This is an important point to make. 3 Million units is the total to date. I think there were around 2 million units sold by the end of September. An additional milion units in the 4th quarter is very solid for ongoing MMO sales.
However, this also provides some important information on the success of the B2P business model. GW2 produced $110US revenue in Q4. Unit Sales directly from Arenanet may provide $60/unit revenue, but with the wholesale prices for units sold through other retailers, the average revenue per unti sold would be less than $60/unit.
The wholesale price is probably closer to $36/unit. It's not unreasonable to guesstimate that the average revenue per unit is somewhere around $45. That would mean ~$65 million in revenue was produced via gem sales. That's pretty healthy revenue. Roughly the equivalent of the revenue produced by a subscription based game with a paying player base of over 1.4 million players! (If all 3 million GW2 accounts were being actively played, that would mean roughly half the revenue per account as a subscription based game, but few AAA MMOs released in recent years can boast of 700,000 active, paying subscribers).
These numbers look even better, relative to the competition, when you consider how many of the AAA P2P titles released in recent years have transitioned to F2P models, in some cases less than a year after the initial release.
GW2 will continue to build the total player base via box sales over time. Among that playerbase, people will come and go as far as active play time goes, but the expanding pool should continue to provide enough active, gem purchasing players to maintain and even grow the revenue stream over time.
How is anything an indication of success or failure at this point? For an MMO to be successful it must overcome more hurdles than simply selling boxes, that goes for the B2P model point as well. An MMO's success greatly depends on how relevant it remains over a course of years not the first few months.
My major gripe with this form of success calculation is that many MMO's sell well when they release, be it 1-2 million or even 3 it really doesn't mean a game is going to be successful at offering a MMO experience. These are sales based on hype for the most part.
Come back two years from now and such a point will be relevant as well as accurate if things remain on the up for A-net.
Based on word of mouth right now, the retention based aspects of the game are suffering from some series problems. Much like they were in TOR at this point of it's life, the main factor here for success is how they deal with those issues.
You will dismiss the actual numbers, because it's too soon to judge success, but then you will look to "word of mouth" as an indication of the current state of the game?
GW2 is doing better at the 4+ month mark than almost any other MMO since WoW, based on the numbers. Time will tell how well it maintains that success over time, but it is clearly a stand out success to this point. As a player with almost 800 hours played and much experience in the genre, I can say that the ingredients are all there to ensure ongoing success and Arenanet has outlined ongoing development that will just solidify the viability of the game.
The game is a clear success to date and all indications are that it will build on that success moving forward.
You will dismiss the actual numbers, because it's too soon to judge success, but then you will look to "word of mouth" as an indication of the current state of the game?
GW2 is doing better at the 4+ month mark than almost any other MMO since WoW, based on the numbers. Time will tell how well it maintains that success over time, but it is clearly a stand out success to this point. As a player with almost 800 hours played and much experience in the genre, I can say that the ingredients are all there to ensure ongoing success and Arenanet has outlined ongoing development that will just solidify the viability of the game.
The game is a clear success to date and all indications are that it will build on that success moving forward.
It's not about dismissing the numbers at all, at least that's totally unrelated to seeing the word of mouth flying around at present, as well as A-nets own admissions that substantiate that word of mouth.
Edit: I should add that I acknowledged above they've passed a milestone in that they've met or may have even surpassed launch sales expectations. That's just one of many hurdles though, as I said in my original post.
Also note that I didn't say it has failed either, I just personally think it is far too early to say either way.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I am saying that 3 million sold units for a triple A B2P RPG is nothing special. Many B2P RPGs sold more than that and D3 was just one example, so 3 million is perhaps above average for a triple A title.
Hell even subscriber based RPGs like AoC and SW:TOR sold over a million units, so 3 million for a B2P one is nothing special.
context from wiki -- this is all time sales -- not just sales for 5 months
i could be wrong but i think its realistic that GW2 will sell at least 10 million over a 3 year period
-- if it does, that places GW2 in top 10 PC games of all time for best sellers
This is an important point to make. 3 Million units is the total to date. I think there were around 2 million units sold by the end of September. An additional milion units in the 4th quarter is very solid for ongoing MMO sales.
However, this also provides some important information on the success of the B2P business model. GW2 produced $110US revenue in Q4. Unit Sales directly from Arenanet may provide $60/unit revenue, but with the wholesale prices for units sold through other retailers, the average revenue per unti sold would be less than $60/unit.
The wholesale price is probably closer to $36/unit. It's not unreasonable to guesstimate that the average revenue per unit is somewhere around $45. That would mean ~$65 million in revenue was produced via gem sales. That's pretty healthy revenue. Roughly the equivalent of the revenue produced by a subscription based game with a paying player base of over 1.4 million players! (If all 3 million GW2 accounts were being actively played, that would mean roughly half the revenue per account as a subscription based game, but few AAA MMOs released in recent years can boast of 700,000 active, paying subscribers).
