If you already purchased the expansions for that account, as a premium player, you will still have access to it.
Very true. MoM & SoM are your's forever no matter when you bought them.
Sorry, thought you were more worried about the first item (SoA) as that seems to be the biggest hanging point for players.
To be fair, that is the biggest pile of lemon in that whole deal. But if everyone who ever bought a Box of lotro could play the entirety of 1-50 content for free(many do not even reach highlevel, only playing around for months in the levelrange with different toons) turbine would have had to many freeloaders, forcing them to make other parts of the store more prevalent.
Personally im happy with relatively unimportant store consumeables and one time purchases of content. And lets not kid ourselves, we cant have both, free content and no mandatory store stuff.
If you already purchased the expansions for that account, as a premium player, you will still have access to it.
Very true. MoM & SoM are your's forever no matter when you bought them.
Sorry, thought you were more worried about the first item (SoA) as that seems to be the biggest hanging point for players.
To be fair, that is the biggest pile of lemon in that whole deal. But if everyone who ever bought a Box of lotro could play the entirety of 1-50 content for free(many do not even reach highlevel, only playing around for months in the levelrange with different toons) turbine would have had to many freeloaders, forcing them to make other parts of the store more prevalent.
Yea I hear you. So many of us in Beta argued that while we shouldn't get it for free, a discount in the store for those zones would be nice. Granted we weren't owed anything from our box buy, but a discount as a way of saying 'Thank You for your support in the early years' would have been nice. Oh well life goes on.
For sake of argument I will just say I agree with you about how teams are moved around and hired. I do have a decent understanding of programming and how devs can't just be thrown into any area and expected to function. It is however just more speculation on they whys of what happened.
What we do know is that there is a trend in games coverting to f2p going through serious drop offs in new content development during that time. There is obviously a lot of work to do in such changes and I don't think it can be explained away with conventional thinking about how dev teams work, because it is anything buy a conventional operation at this point and unlikely that 3 games made the same changes at the same time by coincidence. Rethinking how an entire game works is going to take a lot of effort from a lot of people.
As for your observations about specifics in wow, ok. I don't think wow invented the holy trinity at all and lets just assume everything you said about specific mechanics is wow is true.
Lotro does have remarkably similar gameplay to wow. Without going into tons of details, anyone moving from wow to lotro is going to understand the game within minutes. It will take seconds to recognize quest givers in quest hubs that hand out quest chains. Sending the player on a series of quest while unlocking a story at various points of interest. Returning to class trainers to get new skills and filling the same hotbars on the same ui to watch cooldowns while fighting monsters in the same combat system. Grouping for group quests and dungeons, lfg tool, etc. Sure these things have been done to different degrees in other mmos, but it would be hard to say that lotro doesn't borrow heavily from wows style of gameplay.
Yes there are differences in classes, skills and other things, but in the overall picture the gameplay feels so similar to wow that almost no training is required. Almost every aspect of lotro combat and leveling has already been learned and feels comfortable to someone that has played wow prior to lotro.
This isn't a bad thing or an insult. I personally think lotro is a great game and the only quality release post 2004, but at the same time it didn't do enough to disinguish itself from wow. Had it done that I think it would have gained a lot more players than it has.
For sake of argument I will just say I agree with you about how teams are moved around and hired. I do have a decent understanding of programming and how devs can't just be thrown into any area and expected to function. It is however just more speculation on they whys of what happened.
What we do know is that there is a trend in games coverting to f2p going through serious drop offs in new content development during that time. There is obviously a lot of work to do in such changes and I don't think it can be explained away with conventional thinking about how dev teams work, because it is anything buy a conventional operation at this point and unlikely that 3 games made the same changes at the same time by coincidence. Rethinking how an entire game works is going to take a lot of effort from a lot of people.
Not arguing there, im just pointing out that there should be alot of people on your team having nothing to do with it. Incidentially those writing questtexts, making landscapes or creating instances. I just dont see how those would help you converting your game to a F2P, and we didnt hear of any layoffs in LotRO. Also keep in mind that out of your examples LotRO was the only game going F2P that wasnt in financial trouble. No offense but i think you might be confusing cause and effect here. The other games got in financial trouble first, which probably caused their drop in content creation, then decided to go F2P as a last ditch effort. Further proof would be the changes, how many of those games redid their instances, introduced major gamemechanics, switched to a newer DirectX version and released a new region while going F2P? If Turbine had decided to do nothing of this they probably would have been able to keep a normal content progression with raids and stuff despite going F2P.
