thing over before being done. This starts to dry up between level 35-45 in LOTRO.
PvP would change that. As to your comment on PvMp. It was NOT fun to me, and I have felt WoW and Guild Wars have much better PvP implemntations, and WAR will be if not as good, better.
I never felt LOTRO was a dud either sales wise. It is not as good as it could be. It should really have more. And maybe, as I have said over and over...MoM may fix that.
See, I knew sooner or later you'd make a statement that proves that you're a guy who is basically here to tear the game down. Because at heart, you just don't like it. It's statements like the one I have highlighted that proves you're dishonest and you're also comitted to stirring the pot on this forum as opposed to producing any kind of constructive debate.
First of all, you quite simply did not survey most LotRo players (200k people?). That's a lie and by association makes you a liar.
Secondly, I can refute your claim. Most of the people I play with, play for 20+ hours a week, so there, you're wrong on that front as well. I'll go further, many of them have been around since UO/EQ1, so they aren't casuals.
You aren't here to have objective debates, you're here to put LotRo down and you've been doing it for a long time. I've gone through your posts on this forum and it is always negativity concerning LotRo. You consistently accuse others of not producing facts but you are very prone to doing the same thing.
Again, I really don't understand what it is you are hoping to accomplish, except maybe to prove to yourself that GW is the most "hardcore", "complex" RPG ever made.
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
Yah, at the rate AoCs going my prediction will be correct. You see WAR will take SOME players from LotRo, it will take many more from AoC. They are similar games and having been on both betas (AoC and WAR) I can already tell you that WAR will have a solid launch. WAR is likely to do a lot of damage to AoC as there is no way it can be repaired in the next 2 weeks.
Lotro will continue to make its monthly cash and MoM will sell a decent amount of boxes. It will continue to do well. It will never be the best, conversely, it will never be the worst.
The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most.
First of all, you quite simply did not survey most LotRo players (200k people?). That's a lie and by association makes you a liar.
Secondly, I can refute your claim. Most of the people I play with, play for 20+ hours a week, so there, you're wrong on that front as well. I'll go further, many of them have been around since UO/EQ1, so they aren't casuals.
You've both wandered into a fuzzy area here.
Your personal experience of players playing 20+ hours a week is pretty meaningless, but so is Edge's "study" unless we can see some details. Precisely how did he conduct the study? Who was he conducting it for? What does he mean by "most" players and how did he measure their "love"?
I wouldn't go throwing around words like "liar" yet, but I would query the claim.
Yah, at the rate AoCs going my prediction will be correct. You see WAR will take SOME players from LotRo, it will take many more from AoC. They are similar games and having been on both betas (AoC and WAR) I can already tell you that WAR will have a solid launch. WAR is likely to do a lot of damage to AoC as there is no way it can be repaired in the next 2 weeks. Lotro will continue to make its monthly cash and MoM will sell a decent amount of boxes. It will continue to do well. It will never be the best, conversely, it will never be the worst.
Fair point. You're completely right that WAR is likely to snatch more AoC than LOTRO players. I didn't take that into account.
I'll definitely look in on Funcom's next public report.
Comments
It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
Hope you understand my position.
S
It doesn't want to. It's the last straw left to attack LOTRO, actually.
DB
{ Mod Edit }
Wrong, if you would have read the thread you would have saw this quote:
"I think the goal [for LOTRO] would be over a million subscribers in the west," said Solari, speaking at the COG LiVE event in Warwick, UK, yesterday. "World of Warcraft is such a benchmark now, but if something's going to do it it's going to be a Lord of the Rings brand that lets people play in that environment and experience that content. It's got to have probably the best chance of competing with it."
Please DB, enlighten us "trolls"... just because we have negative things to say about the game doesn't make our points any less valuable than yours. This was a debate about population and success... not whether or not it's a critically-acclaimed game.
I agree. I felt we were all having a VERY good conversation. Too many derails due to people believing we wish to attack the game.
It has nothing to do with that, but what would things have been like if
1. LOTRO had a population even a 1/4 of WoW
2. With how LOTRO is such a huge IP, why does it NOT take more scrips from WoW
3. If people feel Turbine is such a success, and state it as such, where is the proof that Turbine is such a success?
Logicbox9, that is an interesting quote you have there as well. And in all respects, LOTRO should have been THE game to topple WoW, or at least take a million or more.