These numbers look even better, relative to the competition, when you consider how many of the AAA P2P titles released in recent years have transitioned to F2P models, in some cases less than a year after the initial release.
GW2 will continue to build the total player base via box sales over time. Among that playerbase, people will come and go as far as active play time goes, but the expanding pool should continue to provide enough active, gem purchasing players to maintain and even grow the revenue stream over time.
Guessing this is great news for Ncsoft since Gw2 and Blade & Souls which last heard seemed to be doing well in Korea were they're two main drivers of revenue.
Didn't the game have around $45-$46 mill in revenues at the end of 3rd quarter 2012?At that point there were 2 mill plus box sales.End of 3rd quarter was Sept 30 and 2 mill was announced as sold on Sept 13th.
Not saying they did bad,but $48 of $60 would be probably $18 plus dollar's over what companies actually get.Pretty sure I saw the game on sale online for $40 over the holidays,it was a short sale but still.I don't see a store taking an $8 loss even for a day or 2.
$48 a box just doesn't come close to the financial's I read.
The analysts make an educated guess, just like we do. As I pointed out, the revenue for digitial copies sold directly by Arenanet will be much higher per box than the revenue generated via retailer sales. My guess was that the average revenue per box was ~$45 per unit sold. $48/unit is close enough I'm not going to argue with it, but it is still just a guess.
As far as Q3 revenue, pre-sales started in Q2 and many speculated that 400,000 to 800,000+ units were pre-purchased by the end of June. I would think that some portion of that revenue went on the books in Q2? (I think I remember hearing that only Arenanet Direct pre-sales were counted in Q2, since pre-purchases via retailers weren't considered any more concrete than pre-orders and retailers didn't need to pony up the wholesale purchases until close to release).
In any event, revenue points towards a fair level of success on generating revenue via gem purchases, which along with ongoing box sales is key to the success of the game. With a micro-transaction, buy to play business model, revenue trumps all other numbers and GW2 seems to be generating very healthy revenue.
You will dismiss the actual numbers, because it's too soon to judge success, but then you will look to "word of mouth" as an indication of the current state of the game?
GW2 is doing better at the 4+ month mark than almost any other MMO since WoW, based on the numbers. Time will tell how well it maintains that success over time, but it is clearly a stand out success to this point. As a player with almost 800 hours played and much experience in the genre, I can say that the ingredients are all there to ensure ongoing success and Arenanet has outlined ongoing development that will just solidify the viability of the game.
The game is a clear success to date and all indications are that it will build on that success moving forward.
It's not about dismissing the numbers at all, at least that's totally unrelated to seeing the word of mouth flying around at present, as well as A-nets own admissions that substantiate that word of mouth.
Well, we hear negative "word of mouth" on in game population that many active players, myself included, can say are greatly exaggerated. People are still having issues transferring to 80%+ of all game servers due to population caps. This is even with the caps having been recently raised by a small percentage, plus the safe assumption that the average hours played per account per month has almost certainly seen some decline as players fall into sustainable play patterns beyond the initial rush.
Is there churn? I'm sure there is. However, there is clearly new box sales growth to counterbalance churn. Also, churn may mean something very different with GW2 than with a subscription game. Many people who dip out of active play for what ever reason may dip in and out many times over the course of a year, where as most subscription churn represents long term or permanent loss of players/revenue.
Also, though burn out does occur in any MMO, it would make sense that people who "wash out" of the game quickly are also the least likely to have made regular gem store purchases during their visit to the game. People who love the game and are more likely to remain as active players are probably also the group with the highest average per month layout for gem purchases. The churn rate among people who don't contribute any ongoing revenue is greatly diminished in it's importance, as long as there are enough active players to support healthy server populations and produce ongoing revenue.
The game world is huge and there are many things to do not only in the game world, but outside of it. Having so many "full" servers more than four months after launch is a very good sign and the sense that "zones aren't as full as they used to be" can be mostly attributed to the increased distribution of the playerbase throughout a very expansive game.
GW2 does have gems, but again, we don't know how that plays out in comparison, when you look at revenue.
EA lays off tons of people in different studios everywhere, NCSoft does just as much, which Arenanet is a part of. NCSoft will choose what studio needs to layoff who as they have done in previous years.
I always knew there would be a crowd that would never get tired of shallow game mechanics and zero complexity.
However. I knew a whole boatload of people who left to play this game when it launched. A lot came back within a few weeks. More in a month. I dont know a single person whos playing this now.
