Home › Game Forums › WildStar
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
WS v. ESO - Which one Failed Less/ Succeeded More?
Sassy_Gay_Unicorn
Member UncommonPosts: 316
in WildStar
As the title sez:
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I would say they were both were rather disappointing at release. As to which was less successful, I dunno.
Quarterly reports and recent departures suggest WS is going to have the harder time of it, combined with the absence of a known IP and the tiny playerbase they were aiming for.
Yes, some frame of reference for what to expect for the games, and some frame of reference for the results showing how they were not what was expected or how the games performed less than was expected.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well Wildstar has dropped its monthly updates, lost its executive producer and switched to mega server technology within a few weeks of each other
“We’ve been training ourselves to do monthly updates because we think the era of waiting 3-6 six months and then doing a big update is kind of over.”
Apparently not
Its not a resounding success and it has no IP to fall back on to rebuild.
both fail.
ArcheAge Masterrace lolz
what he said ^^
Neither.
Both have yay and nay sayers. Also undecided - AA supporters.
When AA comes out large portion of people will be disappointed and praise next game. Smaller part will enjoy the game and cycle continues.
Agree
Btw i ll give it a shot again once September Feature Pack goes live.
All Time Favorites: EQ1, WoW, EvE, GW1
Playing Now: WoW, ESO, GW2
Yes, GW1 is vastly better than any of these games.
For the next month or two at least.
Then I suspect it will be the cool game to hate on, while Wildstar catches a break.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
Ofc that will hapened at some degree, but the release of AA is a little diferent from ESO and WS, AA is not new.
It will be new to alot of ppl, but AA have alot of followers that allready play the game for a few months in other regions and in a long full working alpha.
If you can define exactly what they were trying to achieve then perhaps a can tell you if they did indeed fail.
Personally I gave ESO 3 months and Wildstar 3 hours before I had enough but I do not think either are failures and I hope that enough people play them that the people who put in all the hard work producing the games continue to have employment.
I don't think either was a failure.
Never been a fan of hard instance raiding or grouping. When I want to play with other players I'd like to enjoy myself, play casually and just derp around. To see Wildstar form a small niche of players has me hoping that those players have found their game and hopefully future games will stay away from that sort of content.
Much the same with ESO, not a fan of the action combat or the overbearing voice acting. Hopefully players interested in those features have found their game and future games will stay away from that sort of content.
I wonder why people always ask this.
As with any business the measure of success is recouping your development (and running) costs and turning a profit on top of that.
I haven't seen ESO's figures, but judging by the NCSoft quarterly report, which suggests WS is a long way off recouping the most conservative estimates of the development cost, and their President stepping down it seems that all is far from well in the WS camp.
But we don't know their dev costs, the only numbers where made and created on these forums and also I pointed out last time the figures where from jan to the end of june, so it's all a guessing game if you ask me.
To the topic:
The point still remains how can we gauge what is a success or failure for both games? right now there is only 4 P2p AAA games and only 2 released this year and one has had a grip on the market for so long there's no point trying to compare. There have been many games that had to shut down, but many people would never consider them as failed. So how can we gauge what is a faliure if games that have been shutdown can't be looked at the same way? to judge success we could use FFxiv, but thats still seem like a guess. if all three release sub numbers we could see whats doing better, but thats about it tbh.
Yes it is all a guessing game, but the way you judge success or failure in any company is whether they recoup their initial development costs (plus any interest accrued on loans etc), whether they achieve sufficient regular cashflow to cover their running costs and whether they earn sufficient profit for its founders/ shareholders to warrant their risk or the absence of alternative investmenets, and perhaps if it matters to the firm (and certainly secondary to the above which dictate success or failure of the company) via customer satisfaction.
There are fairly strong indications that WS is in trouble on this front, whether people choose to hide behind the absence of official figures or not.
People may choose other measures of success, but the above is the only one that matters, since it is the only one that dictates whether the game will continue running, whether it will receive any patches, updates or expansions, and whether there will be a complete change in direction in terms of the monetization model or the game mechanics.
You mention sub numbers, but a small niche game with a low development and running costs requires many less subs than an AAA mmo with a huge development budget. Yes sub-numbers feed into the profitability of a game, but alone sub numbers are entirely meaningless.
Its honestly tough to say. ESO launch was abysmal. Horrible. Bugs and bad gameplay exploits that were reported in beta and ignored. People camping little bosses in small dungeons for crappy loot. It was just..laughable that something like this was allowed in game. However, it seems like after 3 or so months that ESO is making great strides and I believe its on the precipice of craving out its own niché in the genre. If I ever pick it up, it'll be to enjoy the game Skyrim style via exploration, story, taking in the scenery and lore, doing what I want to do class wise, etc. I dont think ESO is a game to get bogged down in dungeons and endgame play. And I won't purchase it for that. (my experience comes from several beta weekends).
Wildstar I had a better time with. Two max level characters in a month, fun combat, great lore for a new IP. I called it during beta that their focus on 40 man raiding was going to be its downfall, and it partially is. Even some of the 40 man hardcores are leaving because it just has too many barriers to entry. Coupled with bugs and system issues to be expected for any new games growing pains, Im not sure. They addressed sever populations REALLY quick with megaservers. But now have abandoned monthly updates. I also hear they might be focusing more on opening up the endgame experience more as well as making more solo end game content. This is promising.
I can't give an answer. Wildstar had a better first month than ESO IMO. ESO is having a better end of the quarter. But Wildstar is just getting their feet under them. Tough to say.
I didn't vote.
Why do people keep trying to compare these two games success or failure with one another. Sure, they came out at about the same time, but they are different games all together.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Well, the cheese got my vote.
Seriously though, it's hard to say. I'd say with the time invested in the game development, Wildstar is the bigger loser here. You don't develop a game for 9 years and release a POS as it was. Even the alpha they had lasted quite long, and they got feedback, relevant feedback how enjoyable their game is and what they should do to increase it. They did not...and they reap what they sowed so I don't feel sorry for them...well actually, fuck them, they got feedback from people that spent hundreds of hours on their game trying to help them. And what they got in return...they were told to shut up...in alpha...pathetic (I saw the posts, they weren't trolly or anything, it was just feedback on what is wrong with the game).
Granted my view is mostly through what is happening with ppl in the guild (forums are usually meh) and their feedback and from idk 60-ish people that started in both games, vast majority did not make it past 3-4 weeks. Which is a damn bad achievement, if people don't even want to play for the 1st free month (at least in my book).
So I guess TESO would win for me. At least I can say the devs were kinda fresh in the MMO business and well, they made mistakes.