Guild Wars 2 to me, is actually fail-proof. There is no online subscription, so if the game does fail it's simply because the game isn't good enough to hold people's attention. So because of that, I don't think GW2 is going to have any issues. It looks amazing, plays amazing. Plus, no online fee. So you can buy the game and play it at any time. If you don't like it, quit. If you love it - Keep on playing.
I don't think its fail-proof like a single-player game, because they do intend to have persistant servers and updates, which will cost them upkeep, not to mention expansion development. Possibly a lot of servers, with a lot heftier requirements, than say, the first GW. I think how well liked the game turns out to be will have a huge impact on how much money they make beyond box sales. Six months down the line, or a year or two, I think they're hoping to be pulling in a lot of revenue for a long time.
So if the game is disappointing, that won't happen. Even if they sell 3 million boxes, I think it will be a failure if they can only sell 300k of their first expansion, for example.
I don't expect that to be the case, I just don't like how people keep saying its impossible, just because it's B2P. That implies Anet could ride all the hype and make a huge profit without even trying. Really, I think they're going to need to work just as hard as any other MMO devs, at keeping the game moving forward, selling it to to new players and longterm veterans alike, so that the money will keep coming in. Even though it won't be coming from subs.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Guild Wars 2 to me, is actually fail-proof. There is no online subscription, so if the game does fail it's simply because the game isn't good enough to hold people's attention. So because of that, I don't think GW2 is going to have any issues. It looks amazing, plays amazing. Plus, no online fee. So you can buy the game and play it at any time. If you don't like it, quit. If you love it - Keep on playing.
I don't think its fail-proof like a single-player game, because they do intend to have persistant servers and updates, which will cost them upkeep, not to mention expansion development. Possibly a lot of servers, with a lot heftier requirements, than say, the first GW. I think how well liked the game turns out to be will have a huge impact on how much money they make beyond box sales. Six months down the line, or a year or two, I think they're hoping to be pulling in a lot of revenue for a long time.
So if the game is disappointing, that won't happen. Even if they sell 3 million boxes, I think it will be a failure if they can only sell 300k of their first expansion, for example.
I don't expect that to be the case, I just don't like how people keep saying its impossible, just because it's B2P. That implies Anet could ride all the hype and make a huge profit without even trying. Really, I think they're going to need to work just as hard as any other MMO devs, at keeping the game moving forward, selling it to to new players and longterm veterans alike, so that the money will keep coming in. Even though it won't be coming from subs.
I expect GW2 to do well. But I have to agree. to call it failproof at this time is nothing more than a hope. There are too many wishlists, opinions, assumptions and future predictions being presented as given facts on these threads. This site tracks almost 600 online games. Which ones that have been released are failproof? Even the juggernaut WoW is showing signs.
You would think that the past 5 year history of this industry would spark a more prevalent "wait and see" attitude. But it hasn't People hype one game only to be disappointed, spend a month bashing it and then move on to pin their hopes on the nex and the cycle repeats over and over without fail. "The next one for sure!"
One thing I am willing to bet my lunch money on and that is, no matter how good GW2 is, it cannot live up to it's current hype. Especially if you consider that nobody knows where it's flaws and shortcomings are. You can't believe that it won't have any whatsoever can you?
It doesn't have a subscription. Box sales is all that will determine its success. I'm pretty sure all the GW1 players will be buying it making it a garunteed success out the gate.
What games have really failed. In all honesty, I cannot name that many. If the measure of failure is the success of WoW, then probably all of them have and will fail in the near future....including GW2.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
It doesn't have a subscription. Box sales is all that will determine its success. I'm pretty sure all the GW1 players will be buying it making it a garunteed success out the gate.
Try reading the post right above yours...
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
It doesn't have a subscription. Box sales is all that will determine its success. I'm pretty sure all the GW1 players will be buying it making it a garunteed success out the gate.
Try reading the post right above yours...
I can't be arsed , sorry
If I repeat what's already been said then who cares
Aye, dont forget the older games like vanguard saga of heroes which was ment to also have been a killer, but failed.
No one ever set Vanguard up to be a WoW killer. It was just an under the radar hardcore EQ style MMO. And it only failed because SoE forced it out 8 months early. The game itself was fantastic.
Under the radar? lol, it was over hyped everywhere by Brad, he made sure the gaming world knew about it.
And if you really want to blame a company for the game being a bag of shite, blame Sigil Games.
With regards to the next big failure, first you need to define what failure actually is.
Take GW2 for example, there is no subscription, so you have to measure its success or failure on box sales, so how many box sales do they need before you claim it is a faliure? how long do they have to make those sales?
GW made around 6 million box sales, so if GW2 sells less than that, is that a failure?
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Aye, dont forget the older games like vanguard saga of heroes which was ment to also have been a killer, but failed.
No one ever set Vanguard up to be a WoW killer. It was just an under the radar hardcore EQ style MMO. And it only failed because SoE forced it out 8 months early. The game itself was fantastic.
Vanguard was not launched by SOE, it was developed and launched by Sigil, who was orginially partnered with Microsoft to make the game. SOE later co-published with them after Sigil broke off the deal with microsoft, but had no real control over when the game came out at the time. Sigil launched it when it was so broken and unplayable because they ran out of money during development. SOE later bought all rights to it and fixed it up to what it is now. It is this kind of unresearched Information that makes SOE sound worse than it deserves. Yes SOE isnt the best company but do try to only attribute its ACTUAL failures to it, not someone elses.