Yeah i know, theres a lot still playing the game...like i said, the market for shallow is always going to be there which is why they keep pumping out games like this. I think their greatest weapon was B2P and no sub. Had this been a game with a sub the situation with the game would be a lot more obvious than it is now.
I am glad this game exists however, it keeps the crowd that always begs for easier, less complex, and faster occupied...hopefully forever.
I know this post will come off as super negative but i mean this all with the best, every type of gamer should have a decent game to play.
Now if we could just get a well made, complex sandbox, with full loot, that isnt eve out there for the other side. I dont mind grind, im not scared of progression or knowing others are ahead of me, i like to read up and theorize...soon i hope
Either way, enjoy your instanced pvp and public quest events ` glad its working out!
I read shallow here I read shallow there do PLEASE explain to me WHAT makes the game shallow, what aspects of it and what did you do when you played it.
If you can't anwser any of these questions I have then your post is shallow and pointless.
I always knew there would be a crowd that would never get tired of shallow game mechanics and zero complexity.
However. I knew a whole boatload of people who left to play this game when it launched. A lot came back within a few weeks. More in a month. I dont know a single person whos playing this now.
Yeah i know, theres a lot still playing the game...like i said, the market for shallow is always going to be there which is why they keep pumping out games like this. I think their greatest weapon was B2P and no sub. Had this been a game with a sub the situation with the game would be a lot more obvious than it is now.
I am glad this game exists however, it keeps the crowd that always begs for easier, less complex, and faster occupied...hopefully forever.
I know this post will come off as super negative but i mean this all with the best, every type of gamer should have a decent game to play.
Now if we could just get a well made, complex sandbox, with full loot, that isnt eve out there for the other side. I dont mind grind, im not scared of progression or knowing others are ahead of me, i like to read up and theorize...soon i hope
Either way, enjoy your instanced pvp and public quest events ` glad its working out!
I read shallow here I read shallow there do PLEASE explain to me WHAT makes the game shallow, what aspects of it and what did you do when you played it.
If you can't anwser any of these questions I have then your post is shallow and pointless.
I don't know bro but i thought you would be the one who would understand what he meant by GW2 being shallow..
Originally posted by Torgrim
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
I'm not that good with numbers but boxsales versus develop time don't always equal profit.
Profit with boxsales AND keep them subs for months are the real profit in both long term and short term.
Do studios enjoy losing money?, They must, due to how the games been doing for the past 7 years except GW2.
It's a really weird cycle that has evolved, and it looks like It won't stop anytime soon.
Originally posted by Torgrim Checkout older games from late 80s to 2000 and compare them to games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Originally posted by Torgrim
OP great post +1
That's why I have a sub going in Vanguard, that's the only game I really still get the oldschool feeling even if they have made some things alittle easier over the years.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
How is anything an indication of success or failure at this point? For an MMO to be successful it must overcome more hurdles than simply selling boxes, that goes for the B2P model point as well. An MMO's success greatly depends on how relevant it remains over a course of years not the first few months.
My major gripe with this form of success calculation is that many MMO's sell well when they release, be it 1-2 million or even 3 it really doesn't mean a game is going to be successful at offering a MMO experience. These are sales based on hype for the most part.
Come back two years from now and such a point will be relevant as well as accurate if things remain on the up for A-net.
Based on word of mouth right now, the retention based aspects of the game are suffering from some series problems. Much like they were in TOR at this point of it's life, the main factor here for success is how they deal with those issues.
Your personal subjective definition of success is irrelevant. I can produce anything i want as a measure of success or failure and proclaim it success or failure.
Example: WoW is failure because it has gnomes.
ANet set their goals and if that goals were reached its a SUCCESS (and its pretty obvious they DID reach them)
Next step will be how well expansion sells. But for now and until expansion its a SUCCESS.
Oh, and word of mouth?
Originally posted by oubers
Made me lolz......GW2 is bland while SWTOR is a cool game now?
How is anything an indication of success or failure at this point? For an MMO to be successful it must overcome more hurdles than simply selling boxes, that goes for the B2P model point as well. An MMO's success greatly depends on how relevant it remains over a course of years not the first few months.
My major gripe with this form of success calculation is that many MMO's sell well when they release, be it 1-2 million or even 3 it really doesn't mean a game is going to be successful at offering a MMO experience. These are sales based on hype for the most part.
Come back two years from now and such a point will be relevant as well as accurate if things remain on the up for A-net.
Based on word of mouth right now, the retention based aspects of the game are suffering from some series problems. Much like they were in TOR at this point of it's life, the main factor here for success is how they deal with those issues.
Your personal subjective definition of success is irrelevant. I can produce anything i want as a measure of success or failure and proclaim it success or failure.
Example: WoW is failure because it has gnomes.