WAR on the other hand may be that game, and I still think the whole reason revolves around PvP..
If people could have played the evil side in LOTRO, do you think the scrips would have been larger? If some type of PvP existed, do you think it could have done...better?
It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
Hope you understand my position.
S
Your position is fine, and well-said. However, even though I no longer play the game... I still have played quite a bit of it, even got a Minstrel to 50. I come on the boards and debate things, thats what these are for. See that little flaming paper icon next to the thread topic, it's because it's a hot issue and people WANT to discuss it.
Also, I'm not quite sure you understand what is meant by the character models being "better" in DX10... in reality, without an entire graphics overhaul... nothing can make those models not look like 10-inch-waisted Ken dolls with body suits. DX10 or DX9, they still look terrible imo...
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
******************************
Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
It's a commercial success, deal with it! It isnt WoW and never will be but it turns a good profit.
This is what we have been discussing through this thread. But, this is a blanket statement that you have not shown proof of. You make this statement as fact, but for this to happen, you should point to sources. How do YOU know it turns a good profit. How do you know it is a commercial success? According to the latest data (which I will gladly provide links for), Age of Conan was actually a larger success.
you CANNOT stand the fact that LotRo is even mildly successful.
I was throroughly disappointed in LOTRO, that is true, and still was the last time I tried to play, but, I could care less about that, and would prefer blanket statements of how much of a hit LOTRO is was backed up with actual facts.
Look at your image for example with "Failcom". To me this sounds like what you are blaming ME for.
I think YOU feel wronged by Funcom, so you need someone to take it out on is all. I would prefer the thread was not derailed with this is all.
You dont provide facts half the time but anywhoooo.
I couldn't care less about Failcom. I just think the Logo is funny. I played AoC for a few days and left. As any sentient human being can see, it isn't working out well for them. But again, I could care less.
My point, and it stands, is simply WHY you feel the need to consistently attack a game you have no interest in. I have NOTHING against anyone who doesn't like LotRo and I have nothing against negative commentary. I do however, question the motives of a guy who has made his feelings clear but remains here anyway.
For example, DX10.
You say you can't see the difference on the character models. Consequently, according to you, there is no difference. I can clearly see the difference. You tend to accept your opinion as gospel.
Hope you understand my position.
S
Your position is fine, and well-said. However, even though I no longer play the game... I still have played quite a bit of it, even got a Minstrel to 50. I come on the boards and debate things, thats what these are for. See that little flaming paper icon next to the thread topic, it's because it's a hot issue and people WANT to discuss it.
Also, I'm not quite sure you understand what is meant by the character models being "better" in DX10... in reality, without an entire graphics overhaul... nothing can make those models not look like 10-inch-waisted Ken dolls with body suits. DX10 or DX9, they still look terrible imo...
As for openedge's comment about whether or not the game would have been more successful had there been a proper PvP focus? How many units did AoC sell? Well, imagine a license like LoTR in a PvP setting... yeah, probably would have been huge. Turbine should have launched with moria or something, and not some unheard land that no one but the lore people would care about. It's like asking someone if they want to play an NBA basketball video game, and they are like "hell yeah I do!" and then saying "oh yeah, this isn't with NBA players or teams, it's NBA D-league players and teams... what's the problem? you don't want to play as the Reno Bighorns with some 20th round draft pick?"... people would throw it right into the garbage.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
S
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
Those areas mean nothing to someone who didn't read the books and only saw the movies... and believe it or not, there are probably millions of people who were introduced to the awesomeness of Tolkien's work because of the movies. They didn't need to put everything in at launch, but it would have been BETTER for them to add something memorable.
What...Bree, The shire, weathertop etc...are places people have never heard of? This game is pretty big as it is...Adding a bunch more space in the very beginning of the game would have been a bad idea. If theywent only as far as Moria maybe...but all the way through Mordor? The game thats size would have taken forever to come out and would have been very empty in terms of content.
