Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Funcom: Age of Conan player numbers 'will never match WoW's' it's going to run up to World of Warcra
AmazingAvery
Age of Conan AdvocateMember UncommonPosts: 7,188
|
Funcom has said Age of Conan will never attract the same number of players that have flocked to Blizzard's World of Warcraft in an interview with CVG. But I think Age of Conan is going to appeal to a broad range of players, people who like MMOs, people who don't like MMOs", he continued. |
Read more here at CVG : http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=185058
And also take a look over easter weekend here: 2 new screen for now: http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=185186
Full interviews coming there soon!
This maintains Funcom's direction from the start that its not or never has been aiming for WoW numbers from the beginning. They released beta numbers nearly one year from when apps were taken and never forced the popularity in that way on the passer by. The game is sold on its merits and not its numbers, numbers are important but the game itself imo is more so. Get the basics right first then the word will get out - its only natural.
For me its not about getting millions of players. I already know there will be populated servers and as a fan im confident those numbers will stay to get my social fix. I don't need to have everyone on the server on my friends list... Do you?
Comments
What it boils down to is how well the game launches, how well it's received by the gaming press, how ready the game is for lauch, and whether they can deliver something fun to play.
It's pretty pointless trying to determine how successful games are going to be because noone really has a clue. Everquest was initially planned to last for one year, instead it changed everything and still goes on 9 years later. Brad McQuaid told us that Vanguard was aiming for 300,000-400,000 subscribers, obviously it fell far short of that. Blizzard were hoping for a peak of 1 million subscribers but managed 10 times the number of that. Everquest 2 was marketed as the "80lb Goriilla of Online Gaming" but wasn't the product they wanted it to be at launch, a year later the product was a lot better, but they had missed their opportunity.
So given all that, I'm inclined to believe that ALL speculation on the success of the game is ultimately pointless and only time will tell of AoC will be a success (doesn't need millions of customers to be a success), or another mediocre MMO in a sea of mediocre MMOs.
Still waiting for your Holy Grail MMORPG? Interesting...
I think there are two deciding factors that will keep AoC from reaching "huge" subscriptions.
1) The System Requirements. I know the game will run on Medium systems, but not on low-budget systems, or, it will run only in the lowest possible qualities and it will have to remain seen if that is something people enjoy.
2) The M Rating. Yes, it will attract people, but it will also repel people. Not claiming what kinds, just that it will do so.
Anyway, that being said, I also think that to be considered a success, the game doesn't need huge numbers. What it needs is a solid subscriber base in the numbers that give FC profit (so the company is happy) and a solid game with few bugs at launch and continually upgraded content as well as performance (to make the players happy). If those two can be achieved, the game can be considered a success. See EVE Online. They don't have the huge numbers, but nobody thinks of that one as a failure.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Yep i agree totally. It will be a sucess, it will have a good following, and no it won t touch WOW s numbers. I m willing to bet a better community though
haha, I remember when BBC news made the old report about Age of Conan back in May 2007. Here is the:
Beating Warcraft at its own game
Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6619875.stm
Beside, Funcom should not mock Blizzard game. I remember when this picture was on the frontpage
That picture is pretty funny for me. AoC > WoW.
And the quotes from Gaute in the first few paragraphs of that BBC news story still stand true.
But im unsure of what your getting at BattleKruse? The delay?
Funny picture, I kind of missed it.
Agree 100%. Fortunately, I just got a new rig.
A big part of WoW's popularity is due to the low end system requirements and still looks good.
WoW is like TV its cheap, simple and appeals to the dimwits in our society (though not all players fit in that category, you all know who i am talking about )
AoC, SWG (pre NGE), WAR (to a certain extent) and Everquest are like books. they are filled with wonderful content but the masses wont have any of it.
basically...you cant beat WoW unless u make an even less complicated game and use an even more popular IP (which in the gaming world there almost is none (save starcraft..again a Vivendi IP))
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
Any smart developer knows it's pointless to set a goal of getting more subscriptions than WoW. WoW was a right time, right place happening with an established IP, established fan base, composition of polished game mechanics and a foray into Asia.
You're starting to see more and more Devs make the comment that they aren't trying to out do WoW. It's only some gamers out there, who in my opinion have no clue, making such comments and comparisons.
Make a solid game, have a good release, get 200-500K subscriptions and chalk it up a financial win. As Bobby Kotick, CEO of Activison, said, "...we don't think that even if we made the $500 million or $1 billion investment to get a product out that would be competitive with Warcraft that we would actually be successful doing it."
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
There is something about a disconnect like that in the gaming industry that bothers me, and it always makes me wonder where the root of it lies. Is all this positive media coverage "bought", as so much preview coverage supposedly is? Does Funcom just not have the money to promote this title properly? Should we be interested and we're just not, is the media just out of touch with the interests of their readers, or is something more nefarious going on with the preview coverage?
There is something about a disconnect like that in the gaming industry that bothers me, and it always makes me wonder where the root of it lies. Is all this positive media coverage "bought", as so much preview coverage supposedly is? Does Funcom just not have the money to promote this title properly? Should we be interested and we're just not, is the media just out of touch with the interests of their readers, or is something more nefarious going on with the preview coverage?
I dude from the forums made that picture. Last December I think.
I think you find the interested to non interested ratio percentage to be more or less the same as the people with PC's who can & can't play the game - Around 85% for > 15% against.
I don't know how you was able to pull the word 'nefarious' out and place it in that sentance.
That interview was May 2007 that picture you pulled out was from December '07.
You should of quoted Gaute as saying this:
"We did not want to be a teen-rated game, we wanted to have the possibility of making a game that takes the licence seriously."
I think that quote somes the game up - about taking advantage of the license you own, using it to the best of the companies ability. Thats why we have blood and not jam.
Well one thing is people seem to think you need to have millions apon millions of players to have a "good", and "properly functioning" MMO. You don't. A few hundred thousand is a success, but in order to reach that you need stable servers, and a game with plenty of content to even satisfy the power gamer, it needs to be relatively easy to learn, and run decently on a basic modern computer.