ANet set their goals and if that goals were reached its a SUCCESS (and its pretty obvious they DID reach them)
Next step will be how well expansion sells. But for now and until expansion its a SUCCESS.
Actually according to Mike O brian he wants to beat WOW and become number one so nope if we are talking about goals set by Anet then GW2 isn't a success yet.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
Actually according to Mike O brian he wants to beat WOW and become number one so nope if we are talking about goals set by Anet then GW2 isn't a success yet.
Except that is exactly why it is a success for now until the expansion.
All things come to those who wait. As long as Anet learns from the mistakes made in the past few months and the Jan 28th update brings all the fixes and upgrades to the content already part of the game. Patients may just pay off.
I always knew there would be a crowd that would never get tired of shallow game mechanics and zero complexity.
However. I knew a whole boatload of people who left to play this game when it launched. A lot came back within a few weeks. More in a month. I dont know a single person whos playing this now.
Yeah i know, theres a lot still playing the game...like i said, the market for shallow is always going to be there which is why they keep pumping out games like this. I think their greatest weapon was B2P and no sub. Had this been a game with a sub the situation with the game would be a lot more obvious than it is now.
I am glad this game exists however, it keeps the crowd that always begs for easier, less complex, and faster occupied...hopefully forever.
I know this post will come off as super negative but i mean this all with the best, every type of gamer should have a decent game to play.
Now if we could just get a well made, complex sandbox, with full loot, that isnt eve out there for the other side. I dont mind grind, im not scared of progression or knowing others are ahead of me, i like to read up and theorize...soon i hope
Either way, enjoy your instanced pvp and public quest events ` glad its working out!
I read shallow here I read shallow there do PLEASE explain to me WHAT makes the game shallow, what aspects of it and what did you do when you played it.
If you can't anwser any of these questions I have then your post is shallow and pointless.
I don't know bro but i thought you would be the one who would understand what he meant by GW2 being shallow..
Originally posted by Torgrim
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
I'm not that good with numbers but boxsales versus develop time don't always equal profit.
Profit with boxsales AND keep them subs for months are the real profit in both long term and short term.
Do studios enjoy losing money?, They must, due to how the games been doing for the past 7 years except GW2.
It's a really weird cycle that has evolved, and it looks like It won't stop anytime soon.
Originally posted by Torgrim Checkout older games from late 80s to 2000 and compare them to games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Originally posted by Torgrim
OP great post +1
That's why I have a sub going in Vanguard, that's the only game I really still get the oldschool feeling even if they have made some things alittle easier over the years.
I know you feel quite proud of yourself and though hahaha got him when you posted this with my quotes.
The word shallow means absolute nothing if you can't explain what is is that makes it shallow.
I really don't know why you thought you were smart by making those quotes about me liking GW2, as also quoted I have a sub running in Vanguard for my oldschool fix and I play GW2 because I find that form of gameplay refreshing and I find the dungeons challengeing and I like the WvW PvP so my quotes somehow in your troll mind should answer my question why he feels GW2 is shallow
Really great game, beyond all my expectations. First "free" to play (have no problem with purchase of client) that i would gladly pay sub. My best trio ever it loosk is swtor/wow/gw2 so far.
I know you feel quite proud of yourself and though hahaha got him when you posted this with my quotes.
The word shallow means absolute nothing if you can't explain what is is that makes it shallow.
I really don't know why you thought you were smart by making those quotes about me liking GW2, as also quoted I have a sub running in Vanguard for my oldschool fix and I play GW2 because I find that form of gameplay refreshing and I find the dungeons challengeing and I like the WvW PvP so my quotes somehow in your troll mind should answer my question why he feels GW2 is shallow
i simply quoted you to answer your own predicament regarding how GW2 is not shallow. But your quots do make for very interesting read . But if we go by dictionary meaning shallow means somethign which lacks depth.
Granted it will vary from person to person but keeping your other posts in mind and your rant about modern games being easy and lackign depth i was hoping you would understand his post better and what he meant when he said 'GW2 is shallow'.
You mentioned that games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Your words not mine. Then you talk about lazy gamers who want everythign handed to them on silver platter. Who and which demographics do you think GW2 devs were aiming for? yes people with jobs, wives and kids who can hop in and out of the game on their own terms.
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
Again your words not mine. So yes actually you have already answered OP's question in past i just believe you have a very bi polar thing going on here. But to make it easier i will list the reasons based on your own posts.
1;) Fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed. (Check)
2;) Focusing on players who want everything served to them on silver platter. (Check)
3;) Catering to lazy carrot on stick kids and i got a job, wife and 2 children gamers. (Check)
4.) Games like Vanguard the only game which gives old school feeling these days somethign missing from games like GW2. (Check)
I can go on but isn't that what OP is trying to say but in different words? if this doesn't scream shallow than what does?