I like the way they are doing it...in chunks. This gives them very many places to add in future expansions and also it is great to have places fleshed out. Even places we haven't seen or heard of much before. If they just mad a game that made a beeline to the end, it would be very restrictive. People would wonder why they couldn't explore more and why they are boxed in.
Those areas mean nothing to someone who didn't read the books and only saw the movies... and believe it or not, there are probably millions of people who were introduced to the awesomeness of Tolkien's work because of the movies. They didn't need to put everything in at launch, but it would have been BETTER for them to add something memorable.
Ummm...anyone who has seen the movie, will know of the Shire, Bree and weathertop just as much as any other place. It's not like I picked Tom Bombadil or the Old Forest, or something that wasn't even in the movies. The shire, bree and weathertop got plenty of face time in the movies.
******************************
Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
S
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
This is where the main issue lies. Just how many scrips are there. Many people come and complain of low population servers (which other players do say is wrong), but if say only 2 or 3 servers are busy, while others are dead, this could be a low pop for sure. Someone has stated between 1000-2000 people searchable on the server during prime time...is this enough to keep the game afloat?
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Never going to stop, so it is an accepted norm. Until someone steals the spotlight, it will always be this way. Now as to attaining it, Turbine needs to see what is being done in other MMO's. LOTRO has a lot of "clone" mentality, but they need to take it further...models, UI, gameplay...then they maybe could reach a larger audience.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
S
I wish LOTRO was better myself. I love the license, and I wanted to like Turbines efforts. Too many issues still exists for it and until Turbine makes major changes, it will stay niche, and even lose to upcoming games..
Maybe MoM will rethink the game...
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
******************************
Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
S
Not the point. We are discussing the fact that Funcom in ONE MONTH had 4 times to amount of sales on NPD compared to LOTRO for a whole year. What does that say about the market?
Why has LOTRO not taken off and become a major success if it is doing so well itself?
As to LOTRO beating AoC? Sure, thanks to major flub ups by Funcom. But, LOTRO will NOT do well when WAR releases.
I still think WAR will decide the market for sure. If WoW loses scrips (which i believe it will), LOTRO will also lose. Xfire numbers for LOTRO, EQ2, Vanguard all took a dive when AoC was released. Those numbers have gone up again...
But, what will happen when WAR is out? This should be interesting.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
This imbalance of the amount of people happens in every game. Horde almost always wins in WoW...from what I hear in WAR, destruction outnumbers order 2:1. The evil, bad whatever side always has more. A PVP mentality of somesort.
******************************
Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
But, lets say you have 200k scrips, and say 50% quit due to PvP changes.
Yet, we have a market of 800k players who wanted some form of PvP (I am betting more, which will show when WAR releases) based on AoC's sales.
Lets say they could bring in 50% of those to replace the 50% lost.
100k lost (which could all be lifetimers, their largest fans, i.e: Turbines dead weight that pays nothing), 400k gained (who may either pay monthly or lifetime again...).
What an interesting way to look at it...eh?
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
This imbalance of the amount of people happens in every game. Horde almost always wins in WoW...from what I hear in WAR, destruction outnumbers order 2:1. The evil, bad whatever side always has more. A PVP mentality of somesort.
But, it varies per server. Alliance can be larger on another server, so no matter what, one side on some server is going to suit your style.
Reason for WAR's queue system. If you choose Evil on one server, you also cannot play good on that same server, preserving balance. As well, each server keeps the Evil/Good in check with balances to prevent the Alliance Horde issue (i.e: a "Better" implemented PvP).
WAR's PvP will make or break the PvP question is all I am saying now.
No one is going to debate that, if it had been open PvP, it probably would have done better. Saying that. Many of the people who do play it and are sticking with it would not be playing it if it were open PvP. I for one HATE open PvP. It attracts the worst kind of people. LotRo's PvMP is structured. It doesn't appeal to the gankers and griefers.