Im just trying to point out that turbine did alot of stuff besides offering their "extended trial".
As for your observations about specifics in wow, ok. I don't think wow invented the holy trinity at all and lets just assume everything you said about specific mechanics is wow is true.
Lotro does have remarkably similar gameplay to wow. Without going into tons of details, anyone moving from wow to lotro is going to understand the game within minutes. It will take seconds to recognize quest givers in quest hubs that hand out quest chains. Sending the player on a series of quest while unlocking a story at various points of interest. Returning to class trainers to get new skills and filling the same hotbars on the same ui to watch cooldowns while fighting monsters in the same combat system. Grouping for group quests and dungeons, lfg tool, etc. Sure these things have been done to different degrees in other mmos, but it would be hard to say that lotro doesn't borrow heavily from wows style of gameplay.
You admit yourself that none of this got invented by WoW. Its the genre standard, and has been before WoW. Im not even conviced the LFG tool in wow isnt actually alot younger than that in LotRO, i think it was added somewhere in BC(with the current version with autogrouping only coming in WotLK). Besides thats not gameplay we are talking about, its UI. Gameplay for me is how the different classes in a group interact to beat an instance, or how soloing works. And thats alot different, i only have to say conjunctions or hunters curing poison.
Yes there are differences in classes, skills and other things, but in the overall picture the gameplay feels so similar to wow that almost no training is required. Almost every aspect of lotro combat and leveling has already been learned and feels comfortable to someone that has played wow prior to lotro.
You have to learn conjunctions, you have to learn to watch your aggro, you have to learn to use your CC. Either your an old school WoW player, or you never actually played LotRO. I consider myself a competent MMO gamer, and i had to (re)learn a hell of a lot to be semi confident in groups in LotRO compared to WoW. Sorry if i come of as contrary and just disagree with everything you say, but there where so many points where i simply failed. Like doing those damned conjunctions if your a healer and dont have the mob in target etc. Or actually having to judge your aggro without any help, and damn i was a healer. Do you know how long it has been since i pulled healaggro in WoW with a target the tank was actually working on? I thought the tank was pulling my leg when he said i have to be more careful with my groupheals. And yeah lets not get into my Warden tank. i played all 4 tankclasses in WoW(only 2 in 80 raids though), when i explained to my wow buddy how my warden tanked he declared me insane. No taunt, no snapaggro and no "oh shit" buttons? Not even a single instant high threat attack? Wearing leather(and not the druid version which gets bumped through a modifier to crazy levels)?
This isn't a bad thing or an insult. I personally think lotro is a great game and the only quality release post 2004, but at the same time it didn't do enough to disinguish itself from wow. Had it done that I think it would have gained a lot more players than it has.
I didnt think of it as an insult. But im a bit shocked and ... well confused. For me its as different as night and day, when i cant stand a minute more of WoW i go to LotRO and ... everything is so different. The community, the crafting, the landscapes(shire at night *sigh*), the groups, the quests ... The entire feel of the game is different to me, especially the gameplay. Even mechanically its different with levelscaling skirmishes + pet, the radiance gating the LI system.
So yeah, im totally lost and honestly confused how you can say its like WoW. Unless you mean in the most general way where every fantasy mmorpg is like WoW(EQ,EQ II, Vanguar, AoC, Warhammer etc).
Edit: Most of all WoW has gotten soo easy, even while leveling. Doesnt matter wether im fighting elite or normal mobs, playing my 53 warrior, my 61 mage or my 72 priest. It mindboggling easy. My priest especially is nearly immortal, just dot the mobs and the vampiric embrace easily heals everything away(it now automatically affects every mob you attack, dont have to cast it like in the past). Makes my Warlock look like a pansy, and i already considered my warlock imba ...