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
As usual the 'shallow lacks complexity' crowd confuse mindless repetition (grind) with 'hardcore gameplay'.
I don't play much but hop in and play with my son or a couple of mates and we always agree we should do this more often. The game has a lot of charm IMHO.
i simply quoted you to answer your own predicament regarding how GW2 is not shallow. But your quots do make for very interesting read . But if we go by dictionary meaning shallow means somethign which lacks depth.
Granted it will vary from person to person but keeping your other posts in mind and your rant about modern games being easy and lackign depth i was hoping you would understand his post better and what he meant when he said 'GW2 is shallow'.
You mentioned that games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Your words not mine. Then you talk about lazy gamers whow ant everythign handed to them on silver platter. What do you think GW2 devs were aiming for? yes people with jibs, wives and kids whoc na hop in and out of the game on their own terms.
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
Again your words not mine. So yes actually you have already answered OP's question in past i just believe you have a very bi polar thing going on here. But to make it easier i will list the reasons based on your own posts.
1;) Fast fod industry gameplay with little braina ctivity needed
2;) Focusing on players whow ant everything served to them on silver platter
3;) Catering to lazy carrot on stick kids and i got a job, wife and 2 children gamers
4.) Games like Vanguard the only game which gives old school feeling these days somethign missing from games like GW2.
I can go on but isn't that what OP is trying to say but in different words?
Meaningless ultra long grinds+forced grouping isnt depth. And thats all that "old school" games had. Yes i played them, i just dont wear rose colored glasses.
The only game i would charcterize with "deep" is EvE atm.
Meaningless ultra long grinds arent depth. And thats all that "old school" games had. Yes i played them, i just dont wear rose colored glasses.
I am just playing the devils advocate here i honestly belong to neither camp. because i am casual as well as hardcore gamer based on how much free time i can spare for gaming. However i do hate double standards.
Saying that modern MMOS cater to casuals and have very less depth, even go on to call them 'punks' and then if someone dares question GW2's depth the same guy jumps on him forgetting that in past that is all he has been doing ..complaining about modern MMOS being 'shallow'.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
I am just playing the devils advocate here i honestly belong to neither camp. because i am casual as well as hardcore gamer based on how much free time i can spare for gaming. However i do hate double standards.
Saying that modern MMOS cater to casuals and have very less depth, even go on to call them 'punks' and then if someone dares question GW2's depth the same guy jumps on him forgetting that in past that is all he has been doing ..complaining about modern MMOS being 'shallow'.
I didnt find any staggering complexity in those games.
MMOers have a tendency to proclaim "taking long time" as "complex" or "hard"
Going to max level in those games wasnt hard or coplex, it was just freaking long and ultra boring from todays perspective and had an added annoyance of needing 5-ish other people to do anything. Thats why those arent produced any more because they wouldnt survive a year in the market.
GW2 does have gems, but again, we don't know how that plays out in comparison, when you look at revenue.
EA lays off tons of people in different studios everywhere, NCSoft does just as much, which Arenanet is a part of. NCSoft will choose what studio needs to layoff who as they have done in previous years.
Except ANet just hired more people last week.
FUN FACT: Bioware was hiring for Austin (ie. SW:TOR development) until ***DAYS*** before the layoffs. The studio saying "hey we need a few more artists", and some HR person approving that, is VERY VERY different from the CFO of NCsoft or whatever, having looked at the spreadsheets in a few months, saying that he wants the studio cut by a third.
I am just playing the devils advocate here i honestly belong to neither camp. because i am casual as well as hardcore gamer based on how much free time i can spare for gaming. However i do hate double standards.
Saying that modern MMOS cater to casuals and have very less depth, even go on to call them 'punks' and then if someone dares question GW2's depth the same guy jumps on him forgetting that in past that is all he has been doing ..complaining about modern MMOS being 'shallow'.
I didnt find any staggering complexity in those games.
MMOers have a tendency to proclaim "taking long time" as "complex" or "hard"
Going to max level in those games wasnt hard or coplex, it was just freaking long and ultra boring from todays perspective and had an added annoyance of needing 5-ish other people to do anything. Thats why those arent produced any more because they wouldnt survive a year in the market.
GW2 isn't deep because the loot, customization, rewards are SO simple. I'm not on edge during a story bossfight because I KNOW the boss isn't going to drop any cool gear, because hey, I don't have 50,000 tokens or a trillion karma or whatever, because gear has to be bought from the vendor.
I know that when I level up I won't get that awesome ability, because HEY I'm level 35 and, as long as I want to play this general build, I'm using the same skills for the rest of the time i ever play this character.