The issue is not even Open PvP, but a better implemented PvP. Right off the bat, the evil side is unbalanced, and forces a gank like mentality to make any progress. Turbine has admitted to making evil weaker to start. No one likes unbalanced PvP. WoW, balanced (as much as possible) Lineage 2 has consequences for PvP, Guild Wars, built from the ground up as PvP, with "straight to PvP" play style (which has been announced for Aion - PvP from the start)
I think you should try it again. Its fun, but it takes time to master. I think if more people gave it a chance they would actually enjoy it. Saying that, it will never appeal to the people who want to fight one on one. That doesn't appeal to me, so its never been an issue
As for a commercial success. Lets say it has 250K subs. Thats $3.5 million gross every month. Thats successful. Is it WoW successful? No it isn't, but Ill wager that LotRo will do way better than Conan in the long run and that WAS an open PvP game.
This is where the main issue lies. Just how many scrips are there. Many people come and complain of low population servers (which other players do say is wrong), but if say only 2 or 3 servers are busy, while others are dead, this could be a low pop for sure. Someone has stated between 1000-2000 people searchable on the server during prime time...is this enough to keep the game afloat?
Listen mate, if SWG is still going and EQ1 is still going, LotRo is going to keep going. IMHO, you and several others are a little bit sensationalist on this point. My server pop is fine (Nimrodel), its not overflowing, but there is definitely a decent population.
The success of wow hinges on several factors, but the most significant one was timing. It was in the right place at the right time and it cleaned up. People should stop measuring other MMOs on the basis of WoW's success. Im sure Turbine would have liked that level of success, Im equally sure they knew they were not going to attain it.
Never going to stop, so it is an accepted norm. Until someone steals the spotlight, it will always be this way. Now as to attaining it, Turbine needs to see what is being done in other MMO's. LOTRO has a lot of "clone" mentality, but they need to take it further...models, UI, gameplay...then they maybe could reach a larger audience.
I can agree with that, to an extent. Some of your points dont make sense. An example would be models. WoW models are nothiing special. Again, I really don't think you have enough experience of LotRo to critique the gameplay. There have been statements from you in the past that would indicate that your experience of the game is EXTREMELY limited.
Is LotRo the best thing since sliced bread, hell no. But on my server at any rate, the community is good, there are always things to do, it is bug free and it is fun to experience the huge world that is only going to get larger.
Hell, I'd prefer a game like the original EQ or SWG, but that isnt forthcoming. WoW changed all that. MMOs truly are for the masses now so Ill take what I can get.
S
I wish LOTRO was better myself. I love the license, and I wanted to like Turbines efforts. Too many issues still exists for it and until Turbine makes major changes, it will stay niche, and even lose to upcoming games..
Maybe MoM will rethink the game...
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
The facts remain...why is LOTRO not as big of a hit as WoW, or even a 1/4 of a hit considering that the IP is such a loved commodity? Is it no PvP and no innovation?
Look at AoC selling 800k copies...just WOW!, that is incredible. What did it have? Innovation (combat even though an argued point is still unique compared to most MMO's besides DDO, which is another story) and promised PvP...which we know is not really there, but I think it was a selling point.
What did LOTRO do sales wise?
Well, according to NPD Charts, not enough to beat the Sims 2 in 2007.
The question is why, pure and simple. I bet quite a few points exists over why it has NOT done well..but, what are the posters opinions here?
That may be true but what good is 700K boxes when your game is tanking and your reputation as a developer is pretty much destroyed. LotRo will beat AoC in the long term financially IMHO.
AoC marketed to the LCD, they knew the mindless crowds of Britney worshippers would be easily enticed with T&A and decapitation (oh and lots of lies about features that AoC doesnt even have). It worked, but personally, that marketing and their subsequent arrogance has cost them their credibility and reputation. Any sales person worth his salt will tell you that the real money is in REPEAT business.
S
Not the point. We are discussing the fact that Funcom in ONE MONTH had 4 times to amount of sales on NPD compared to LOTRO for a whole year. What does that say about the market?
Why has LOTRO not taken off and become a major success if it is doing so well itself?
As to LOTRO beating AoC? Sure, thanks to major flub ups by Funcom. But, LOTRO will NOT do well when WAR releases.
I still think WAR will decide the market for sure. If WoW loses scrips (which i believe it will), LOTRO will also lose. Xfire numbers for LOTRO, EQ2, Vanguard all took a dive when AoC was released. Those numbers have gone up again...
But, what will happen when WAR is out? This should be interesting.