"On May 15, 2007, FOUR MONTHS AFTER the game's release, Sony Online Entertainment announced they had acquired all assets of Sigil and retained much of the Vanguard development team to work for Sony and to continue developing Vanguard."
easy: SWTOR it was lucky to launch at a time with no competition, when some of these new games come out its had it. Plus EA is really bad at supporting MMOS
GW2 will do well
Tera, TSW, Planetside 2, Archeage, WoD, firefall, wildstar, dominus who knows, may do well, may not, but the odds are at least 1 will fail.
Copernicus - will be a massive wow clone and have to fight wow, rift et all for subs
Titan - I think will be a big let down, modern blizzard aint old blizzard, and its supposed to be some sort of Halo mmo isn't it?
Comments
I don't think its fail-proof like a single-player game, because they do intend to have persistant servers and updates, which will cost them upkeep, not to mention expansion development. Possibly a lot of servers, with a lot heftier requirements, than say, the first GW. I think how well liked the game turns out to be will have a huge impact on how much money they make beyond box sales. Six months down the line, or a year or two, I think they're hoping to be pulling in a lot of revenue for a long time.
So if the game is disappointing, that won't happen. Even if they sell 3 million boxes, I think it will be a failure if they can only sell 300k of their first expansion, for example.
I don't expect that to be the case, I just don't like how people keep saying its impossible, just because it's B2P. That implies Anet could ride all the hype and make a huge profit without even trying. Really, I think they're going to need to work just as hard as any other MMO devs, at keeping the game moving forward, selling it to to new players and longterm veterans alike, so that the money will keep coming in. Even though it won't be coming from subs.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I expect GW2 to do well. But I have to agree. to call it failproof at this time is nothing more than a hope. There are too many wishlists, opinions, assumptions and future predictions being presented as given facts on these threads. This site tracks almost 600 online games. Which ones that have been released are failproof? Even the juggernaut WoW is showing signs.
You would think that the past 5 year history of this industry would spark a more prevalent "wait and see" attitude. But it hasn't People hype one game only to be disappointed, spend a month bashing it and then move on to pin their hopes on the nex and the cycle repeats over and over without fail. "The next one for sure!"
One thing I am willing to bet my lunch money on and that is, no matter how good GW2 is, it cannot live up to it's current hype. Especially if you consider that nobody knows where it's flaws and shortcomings are. You can't believe that it won't have any whatsoever can you?
Why do people mention GW2
It doesn't have a subscription. Box sales is all that will determine its success. I'm pretty sure all the GW1 players will be buying it making it a garunteed success out the gate.
There is only one "big" game coming out in 2012 that we know about, GW2, and it won't be a failure.
Kind of hard to "fail" when box sales at launch are going to pay off the $ spent on the game + huge profits and no sub numbers to worry about.
Several smaller titles, like TSW, PS2, and Tera will follow the all too common "lots of box sales, subs disappear after a month or two" formula.
Or they won't even get that many box sales in the first place (PS2/Tera especially)
Thus are my predictions.
What games have really failed. In all honesty, I cannot name that many. If the measure of failure is the success of WoW, then probably all of them have and will fail in the near future....including GW2.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Try reading the post right above yours...
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
I can't be arsed , sorry
If I repeat what's already been said then who cares
Under the radar? lol, it was over hyped everywhere by Brad, he made sure the gaming world knew about it.
And if you really want to blame a company for the game being a bag of shite, blame Sigil Games.
With regards to the next big failure, first you need to define what failure actually is.
Take GW2 for example, there is no subscription, so you have to measure its success or failure on box sales, so how many box sales do they need before you claim it is a faliure? how long do they have to make those sales?
GW made around 6 million box sales, so if GW2 sells less than that, is that a failure?
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Vanguard was not launched by SOE, it was developed and launched by Sigil, who was orginially partnered with Microsoft to make the game. SOE later co-published with them after Sigil broke off the deal with microsoft, but had no real control over when the game came out at the time. Sigil launched it when it was so broken and unplayable because they ran out of money during development. SOE later bought all rights to it and fixed it up to what it is now. It is this kind of unresearched Information that makes SOE sound worse than it deserves. Yes SOE isnt the best company but do try to only attribute its ACTUAL failures to it, not someone elses.
"On May 15, 2007, FOUR MONTHS AFTER the game's release, Sony Online Entertainment announced they had acquired all assets of Sigil and retained much of the Vanguard development team to work for Sony and to continue developing Vanguard."
easy: SWTOR it was lucky to launch at a time with no competition, when some of these new games come out its had it. Plus EA is really bad at supporting MMOS
GW2 will do well
Tera, TSW, Planetside 2, Archeage, WoD, firefall, wildstar, dominus who knows, may do well, may not, but the odds are at least 1 will fail.
Copernicus - will be a massive wow clone and have to fight wow, rift et all for subs
Titan - I think will be a big let down, modern blizzard aint old blizzard, and its supposed to be some sort of Halo mmo isn't it?