I know that when I finish that challenging dungeon with my friends, I won't be able to go out into the world and FEEL more powerful, killing mobs with ease, because endgame gear doesn't give you much advantage in the open world and zones scale to your level anyway, so you never feel truly powerful.
The game has some of the best PvP I have experienced in years far as mmos go.
It is also one of the worst games I have ever seen from a PvE perspective. All relates to what you yearn for I suppose.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I know you feel quite proud of yourself and though hahaha got him when you posted this with my quotes.
The word shallow means absolute nothing if you can't explain what is is that makes it shallow.
I really don't know why you thought you were smart by making those quotes about me liking GW2, as also quoted I have a sub running in Vanguard for my oldschool fix and I play GW2 because I find that form of gameplay refreshing and I find the dungeons challengeing and I like the WvW PvP so my quotes somehow in your troll mind should answer my question why he feels GW2 is shallow
i simply quoted you to answer your own predicament regarding how GW2 is not shallow. But your quots do make for very interesting read . But if we go by dictionary meaning shallow means somethign which lacks depth.
Granted it will vary from person to person but keeping your other posts in mind and your rant about modern games being easy and lackign depth i was hoping you would understand his post better and what he meant when he said 'GW2 is shallow'.
You mentioned that games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Your words not mine. Then you talk about lazy gamers who want everythign handed to them on silver platter. Who and which demographics do you think GW2 devs were aiming for? yes people with jobs, wives and kids who can hop in and out of the game on their own terms.
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
Again your words not mine. So yes actually you have already answered OP's question in past i just believe you have a very bi polar thing going on here. But to make it easier i will list the reasons based on your own posts.
1;) Fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed. (Check)
2;) Focusing on players who want everything served to them on silver platter. (Check)
3;) Catering to lazy carrot on stick kids and i got a job, wife and 2 children gamers. (Check)
4.) Games like Vanguard the only game which gives old school feeling these days somethign missing from games like GW2. (Check)
I can go on but isn't that what OP is trying to say but in different words? if this doesn't scream shallow than what does?
No I still haven't answerd my own question and I STILL WANT A ANSWER FROM HIM not you and YOUR opinions.
So I really don't care what you have to say and how you feel and how you think the word shallow apply to GW2.
So with your logic I should wait, what to 2050 so I can play a game that YOU aprove?
I know you feel quite proud of yourself and though hahaha got him when you posted this with my quotes.
The word shallow means absolute nothing if you can't explain what is is that makes it shallow.
I really don't know why you thought you were smart by making those quotes about me liking GW2, as also quoted I have a sub running in Vanguard for my oldschool fix and I play GW2 because I find that form of gameplay refreshing and I find the dungeons challengeing and I like the WvW PvP so my quotes somehow in your troll mind should answer my question why he feels GW2 is shallow
i simply quoted you to answer your own predicament regarding how GW2 is not shallow. But your quots do make for very interesting read . But if we go by dictionary meaning shallow means somethign which lacks depth.
Granted it will vary from person to person but keeping your other posts in mind and your rant about modern games being easy and lackign depth i was hoping you would understand his post better and what he meant when he said 'GW2 is shallow'.
You mentioned that games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Your words not mine. Then you talk about lazy gamers who want everythign handed to them on silver platter. Who and which demographics do you think GW2 devs were aiming for? yes people with jobs, wives and kids who can hop in and out of the game on their own terms.
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
Again your words not mine. So yes actually you have already answered OP's question in past i just believe you have a very bi polar thing going on here. But to make it easier i will list the reasons based on your own posts.
1;) Fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed. (Check)
2;) Focusing on players who want everything served to them on silver platter. (Check)
3;) Catering to lazy carrot on stick kids and i got a job, wife and 2 children gamers. (Check)
4.) Games like Vanguard the only game which gives old school feeling these days somethign missing from games like GW2. (Check)
I can go on but isn't that what OP is trying to say but in different words? if this doesn't scream shallow than what does?
No I still haven't answerd my own question and I STILL WANT A ANSWER FROM HIM not you and YOUR opinions.
So I really don't care what you have to say and how you feel and how you think the word shallow apply to GW2.
So with your logic I should wait, what to 2050 so I can play a game that YOU aprove?
Considering what he said in his post reflects your own thoughts about state of modern games and direction they are going i don't see what else you want him to say. He didn't say something that we have never heard or read on these forums before. None the less it is hard to ignore irony in your posts.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
Comments
You will dismiss the actual numbers, because it's too soon to judge success, but then you will look to "word of mouth" as an indication of the current state of the game?
GW2 is doing better at the 4+ month mark than almost any other MMO since WoW, based on the numbers. Time will tell how well it maintains that success over time, but it is clearly a stand out success to this point. As a player with almost 800 hours played and much experience in the genre, I can say that the ingredients are all there to ensure ongoing success and Arenanet has outlined ongoing development that will just solidify the viability of the game.