Again, you go to great ends to contradict yourself. I'm on the WAR beta and doubtless, some people will leave LotRo for WAR. But by your OWN logic, most LotRo fans are hardly going to be enticed by a PvP game. I asked my kin the other night (150 Active, there were about 35 online) if any of them would be leaving for WAR. Not all of them have tried it but all of them said that even though they may try WAR, they wouldn't be leaving LotRo.
I think you underestimate the fact that many people have invested a great deal of time in LotRo and aren't just going to jump ship because there is a new game to play. We all like MMOs, it is not unreasonable to try a new game for a couple of weeks at launch. I tried AoC, that didn't mean I ever had any intention of leaving LotRo.
This is a major point.
One argument has been that Turbine wanted to only reach a specific audience. I would beg to differ. That is like making a movie for 25% of the audience and all you would have to do is make one change to reach the other 75% (example is the Original X-Files movie where they made changes to the story to include people who had never watched the TV show, and boy did they sell some whopping tickets...new movie...well, that is another story)
Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already. What the other poster said is correct...if this game had open PVP there would be a good majority of people that currently play that would no longer. Look at the uproar in the official forums when they say that soemthing in PVMP might affect the PVE world outside of it.
But, lets say you have 200k scrips, and say 50% quit due to PvP changes.
Yet, we have a market of 800k players who wanted some form of PvP (I am betting more, which will show when WAR releases) based on AoC's sales.
Lets say they could bring in 50% of those to replace the 50% lost.
100k lost (which could all be lifetimers, their largest fans, i.e: Turbines dead weight that pays nothing), 400k gained (who may either pay monthly or lifetime again...).
What an interesting way to look at it...eh?
Still doesn't answer this... Don't you think that if that was something they WANTED to do they would have already? They didn't want a PVP game they wanted to make a PVE game. I agree there would be more people playing it maybe, but I for one probably would not be. That is why I like this game, it fits me perfectly, and many others it seems. It also doesn't fit other peoples playstyle and that is fine too.
******************************
Brandywine Global LFF chan "/joinchannel glff"
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
This is an interesting comment when not much earlier I stated my overall experience with the game. It would show you as being incorrect. The only thing I have not done in LOTRO is hit max level. Reason? I kept being pulled away by games that were more fun, entertaining and better to look at is all.
Someone does not need to get to max level to know if a game is any good. 40 levels was enough to know that the game was not working. This does not mean it will not in the future if changes are made.
DDO for example really has made headway. The playability and performance of that game has increased 10 fold. So, I think we need to state upfront, it is not that I do not have confidence in Turbine either..
Contrary to the constant attitudes I get here, I for one would like to see LOTRO become something worth playing. It is why I bother to even come here.
I always read posts to gather the information on if something has happened or changed. When I see all the comments of how much each book improved the game, I went back and tried it for myself. When I saw no change, I left.
The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most. LOTRO at this point does not have enough content to keep long term players. People will only play the same thing over before being done. This starts to dry up between level 35-45 in LOTRO.
PvP would change that. As to your comment on PvMp. It was NOT fun to me, and I have felt WoW and Guild Wars have much better PvP implemntations, and WAR will be if not as good, better.
I never felt LOTRO was a dud either sales wise. It is not as good as it could be. It should really have more. And maybe, as I have said over and over...MoM may fix that.
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
Of note...LOTRO will launch in Asia also. But, as has been proven many times over, Asian audiences LOVE PvP based games, and this could hurt LOTRO in the long run.
Age of Conan is not only catering to Asian audiences, but already have a Russian version being worked on. If Funcom could only pull their heads out long enough to fix their issues, they could be a major success there...
Why?
PVP...
DDO though is looking to do a relaunch. If the work they are doing now comes through and makes the game more fun, then DDO could finally become profitable for them.
All of this is just a waiting game for now, as I still feel WAR may prove to developers what players want (please note, I may mention WAR a lot, but I am not an advocate or a fanboy, just feel it may answer a lot of questions on PvP sales viability)
Cheers
This is an interesting comment when not much earlier I stated my overall experience with the game. It would show you as being incorrect. The only thing I have not done in LOTRO is hit max level. Reason? I kept being pulled away by games that were more fun, entertaining and better to look at is all.
Someone does not need to get to max level to know if a game is any good. 40 levels was enough to know that the game was not working. This does not mean it will not in the future if changes are made.
DDO for example really has made headway. The playability and performance of that game has increased 10 fold. So, I think we need to state upfront, it is not that I do not have confidence in Turbine either..
Contrary to the constant attitudes I get here, I for one would like to see LOTRO become something worth playing. It is why I bother to even come here.
I always read posts to gather the information on if something has happened or changed. When I see all the comments of how much each book improved the game, I went back and tried it for myself. When I saw no change, I left.
The content in LOTRO becomes something less than desirable, and weeds out those who like to game a lot. As I did a study a while back for most LOTRO players, and the average player who LOVED the game played 1-2 hours at most. LOTRO at this point does not have enough content to keep long term players. People will only play the same thing over before being done. This starts to dry up between level 35-45 in LOTRO.
PvP would change that. As to your comment on PvMp. It was NOT fun to me, and I have felt WoW and Guild Wars have much better PvP implemntations, and WAR will be if not as good, better.
I never felt LOTRO was a dud either sales wise. It is not as good as it could be. It should really have more. And maybe, as I have said over and over...MoM may fix that.
See, I knew sooner or later you'd make a statement that proves that you're a guy who is basically here to tear the game down. Because at heart, you just don't like it. It's statements like the one I have highlighted that proves you're dishonest and you're also comitted to stirring the pot on this forum as opposed to producing any kind of constructive debate.
First of all, you quite simply did not survey most LotRo players (200k people?). That's a lie and by association makes you a liar.
Secondly, I can refute your claim. Most of the people I play with, play for 20+ hours a week, so there, you're wrong on that front as well. I'll go further, many of them have been around since UO/EQ1, so they aren't casuals.
You aren't here to have objective debates, you're here to put LotRo down and you've been doing it for a long time. I've gone through your posts on this forum and it is always negativity concerning LotRo. You consistently accuse others of not producing facts but you are very prone to doing the same thing.
Again, I really don't understand what it is you are hoping to accomplish, except maybe to prove to yourself that GW is the most "hardcore", "complex" RPG ever made.
We must agree to disagree. Ill leave it at that.
S
That seems highly unlikely.
Unlike Turbine, Funcom have gone the route of full disclosure.
They sold 700k in the first month (source). They're up to 1.2 million now. (source). And, they haven't launched in Asia yet.
They currently have 415K active accounts = subscribers + players in their first month. (source). The most reliable data that we have would put LOTRO at about half that.
Funcom also has Anarchy Online in their pocket. That was a highly successful mmo that have kept them in business for many years.
Turbine have Dungeons and Dragons Online...
I haven't set foot inside AoC so I can't comment on game quality but available figures simply don't support your prediction.
Besides, AoC has assets that LOTRO lacks i.e. boobs, boobs, boobs and even more boobs. There's just nothing like boobs to keep you afloat.
Yah, at the rate AoCs going my prediction will be correct. You see WAR will take SOME players from LotRo, it will take many more from AoC. They are similar games and having been on both betas (AoC and WAR) I can already tell you that WAR will have a solid launch. WAR is likely to do a lot of damage to AoC as there is no way it can be repaired in the next 2 weeks.
Lotro will continue to make its monthly cash and MoM will sell a decent amount of boxes. It will continue to do well. It will never be the best, conversely, it will never be the worst.
S
First of all, you quite simply did not survey most LotRo players (200k people?). That's a lie and by association makes you a liar.
Secondly, I can refute your claim. Most of the people I play with, play for 20+ hours a week, so there, you're wrong on that front as well. I'll go further, many of them have been around since UO/EQ1, so they aren't casuals.
You've both wandered into a fuzzy area here.
Your personal experience of players playing 20+ hours a week is pretty meaningless, but so is Edge's "study" unless we can see some details. Precisely how did he conduct the study? Who was he conducting it for? What does he mean by "most" players and how did he measure their "love"?
I wouldn't go throwing around words like "liar" yet, but I would query the claim.
Fair point. You're completely right that WAR is likely to snatch more AoC than LOTRO players. I didn't take that into account.
I'll definitely look in on Funcom's next public report.