[1] You are right that turbine did a lot more work on their backend and revamping, but the point was not a lot of new content. It still was a decent amount of work, but a lot of effort was put into the conversion as well. I think ddo changed, because it was a make or break situation for the game. EQ2 and Lotro I think are preemptively changing, because they stopped growing a long time ago. Moreso in the case of eq2 than lotro, but IMHO I think each peaked a long time ago. I suspect these changes are coming when the games are in a more favorable situation rather than waiting until the situations worsen.
[2]
Wow 2007 and lotro 2007 shared very similar gameplay aspects. Things have changed since then, but when lotro stood a chance to really impact the market and draw in a lot of players it didn't, because the gameplay was so similar to wow.
I mean Wow is an EQ clone, but it doesn't feel anything like playing EQ at all. It took the same mechanics and evolved them enough to make a game that almost doesn't resemble anything from EQ. There are some neat new mechanics in lotro and the visuals are all different from wow, but the bulk of the gameplay (in 2007) was just a remaking of the quest grinding instanced content of wow. I'm not alone in thinking that and I feel that is what really held lotro from achieving critical success.
This really stands out when you look at the differences in the two previous versions of what lotro was being done as. One by some company I can't recall, but the other was turbine before they scaped a completely different game design and remade lotro what it is today. This was around 2005 if that tells you anything.
Wow 2007 and lotro 2007 shared very similar gameplay aspects. Things have changed since then, but when lotro stood a chance to really impact the market and draw in a lot of players it didn't, because the gameplay was so similar to wow.
I mean Wow is an EQ clone, but it doesn't feel anything like playing EQ at all. It took the same mechanics and evolved them enough to make a game that almost doesn't resemble anything from EQ. There are some neat new mechanics in lotro and the visuals are all different from wow, but the bulk of the gameplay (in 2007) was just a remaking of the quest grinding instanced content of wow. I'm not alone in thinking that and I feel that is what really held lotro from achieving critical success.
This really stands out when you look at the differences in the two previous versions of what lotro was being done as. One by some company I can't recall, but the other was turbine before they scaped a completely different game design and remade lotro what it is today. This was around 2005 if that tells you anything.
I'm not convinced it was the similarities in game play that held LOTRO back. At least entirely.
The problem with "The Lord of the Rings", besides the challengs of adapting the I.P. is that it has several demographics to satisfy.
One would be "mmo players", one would be Fans of "The Lord of the Rings" and one would be fans of the movies.
Each demographic has its own special expecations. And they don't always mesh well.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Wow 2007 and lotro 2007 shared very similar gameplay aspects. Things have changed since then, but when lotro stood a chance to really impact the market and draw in a lot of players it didn't, because the gameplay was so similar to wow.
I mean Wow is an EQ clone, but it doesn't feel anything like playing EQ at all. It took the same mechanics and evolved them enough to make a game that almost doesn't resemble anything from EQ. There are some neat new mechanics in lotro and the visuals are all different from wow, but the bulk of the gameplay (in 2007) was just a remaking of the quest grinding instanced content of wow. I'm not alone in thinking that and I feel that is what really held lotro from achieving critical success.
This really stands out when you look at the differences in the two previous versions of what lotro was being done as. One by some company I can't recall, but the other was turbine before they scaped a completely different game design and remade lotro what it is today. This was around 2005 if that tells you anything.
I'm not convinced it was the similarities in game play that held LOTRO back. At least entirely.
The problem with "The Lord of the Rings", besides the challengs of adapting the I.P. is that it has several demographics to satisfy.
One would be "mmo players", one would be Fans of "The Lord of the Rings" and one would be fans of the movies.
Each demographic has its own special expecations. And they don't always mesh well.
Agreed with this point I think the biggest thing maybe holding LOTRO back is the fact that it doesn't have a fully adapted pvp component so it is hard to reach the "fanatical" state that many pvp players reach and stay at often within the games they play. In general pvp players rush to end game to be as effective at pvp as possible and if you can keep them hooked of course they will continue to play until something else comes along to scratch the itch that your game no longer scratches. Not even an option in LOTRO from what I hear about monster play. I think this more than anything kept LOTRO from hooking the mmo crowd. I've heard some grumblings about the game from the fans of the Tolkien lore but can honestly say I've also met quite a few Tolkien fans who are impressed with the game, then lastly those who are fans of the movies I can't really recall hearing it often but I fall into this category as I had not read any Tolkien before seeing the films nor after I came in on the strength of the quality of the movies and from my persepective they did as good a job here as they maybe could have The epic quest line weaves a believable tale around the premise of the films and I never tire of going through the content that's there.
But as mmo's go the truth of the matter is LOTRO is like like a nice family car where as WOW is like a sports car and from what I see most gamers are looking to be WOW'd at a fast frenetic pace while LOTRO is more akin to a slow stroll.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Agreed with this point I think the biggest thing maybe holding LOTRO back is the fact that it doesn't have a fully adapted pvp component so it is hard to reach the "fanatical" state that many pvp players reach and stay at often within the games they play. In general pvp players rush to end game to be as effective at pvp as possible and if you can keep them hooked of course they will continue to play until something else comes along to scratch the itch that your game no longer scratches. Not even an option in LOTRO from what I hear about monster play. I think this more than anything kept LOTRO from hooking the mmo crowd. I've heard some grumblings about the game from the fans of the Tolkien lore but can honestly say I've also met quite a few Tolkien fans who are impressed with the game, then lastly those who are fans of the movies I can't really recall hearing it often but I fall into this category as I had not read any Tolkien before seeing the films nor after I came in on the strength of the quality of the movies and from my persepective they did as good a job here as they maybe could have The epic quest line weaves a believable tale around the premise of the films and I never tire of going through the content that's there.
But as mmo's go the truth of the matter is LOTRO is like like a nice family car where as WOW is like a sports car and from what I see most gamers are looking to be WOW'd at a fast frenetic pace while LOTRO is more akin to a slow stroll.
This is a often repeated misconception imho. Active PvP players are minority in pretty much any mixed PvP/PvE MMO. This could be seen clearly on WoW before they opened cross server BGs, at non peak times you only saw about 2-3 BGs open total sometimes even less which amounted to less than 10% of the active playerbase(about 1-2k active on server nonpeak). There is simply a disproportionally large amount of very casual gamers that you never see in forums either. Even EvE Online, one of the most PvP oriented games on the market atm has a huge subset of socalled Carebears(pve players) rumored to be in excess of 50%.
Im not saying a PvP aspect wouldnt increase your subscriberbase, IF it manages to not annoy the PvE players. Which unfortunatly is not a given. Balance changes due to PvP balance are a huge bone of contention whenever they impact PvE balance, and unconsensual PvP, something of a requirement for many PvP oriented players, does more than annoy PvE players a little. Also having to do balance for both PvP and PvE, aswell as doing extra content for PvP players like their own items and instances slows content progression for PvE players, which can easily lead to a situation where both sides are unhappy with the rate content/changes get introduced.
Imho PvP aspects in mostly PvE games is something like a rich boys toy. If your doing exceptionally good, hell yeah why not hire a couple more devs with experience in the area and let them do something optional besides the stuff you PvE devs work on. Even Blizzard only introduced real effort into PvP after they went well clear of the 4 million subscribermark afaik(with arena and associated esports coming again much later).
I think it is worth pointing out that there are more PvP servers in wow than there are PvE servers. Warhammer and Conan, both pvp centric games, each broke initial sales records and broke over 1 million copies sold in a short time.
I would not underestimate the number of players interested in pvp.
I think it is worth pointing out that there are more PvP servers in wow than there are PvE servers. Warhammer and Conan, both pvp centric games, each broke initial sales records and broke over 1 million copies sold in a short time.
I would not underestimate the number of players interested in pvp.
I agree with what you said, but I didn't want to get to deep into a "this is what was missing from lotro so..." at that point in the discussion.
Your right there is a fair amount of people interested in PvP. Also there are different grades of PvP. For example WoW PvP is something completely different from EvE online PvP. Its entirely possible that the former appeals to a player while the latter does not, would such a person now be a PvP player or not?
For example i adored EvE Onlines PvP in all its aspects, yet on WoW i never really got into playing on a PvP server and instead ended on a RP-PvE one. Ironically i found WoWs PvP server unfair, while EvEs came to me as natural. Maybe my view is slanted due to playing mostly on said RP-PVE server, but i got the impression that there must be millions of people playing wow with little to no interest in PvP.
Btw, its worth noting that playing on a PvP server in WoW does not imply that you spend most of your time actively looking for PvP. Id say even on such a server the majority still is doing instances/raiding, while a active minority fills the BGs/open Areas(i always see the same people in wintergrasp f.e.). Many people simply enjoy the added danger, or the occasional 1on1 in the wilderness.
Likewise in Eve the majority of players spend time in PvE activities. The end result is that if players actively chose to play on a pvp server we can assume they find pvp important enoug to factor into their gameplay choices. They don't have to spend the majority of the time seeking pvp to enjoy it.
I'm not really sure if it matters that some people like full loot/full loss or penalties that are next to nothing. If they are looking for pvp in their choice of games its just a preference at that point.
I think it is worth pointing out that there are more PvP servers in wow than there are PvE servers. Warhammer and Conan, both pvp centric games, each broke initial sales records and broke over 1 million copies sold in a short time.
By my totally unofficial count there are about 18 more "Normal" Servers than PvP Servers on WOW and 8 more RP Servers than RPPvP...The numbers are actually pretty close, but there seems to be more Normal than PvP...
It can also be argued that Warhammer and AoC failed miserably in part due to their initial push to be PvP centric. The AoC Devs are on record now saying PvE Combat is the direction the Game is heading in. They want to save the Game so it's a logical choice...The hardcore PvP crowd is a dangerous one to attempt to cater to...If balance issues and other problems with PvP rear their ugly head they'll be gone in a heartbeat and they'll trash your games name till the end of time. It comes with the territory, and any decent Publisher understands it well enough nowadays...
I think PvP is gaining in popularity somewhat and definitely on certain games, but I also think you're over exaggerating a bit. On a game like LOTRO I don't think it matters nearly as much as it does on other Games.
The Poll right here on MMORPG.com titled "Which is more important in an MMO, PvE or PvP?" has more than 10,000 votes...The top response is equal parts PvE and PvP which got 35.6% of the votes. But when comparing PvE only (15.9%), or PvE focus with a little PvP (31.3%) to PvP only (5.8%), or PvP focus with a little PvP (11.5%), the PvE grouping combined leads 47.2 % to 17.3% for PvP...That's a pretty wide margin in favor of PvE content...
So in reality there's really not a huge movement towards PvP preference in MMO's...There is simply more people overall who will PvP at times...The preference is still leaning towards PvE when given the choice of one or the other...
Comments
To be fair, that is the biggest pile of lemon in that whole deal. But if everyone who ever bought a Box of lotro could play the entirety of 1-50 content for free(many do not even reach highlevel, only playing around for months in the levelrange with different toons) turbine would have had to many freeloaders, forcing them to make other parts of the store more prevalent.
Personally im happy with relatively unimportant store consumeables and one time purchases of content. And lets not kid ourselves, we cant have both, free content and no mandatory store stuff.
Yea I hear you. So many of us in Beta argued that while we shouldn't get it for free, a discount in the store for those zones would be nice. Granted we weren't owed anything from our box buy, but a discount as a way of saying 'Thank You for your support in the early years' would have been nice. Oh well life goes on.
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
@rocketeer
For sake of argument I will just say I agree with you about how teams are moved around and hired. I do have a decent understanding of programming and how devs can't just be thrown into any area and expected to function. It is however just more speculation on they whys of what happened.
What we do know is that there is a trend in games coverting to f2p going through serious drop offs in new content development during that time. There is obviously a lot of work to do in such changes and I don't think it can be explained away with conventional thinking about how dev teams work, because it is anything buy a conventional operation at this point and unlikely that 3 games made the same changes at the same time by coincidence. Rethinking how an entire game works is going to take a lot of effort from a lot of people.
As for your observations about specifics in wow, ok. I don't think wow invented the holy trinity at all and lets just assume everything you said about specific mechanics is wow is true.
Lotro does have remarkably similar gameplay to wow. Without going into tons of details, anyone moving from wow to lotro is going to understand the game within minutes. It will take seconds to recognize quest givers in quest hubs that hand out quest chains. Sending the player on a series of quest while unlocking a story at various points of interest. Returning to class trainers to get new skills and filling the same hotbars on the same ui to watch cooldowns while fighting monsters in the same combat system. Grouping for group quests and dungeons, lfg tool, etc. Sure these things have been done to different degrees in other mmos, but it would be hard to say that lotro doesn't borrow heavily from wows style of gameplay.
Yes there are differences in classes, skills and other things, but in the overall picture the gameplay feels so similar to wow that almost no training is required. Almost every aspect of lotro combat and leveling has already been learned and feels comfortable to someone that has played wow prior to lotro.
This isn't a bad thing or an insult. I personally think lotro is a great game and the only quality release post 2004, but at the same time it didn't do enough to disinguish itself from wow. Had it done that I think it would have gained a lot more players than it has.
[1] You are right that turbine did a lot more work on their backend and revamping, but the point was not a lot of new content. It still was a decent amount of work, but a lot of effort was put into the conversion as well. I think ddo changed, because it was a make or break situation for the game. EQ2 and Lotro I think are preemptively changing, because they stopped growing a long time ago. Moreso in the case of eq2 than lotro, but IMHO I think each peaked a long time ago. I suspect these changes are coming when the games are in a more favorable situation rather than waiting until the situations worsen.
[2]
Wow 2007 and lotro 2007 shared very similar gameplay aspects. Things have changed since then, but when lotro stood a chance to really impact the market and draw in a lot of players it didn't, because the gameplay was so similar to wow.
I mean Wow is an EQ clone, but it doesn't feel anything like playing EQ at all. It took the same mechanics and evolved them enough to make a game that almost doesn't resemble anything from EQ. There are some neat new mechanics in lotro and the visuals are all different from wow, but the bulk of the gameplay (in 2007) was just a remaking of the quest grinding instanced content of wow. I'm not alone in thinking that and I feel that is what really held lotro from achieving critical success.
This really stands out when you look at the differences in the two previous versions of what lotro was being done as. One by some company I can't recall, but the other was turbine before they scaped a completely different game design and remade lotro what it is today. This was around 2005 if that tells you anything.
I'm not convinced it was the similarities in game play that held LOTRO back. At least entirely.
The problem with "The Lord of the Rings", besides the challengs of adapting the I.P. is that it has several demographics to satisfy.
One would be "mmo players", one would be Fans of "The Lord of the Rings" and one would be fans of the movies.
Each demographic has its own special expecations. And they don't always mesh well.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Agreed with this point I think the biggest thing maybe holding LOTRO back is the fact that it doesn't have a fully adapted pvp component so it is hard to reach the "fanatical" state that many pvp players reach and stay at often within the games they play. In general pvp players rush to end game to be as effective at pvp as possible and if you can keep them hooked of course they will continue to play until something else comes along to scratch the itch that your game no longer scratches. Not even an option in LOTRO from what I hear about monster play. I think this more than anything kept LOTRO from hooking the mmo crowd. I've heard some grumblings about the game from the fans of the Tolkien lore but can honestly say I've also met quite a few Tolkien fans who are impressed with the game, then lastly those who are fans of the movies I can't really recall hearing it often but I fall into this category as I had not read any Tolkien before seeing the films nor after I came in on the strength of the quality of the movies and from my persepective they did as good a job here as they maybe could have The epic quest line weaves a believable tale around the premise of the films and I never tire of going through the content that's there.
But as mmo's go the truth of the matter is LOTRO is like like a nice family car where as WOW is like a sports car and from what I see most gamers are looking to be WOW'd at a fast frenetic pace while LOTRO is more akin to a slow stroll.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
This is a often repeated misconception imho. Active PvP players are minority in pretty much any mixed PvP/PvE MMO. This could be seen clearly on WoW before they opened cross server BGs, at non peak times you only saw about 2-3 BGs open total sometimes even less which amounted to less than 10% of the active playerbase(about 1-2k active on server nonpeak). There is simply a disproportionally large amount of very casual gamers that you never see in forums either. Even EvE Online, one of the most PvP oriented games on the market atm has a huge subset of socalled Carebears(pve players) rumored to be in excess of 50%.
Im not saying a PvP aspect wouldnt increase your subscriberbase, IF it manages to not annoy the PvE players. Which unfortunatly is not a given. Balance changes due to PvP balance are a huge bone of contention whenever they impact PvE balance, and unconsensual PvP, something of a requirement for many PvP oriented players, does more than annoy PvE players a little. Also having to do balance for both PvP and PvE, aswell as doing extra content for PvP players like their own items and instances slows content progression for PvE players, which can easily lead to a situation where both sides are unhappy with the rate content/changes get introduced.
Imho PvP aspects in mostly PvE games is something like a rich boys toy. If your doing exceptionally good, hell yeah why not hire a couple more devs with experience in the area and let them do something optional besides the stuff you PvE devs work on. Even Blizzard only introduced real effort into PvP after they went well clear of the 4 million subscribermark afaik(with arena and associated esports coming again much later).
@Rocketeer
I think it is worth pointing out that there are more PvP servers in wow than there are PvE servers. Warhammer and Conan, both pvp centric games, each broke initial sales records and broke over 1 million copies sold in a short time.
I would not underestimate the number of players interested in pvp.
@sorvath
I agree with what you said, but I didn't want to get to deep into a "this is what was missing from lotro so..." at that point in the discussion.
Your right there is a fair amount of people interested in PvP. Also there are different grades of PvP. For example WoW PvP is something completely different from EvE online PvP. Its entirely possible that the former appeals to a player while the latter does not, would such a person now be a PvP player or not?
For example i adored EvE Onlines PvP in all its aspects, yet on WoW i never really got into playing on a PvP server and instead ended on a RP-PvE one. Ironically i found WoWs PvP server unfair, while EvEs came to me as natural. Maybe my view is slanted due to playing mostly on said RP-PVE server, but i got the impression that there must be millions of people playing wow with little to no interest in PvP.
Btw, its worth noting that playing on a PvP server in WoW does not imply that you spend most of your time actively looking for PvP. Id say even on such a server the majority still is doing instances/raiding, while a active minority fills the BGs/open Areas(i always see the same people in wintergrasp f.e.). Many people simply enjoy the added danger, or the occasional 1on1 in the wilderness.
Likewise in Eve the majority of players spend time in PvE activities. The end result is that if players actively chose to play on a pvp server we can assume they find pvp important enoug to factor into their gameplay choices. They don't have to spend the majority of the time seeking pvp to enjoy it.
I'm not really sure if it matters that some people like full loot/full loss or penalties that are next to nothing. If they are looking for pvp in their choice of games its just a preference at that point.
By my totally unofficial count there are about 18 more "Normal" Servers than PvP Servers on WOW and 8 more RP Servers than RPPvP...The numbers are actually pretty close, but there seems to be more Normal than PvP...
It can also be argued that Warhammer and AoC failed miserably in part due to their initial push to be PvP centric. The AoC Devs are on record now saying PvE Combat is the direction the Game is heading in. They want to save the Game so it's a logical choice...The hardcore PvP crowd is a dangerous one to attempt to cater to...If balance issues and other problems with PvP rear their ugly head they'll be gone in a heartbeat and they'll trash your games name till the end of time. It comes with the territory, and any decent Publisher understands it well enough nowadays...
I think PvP is gaining in popularity somewhat and definitely on certain games, but I also think you're over exaggerating a bit. On a game like LOTRO I don't think it matters nearly as much as it does on other Games.
The Poll right here on MMORPG.com titled "Which is more important in an MMO, PvE or PvP?" has more than 10,000 votes...The top response is equal parts PvE and PvP which got 35.6% of the votes. But when comparing PvE only (15.9%), or PvE focus with a little PvP (31.3%) to PvP only (5.8%), or PvP focus with a little PvP (11.5%), the PvE grouping combined leads 47.2 % to 17.3% for PvP...That's a pretty wide margin in favor of PvE content...
So in reality there's really not a huge movement towards PvP preference in MMO's...There is simply more people overall who will PvP at times...The preference is still leaning towards PvE when given the choice of one or the other...