The game is a clear success to date and all indications are that it will build on that success moving forward.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
It's not about dismissing the numbers at all, at least that's totally unrelated to seeing the word of mouth flying around at present, as well as A-nets own admissions that substantiate that word of mouth.
Edit: I should add that I acknowledged above they've passed a milestone in that they've met or may have even surpassed launch sales expectations. That's just one of many hurdles though, as I said in my original post.
Also note that I didn't say it has failed either, I just personally think it is far too early to say either way.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The analysts make an educated guess, just like we do. As I pointed out, the revenue for digitial copies sold directly by Arenanet will be much higher per box than the revenue generated via retailer sales. My guess was that the average revenue per box was ~$45 per unit sold. $48/unit is close enough I'm not going to argue with it, but it is still just a guess.
As far as Q3 revenue, pre-sales started in Q2 and many speculated that 400,000 to 800,000+ units were pre-purchased by the end of June. I would think that some portion of that revenue went on the books in Q2? (I think I remember hearing that only Arenanet Direct pre-sales were counted in Q2, since pre-purchases via retailers weren't considered any more concrete than pre-orders and retailers didn't need to pony up the wholesale purchases until close to release).
In any event, revenue points towards a fair level of success on generating revenue via gem purchases, which along with ongoing box sales is key to the success of the game. With a micro-transaction, buy to play business model, revenue trumps all other numbers and GW2 seems to be generating very healthy revenue.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Well, we hear negative "word of mouth" on in game population that many active players, myself included, can say are greatly exaggerated. People are still having issues transferring to 80%+ of all game servers due to population caps. This is even with the caps having been recently raised by a small percentage, plus the safe assumption that the average hours played per account per month has almost certainly seen some decline as players fall into sustainable play patterns beyond the initial rush.
Is there churn? I'm sure there is. However, there is clearly new box sales growth to counterbalance churn. Also, churn may mean something very different with GW2 than with a subscription game. Many people who dip out of active play for what ever reason may dip in and out many times over the course of a year, where as most subscription churn represents long term or permanent loss of players/revenue.
Also, though burn out does occur in any MMO, it would make sense that people who "wash out" of the game quickly are also the least likely to have made regular gem store purchases during their visit to the game. People who love the game and are more likely to remain as active players are probably also the group with the highest average per month layout for gem purchases. The churn rate among people who don't contribute any ongoing revenue is greatly diminished in it's importance, as long as there are enough active players to support healthy server populations and produce ongoing revenue.
The game world is huge and there are many things to do not only in the game world, but outside of it. Having so many "full" servers more than four months after launch is a very good sign and the sense that "zones aren't as full as they used to be" can be mostly attributed to the increased distribution of the playerbase throughout a very expansive game.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
They are over 300 emplayees now
https://forum-en.guildwars2.com/forum/game/bltc/What-to-buy-with-800-gems/first#post1218058
Except ANet just hired more people last week.
I read shallow here I read shallow there do PLEASE explain to me WHAT makes the game shallow, what aspects of it and what did you do when you played it.
If you can't anwser any of these questions I have then your post is shallow and pointless.
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
I don't know bro but i thought you would be the one who would understand what he meant by GW2 being shallow..
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
Made me lolz......GW2 is bland while SWTOR is a cool game now?
Glad you enjoy it.....and thnx for the laugh.
Your personal subjective definition of success is irrelevant. I can produce anything i want as a measure of success or failure and proclaim it success or failure.
Example: WoW is failure because it has gnomes.
ANet set their goals and if that goals were reached its a SUCCESS (and its pretty obvious they DID reach them)
Next step will be how well expansion sells. But for now and until expansion its a SUCCESS.
Oh, and word of mouth?
Its not the game you are looking for ;P
Actually according to Mike O brian he wants to beat WOW and become number one so nope if we are talking about goals set by Anet then GW2 isn't a success yet.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
Except that is exactly why it is a success for now until the expansion.
How many copies did MOP sell till now again?
Assured Mutual Destruction [ICBM]
I know you feel quite proud of yourself and though hahaha got him when you posted this with my quotes.
The word shallow means absolute nothing if you can't explain what is is that makes it shallow.
I really don't know why you thought you were smart by making those quotes about me liking GW2, as also quoted I have a sub running in Vanguard for my oldschool fix and I play GW2 because I find that form of gameplay refreshing and I find the dungeons challengeing and I like the WvW PvP so my quotes somehow in your troll mind should answer my question why he feels GW2 is shallow
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
i simply quoted you to answer your own predicament regarding how GW2 is not shallow. But your quots do make for very interesting read . But if we go by dictionary meaning shallow means somethign which lacks depth.
Granted it will vary from person to person but keeping your other posts in mind and your rant about modern games being easy and lackign depth i was hoping you would understand his post better and what he meant when he said 'GW2 is shallow'.
You mentioned that games after 2000 to 2012 and you can clearly see the games have gone from difficult and challenging to fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed to be able to play.
Your words not mine. Then you talk about lazy gamers who want everythign handed to them on silver platter. Who and which demographics do you think GW2 devs were aiming for? yes people with jobs, wives and kids who can hop in and out of the game on their own terms.
Why do game developers listen to these punks who want everything served on a golden platter with little effort needed and in the same time these people will leave after the first month anyway to scourge the forums for the next big hit.
Since when did the lazy carrot on a stick kids and I got a job,a wife and 2 children gamers have more power than the average gamer?
Again your words not mine. So yes actually you have already answered OP's question in past i just believe you have a very bi polar thing going on here. But to make it easier i will list the reasons based on your own posts.
1;) Fast food industry gameplay with little brain activity needed. (Check)
2;) Focusing on players who want everything served to them on silver platter. (Check)
3;) Catering to lazy carrot on stick kids and i got a job, wife and 2 children gamers. (Check)
4.) Games like Vanguard the only game which gives old school feeling these days somethign missing from games like GW2. (Check)
I can go on but isn't that what OP is trying to say but in different words? if this doesn't scream shallow than what does?
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
As usual the 'shallow lacks complexity' crowd confuse mindless repetition (grind) with 'hardcore gameplay'.
I don't play much but hop in and play with my son or a couple of mates and we always agree we should do this more often. The game has a lot of charm IMHO.
Meaningless ultra long grinds+forced grouping isnt depth. And thats all that "old school" games had. Yes i played them, i just dont wear rose colored glasses.
The only game i would charcterize with "deep" is EvE atm.
I am just playing the devils advocate here i honestly belong to neither camp. because i am casual as well as hardcore gamer based on how much free time i can spare for gaming. However i do hate double standards.
Saying that modern MMOS cater to casuals and have very less depth, even go on to call them 'punks' and then if someone dares question GW2's depth the same guy jumps on him forgetting that in past that is all he has been doing ..complaining about modern MMOS being 'shallow'.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
I didnt find any staggering complexity in those games.
MMOers have a tendency to proclaim "taking long time" as "complex" or "hard"
Going to max level in those games wasnt hard or coplex, it was just freaking long and ultra boring from todays perspective and had an added annoyance of needing 5-ish other people to do anything. Thats why those arent produced any more because they wouldnt survive a year in the market.
FUN FACT: Bioware was hiring for Austin (ie. SW:TOR development) until ***DAYS*** before the layoffs. The studio saying "hey we need a few more artists", and some HR person approving that, is VERY VERY different from the CFO of NCsoft or whatever, having looked at the spreadsheets in a few months, saying that he wants the studio cut by a third.
GW2 isn't deep because the loot, customization, rewards are SO simple. I'm not on edge during a story bossfight because I KNOW the boss isn't going to drop any cool gear, because hey, I don't have 50,000 tokens or a trillion karma or whatever, because gear has to be bought from the vendor.
I know that when I level up I won't get that awesome ability, because HEY I'm level 35 and, as long as I want to play this general build, I'm using the same skills for the rest of the time i ever play this character.
I know that when I finish that challenging dungeon with my friends, I won't be able to go out into the world and FEEL more powerful, killing mobs with ease, because endgame gear doesn't give you much advantage in the open world and zones scale to your level anyway, so you never feel truly powerful.
The game has some of the best PvP I have experienced in years far as mmos go.
It is also one of the worst games I have ever seen from a PvE perspective. All relates to what you yearn for I suppose.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
No I still haven't answerd my own question and I STILL WANT A ANSWER FROM HIM not you and YOUR opinions.
So I really don't care what you have to say and how you feel and how you think the word shallow apply to GW2.
So with your logic I should wait, what to 2050 so I can play a game that YOU aprove?
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
I am fairly indifferent to GW2, I don't play it, but I found it mildly distracting for a month or so, so I don;t feel my money was wasted.
However, I don't understand how someone can argue that the gameplay and mechanics are anything other than shallow.
Anyway, rather than provide a lengthy explantion of what shallow is, I thought I would just share the following extract from the OED: -
shal·low (sh
l
)
adj. shal·low·er, shal·low·est
2. Lacking depth of intellect, emotion, or knowledge: "This is a shallow parody of America" (Lloyd Rose).
3. Guild Wars 2.
Considering what he said in his post reflects your own thoughts about state of modern games and direction they are going i don't see what else you want him to say. He didn't say something that we have never heard or read on these forums before. None the less it is hard to ignore irony in your posts.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney