or to put it another way... Wow, SW:TOR will finally kill Rift..
and .. just as equaly a valid statement funnily enough.
SW:ToR is going to be a gigantic bust. I guarantee that. Why you ask?
The answer is whos making it..... Lucas Arts/Bioware. Lucas Arts has not had a truely successful game since the N64 days to be honest. I just dont trust them enough to make this work, and quite honestly, i dont think a partnership with Bioware, which is not exactly experienced with MMO's is really going to work well when it comes to the final product. Bioware isnt exactly doing wonders for WAR these days is it. Bioware is by no means a bad company and i dont think SW:ToR will be bad, but it wont be what folks expect, and will feel more like a Dragon Age MMO then anything else. I just dont see it sustaining numbers.
And as for WoW... nothing will ever kill WoW. You simply cant kill something so large. But what you can do is make it look vulnerable. No game has been able to take even a minor bite into WoW's sub numbers. I think RIFT will do that. I really would not be surprised if many WoW players, who are literally playing because theres nothing else to play, try Cataclysm out, quickly get tired, and look for another home, which RIFT could provide. I see RIFT being the first MMO to do what others couldnt and take a bite out of the sub numbers for WoW. It wont kill WoW, but it will make folks realize that if you do things right, you can hurt the beast, and eventually with enough wounds the beast will fall.
Uhh Bioware didn't take over control of WAR so I have no clue why you are even making that claim. Mythic still handles the WAR duties, that game is in maitenance mode pretty much and I have heard nothing that says Bioware actually works on that game. Why would they move Bioware onto the failure WAR (that ALREADY failed before the mythic/bioware thing) when SWToR is way more important? You may not like Bioware, but don't blame them for WAR!
As for your "guarantee"? LOL
When I was at E3, the face of SWTOR was also the head of WAR, meaning they put a lot of WAR's Creative development alongside SWTOR and used their poster boy to sell the game. It is fair to link the two in that regard.
That said... SWTOR is a guaranteed bust. No joke, just do a lil research and you will know why. Dont be so surprised either, Final Fantasy 14 online busted for the same reason. BAD DESIGN. Bioware (much respect to them) is treating it like a single player game, partially linear with a subscription fee. Richard Garriet of Ultima Fame couldnt even get his last MMORPG on its feet. Finally, you need to understand that EA isnt really known for having successful mmorpgs under their belt really. This is a butchered product.
Even mmorpg.com has a scathing article on SWTOR after the author actually played the game. Bioware made a bad move and you will see it when they dont meet their projected numbers as well as notice the magnitude of negative reviews from gaming sites.
You can always tell that someone is talking out of their ass when they refer to this as a single player game.
You can always tell that someone is talking out of their ass when they refer to this as a single player game.
Uh huh, and did you actually read my post.
You dont know the difference between "treating it like a single player game" and "referring to it AS a single player game"?
I suppose the developers are talking out of their asses too right? I mean considering in interviews they also refer to their game as single player in many ways, rather, not in the fact that you are limited to one person in a game world but rather in how its presented to the player in terms of story and progression. They will not be making anymore Star Wars single player games because this is the sequel to their single player titles. In fact, they are focusing on a story centric game which results in more of a linear mode of play. PvP will happen on battle grounds. Guild Wars was not a mmorpg, neither will SWTOR be in the same sense.
There is no sand box in SWTOR. There are no genre "game changing" features. The game is designed around their expectations of their single player Knights of the Old Republic games first. Solo play and character progression makes up a huge part of the design. You get a computer controlled companion and go on instanced "missions". SWTOR is not a SINGLE PLAYER GAME by definition though, and no where have I made that claim. Their design however comes from Single Player, and a user will find that a large portion of the game feels like a solo campaign in which other players might be seen in and or around the world, thats all.
Do your own research if you dont want to believe me. I was at E3 by the way and listened to their spiel on everything about the game. I dont even think that event was published outside of E3.
Eh? I hadn't expected a debate about SWTOR in a Rift thread. Not to derail too much from this thread, I do want to say this (but I'm keeping it short): the devs have also said MANY times that SW:TOR is a MMORPG, with all the regular MMO features, as well as the playtest previews and impression reports said it, which btw were generally very positive over the whole line. But sure, I guess that most of the current MMORPG's enable solo play up to level cap these days and can thus be seen as a singleplayer game, WoW, LotrO, AoC and others included.
Regarding SWTOR being a bust or not, well, I guess it's best just to use a quote from the link you referred to yourself:
"Things SWTOR isn't"
A Dismal Failure
If you’re saying this already, I’m sorry, but you’re only guessing. People who do this professionally don’t actually know what the outcome is going to be at this point and calling it this early, no matter how qualified you think you are or how many times you post it on different forums just smacks of trolldom. You honestly don’t know and there may even be a slight chance that you’re spouting it as fact because deep down you’re hoping that your early proclamation will somehow influence the end result. Stop it. It’s way, way, way too early to say this with any credibility.
Back to the OP: what are the requirements for fail or flourish? Because some people would consider Aion or LotrO a fail too. So if it is so be as successful as WoW, then Rift will be a fail.
If it is to do well with at least a couple of 100k's of subs while being generally enjoyable for a longer period than a few months, then I think Rift will flourish and be a success. How much a success depends on how well the endgame is and how well CATA and the other upcoming MMORPG's as GW2, TERA, SW:TOR and others will do.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
And its also followed by "It wont be a blockbuster success".
What you are failing to realize is that the measure of success cannot be comparable to the measure of failure. There is a reason why I didnt use Jon Wood's Blockbuster success or dismal failure pieces because they are subjective to the point where he doesnt actually explain the system, and to be quite honest, I believe he was trying to keep to the middle ground as much a possible, even if his opinion on that matter might differ.
That said. Is Vanguard a success? I mean, its still alive and some profit is being made. Does that make it a success? No its still a failure. Its still a bust. A game doesnt need to be dead in the water for it to be a bust. What it comes down to are Publisher expectations, budget (cost of making game) compared with expected profit (surpassing the cost of making the game in revenue). Just making your money back isnt enough to warrant success. It typically needs to at the very least double on the investment. It is for this reason that SWTOR, as an already established IP even (results in more expectations) will be a bust. No one is thinking it will be APB, but rather the game will just not do as well as their marketing people and producers are predicting. Its as simple as that. Dont be surprised to see perhaps an alternate business model pop up ala Turbine, EA cant lose face with having a mmorpg meet below their expectations.
That said, my explanation follows into the question you are posing about Rift as well and what defines the flourish or failure.
I hope it Flourishes. I see it starting off with tons of people half of them will leave because it's not going to be WoW. The people left will be the people who enjoy the game. I would take 1 hardcore player who likes the game over 100 people who just play every new MMORPG that comes out because they are looking for a duplicate of the WoW with new content.
I hope it does well but I'm afraid for the long term the game will fail because the dymanic events are too much like Guild Wars 2. Also games like Rift will only be time fillers before the majority leave to go play The Old Repulic and Guild Wars 2.
I think it'll do as good as AoC and LotRO, WoW's age is showing despite the expansion. So it'll get its chunk of people who will like it. It looks to have enough quality put in to it if they can make a good first impression (FFXIV didn't) it'll get decent numbers.
It'll be worth of mouth and exceptional updates to make it flourish. I have no idea if the developer is capable or not until I see it.
But I see it being a success in comparison to some recent titles.
RIFT & GW2 are the new cool kids on the block that could pull pass a niche market (like DCUO and some other titles).
If rift was anything like the real paladium books then i think it will have a go. But to tell you the truth im not even sure they own the title. the game rifts as a pen and paper game was awesome and d&d still has its folowing so this game is alot more like wow and is going to draw more players from it. well i guess time will tell
That said. Is Vanguard a success? I mean, its still alive and some profit is being made. Does that make it a success? No its still a failure. Its still a bust. A game doesnt need to be dead in the water for it to be a bust. What it comes down to are Publisher expectations, budget (cost of making game) compared with expected profit (surpassing the cost of making the game in revenue). Just making your money back isnt enough to warrant success. It typically needs to at the very least double on the investment. It is for this reason that SWTOR, as an already established IP even (results in more expectations) will be a bust. No one is thinking it will be APB, but rather the game will just not do as well as their marketing people and producers are predicting. Its as simple as that. Dont be surprised to see perhaps an alternate business model pop up ala Turbine, EA cant lose face with having a mmorpg meet below their expectations.
That said, my explanation follows into the question you are posing about Rift as well and what defines the flourish or failure.
This debate complements nicely another discussion I was posting in, namely that of an Aion thread where people consider Aion to be a failure. Even if it's doing better in subs and player numbers than all the other P2P MMORPG's around besides WoW. As I mentioned in that thread, it's very relative and subjective what is seen as a success or failure, and there's a difference between financial success and being successful as a MMO game.
It all comes down to expectations, since those are subjective and for a large part individual also the conclusion and interpretation whether a game is a success suffers from that subjectvity.
Are for example SWG and LotrO considered to be failures? Maybe in the eyes of their companies where those games didn't make the impact that the companies behind them had hoped or wanted, it certainly didn't reach the sub numbers that many before had expected of them. But those games aren't considered a failure as games in the eyes of the enthusiastic playerbases of those games that adored those MMORPG's.
If it's that debatable to make a 'fail or success' judgement of existing MMORPG's with no solid parameters to work with, it's even harder for upcoming MMORPG's as Rift and SW:TOR. In this I personally follow the same line of thought as Jon Wood did in his article, that it's ok to speculate but that it's best to refrain from making surefire claims and hard predictions.
Although Trion has set its bar on a more reasonable level than EA Bioware, where Rift's company is happy with a few 100k of subs, EA Bioware needs 1 million and more subs. In however way you look at it, 1 million subs is a LOT. I guess 2011-2012 will show if WoW's sub numbers was a fluke, a singularity, or if 1 mil+ subs (or player numbers) for global MMO's can be achieved and maintained by the like of a GW2, SW:TOR, Rift and/or TERA.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Its made in the U.S.A. we should all support this one
No we shouldn't. Not because of that reason.
First of all is half of us not from the US.
Secondly is GW2 also made in the US while TOR is half Canadian, half American.
Thirdly: You should support MMOs because they are good, not because who made them. If you support a crappy American made game over a good game from someone else it actually promotes crappy games on the cost of good ones.
The reason we should support the game is if it is good (I havn't got that beta key yet so I only seen vids and read about it, dunno how good it is yet). There are not that many MMOs releasing every year and the game you should support should deserve it.
If it is good I will support it will all my heart, if it sucks I will see it close down fast.
Its made in the U.S.A. we should all support this one
No we shouldn't. Not because of that reason.
First of all is half of us not from the US.
Secondly is GW2 also made in the US while TOR is half Canadian, half American.
Thirdly: You should support MMOs because they are good, not because who made them. If you support a crappy American made game over a good game from someone else it actually promotes crappy games on the cost of good ones.
The reason we should support the game is if it is good (I havn't got that beta key yet so I only seen vids and read about it, dunno how good it is yet). There are not that many MMOs releasing every year and the game you should support should deserve it.
If it is good I will support it will all my heart, if it sucks I will see it close down fast.
While I don't always agree with you Loke, this reply confirms my opinion that you are more intelligent than the average poster. Supporting something that is crappy only tells the manufacturer that they can go on producing crappy products. This applies to cars, clothes, mmorpgs and everything in between.
Are for example SWG and LotrO considered to be failures? Maybe in the eyes of their companies where those games didn't make the impact that the companies behind them had hoped or wanted, it certainly didn't reach the sub numbers that many before had expected of them. But those games aren't considered a failure as games in the eyes of the enthusiastic playerbases of those games that adored those MMORPG's.
I kinda think SWG is a failure today or at least close, it have very few subs and most companies besides SOE would have canned it a long time ago. NGE is not something I would call a success.
Failure might be a big word, barley goes by is closer to it, just like Vanguard.
LOTRO on the other hand still makes money and can't be considered a failure. The devs hoped for more subs and the publisher who hoped for millions of subs probably don't see it as a success but that is more due to overestimating the MMO market than the game.
A true failure is a game that gets canned within a year of the release, like APB and Tabula rasa.
A regular failure is a game that never gets back the money they used to make it and the running cost of it during it's lifetime (if you reuse the GFX engine you probably have to split the development cost between the games who uses it).
Then there is a middle line where most games come, they get in a few bucks extra but no huge sums.
Successes are games that got in several more times money than it have cost, like Wow, EQ and GW. They are rather rare but MMOs have a huge potential for money and Blizzard are rich as trolls now.
Its made in the U.S.A. we should all support this one
No we shouldn't. Not because of that reason.
First of all is half of us not from the US.
Secondly is GW2 also made in the US while TOR is half Canadian, half American.
Thirdly: You should support MMOs because they are good, not because who made them. If you support a crappy American made game over a good game from someone else it actually promotes crappy games on the cost of good ones.
The reason we should support the game is if it is good (I havn't got that beta key yet so I only seen vids and read about it, dunno how good it is yet). There are not that many MMOs releasing every year and the game you should support should deserve it.
If it is good I will support it will all my heart, if it sucks I will see it close down fast.
While I don't always agree with you Loke, this reply confirms my opinion that you are more intelligent than the average poster. Supporting something that is crappy only tells the manufacturer that they can go on producing crappy products. This applies to cars, clothes, mmorpgs and everything in between.
I kinda think SWG is a failure today or at least close, it have very few subs and most companies besides SOE would have canned it a long time ago. NGE is not something I would call a success.
Failure might be a big word, barley goes by is closer to it, just like Vanguard.
LOTRO on the other hand still makes money and can't be considered a failure. The devs hoped for more subs and the publisher who hoped for millions of subs probably don't see it as a success but that is more due to overestimating the MMO market than the game.
A true failure is a game that gets canned within a year of the release, like APB and Tabula rasa.
A regular failure is a game that never gets back the money they used to make it and the running cost of it during it's lifetime (if you reuse the GFX engine you probably have to split the development cost between the games who uses it).
Then there is a middle line where most games come, they get in a few bucks extra but no huge sums.
Successes are games that got in several more times money than it have cost, like Wow, EQ and GW. They are rather rare but MMOs have a huge potential for money and Blizzard are rich as trolls now.
I was actually referring to SWG Pre-NGE, it never did bring in the sub numbers that Lucas Arts and SOE had hoped for, nor did it capture or stayed true to the 'Star Wars' essence as fully as LA and SOE wanted, why else changing it so drastically with the NGE? Or why have a 2nd Star Wars MMO not even that long after the first one?
But my posts were more about how relative and subjective success and failure is: on these same forums there was a thread today about how Aion was a failure in the eyes of a number of people, while if you look at the financial revenues and sub numbers of the US and EU alone it easily surpasses other MMO's like a LotrO and others that are considered a success in the eyes of other people.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
But my posts were more about how relative and subjective success and failure is: on these same forums there was a thread today about how Aion was a failure in the eyes of a number of people, while if you look at the financial revenues and sub numbers of the US and EU alone it easily surpasses other MMO's like a LotrO and others that are considered a success in the eyes of other people.
it's really a failure on the OPs part to define exactly what he meant by "fail" and "flourish". in the absence of definition, i provided my own when i voted. to a lot of people on these forums "success" means "WoW-killer", which i don't think is a good measure at all.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
No qustion at all,it has and will attract atttention.I do not feel it is innovating anything at all,instead i see some flawed mistakes,that i know some like,but i strongly do not like.
Anything at all OFFLINE ,i will never support.
I do not beleive in a solo designed MMORPG.Sure you can have some solo content to do,but combat should be grouped.A game should be designed like FFXI was,your infancy start in the world would be realistic to solo,but eventually you mature as a player and need to group to fight more formiddable foes than the little bees and rabbits.
Even the best hype NEEDS to deliver,this game will NEED to deliver on it's content,all the talk goes out the window once players begin to play.I just have this gut feeling that this is not the next John Carmack,this is just another small developer trying to cash in on the MMO hype.
Could i be wrong?? oh god i hope so,i would love nothing more than to come onto these forums and say "man am i glad i was wrong,this game is amazing".I say this because right now i am bored and want someting to call home.
My problem is that after playing FFXI and seeing how well a class/multi class system with Renkai can work,all other games fail in comparison,so it is a huge task for this game to grasp my attention.I wanted to beta test it,but the questionnarie was totally loaded and to be frank i didn't like the questions.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
If rift was anything like the real paladium books then i think it will have a go. But to tell you the truth im not even sure they own the title. the game rifts as a pen and paper game was awesome and d&d still has its folowing so this game is alot more like wow and is going to draw more players from it. well i guess time will tell
Paladium Books owns a separate IP. They tried to claim they have the trade mark on the word "Rifts" and therefore "Rift", but found out the hard way that they know nothing of copywrite and trademark law.
I can go out and trademark the word "Cat" but if anyone else tries to use "Cat", I wouldnt be able to hold up that trademark in court, in fact, it would get thrown out. Why? you cannot trademark single commonly used words especially if they are part of the Language of which you speak.
So no, Paladium doesnt own it anymore than Trion does in that regard.
Does it touch in enough areas of a bygone era as well as potentially push the genre forward with some of the announced features (if implemented well) YES
If RIFT can deliver on its features and stay balanced then I think RIFT will flourish I believe it will attract a respectable and loyal following that it will please many for years to come and if it can do that word of mouth can be a very valuable marketing tool and it can potentially grow to be very succesful.
Rift has 2 things most top shelf MMO's does not have and I think one is a direct spin off of the other.
a) it is lacking in the Rabid Fanbois proclaiming this to be the greatest thing ever!!!!!!1!!
b) as a result of that, and by sheer dint of being a fantasy MMO that is not WoW, it seems to have a large amount of "generic goodwill" aimed at it.
People don't hate Rift, they're intrigued by it. Even the mighty MMORPG.com and its universally recognised trolls are taking things easy on Rift because they're feasting on FFXIV, and the game looks like it might be decent and is not WoW.
I actually think it will do considerably better than people think, and may be the surprise hit of the year compared to the other titles.
As the OP name is RIFT_something, and he/she made the account especially for this, I will report the thread for advertising.
The game is promissing, but god i hate advertising!
Oh No, Someone posted a thread on if people think Rift will flourish or not without giving their own opinion on a sub-forum dedicated to the game. Damn Advertisers, whats next people posting a thread about World of Warcraft on a forum dedicated to it. What has the world come to?
Originally posted by A_hi
a mutant copy of WoW and Aion?
this game gonna tank hard
I know, I hate Guild Wars the mutant copy of EQ2 and Neverwinter Nights, World of Warcraft the mutant copy of Everquest, Aion the mutant copy of World of Warcraft and Lineage II, Warhammer the mutant copy of World of Warcraft, and all the rest of the mutant copys out there.
MMORPGs with multi class systems, quests, and a player based economy, next thing you know all FPS games will have guns.
Comments
You can always tell that someone is talking out of their ass when they refer to this as a single player game.
Uh huh, and did you actually read my post.
You dont know the difference between "treating it like a single player game" and "referring to it AS a single player game"?
I suppose the developers are talking out of their asses too right? I mean considering in interviews they also refer to their game as single player in many ways, rather, not in the fact that you are limited to one person in a game world but rather in how its presented to the player in terms of story and progression. They will not be making anymore Star Wars single player games because this is the sequel to their single player titles. In fact, they are focusing on a story centric game which results in more of a linear mode of play. PvP will happen on battle grounds. Guild Wars was not a mmorpg, neither will SWTOR be in the same sense.
There is no sand box in SWTOR. There are no genre "game changing" features. The game is designed around their expectations of their single player Knights of the Old Republic games first. Solo play and character progression makes up a huge part of the design. You get a computer controlled companion and go on instanced "missions". SWTOR is not a SINGLE PLAYER GAME by definition though, and no where have I made that claim. Their design however comes from Single Player, and a user will find that a large portion of the game feels like a solo campaign in which other players might be seen in and or around the world, thats all.
Do your own research if you dont want to believe me. I was at E3 by the way and listened to their spiel on everything about the game. I dont even think that event was published outside of E3.
You might find this article interesting btw http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/367/feature/4631
Finally, lets turn this back into a discussion about RIFT!
Eh? I hadn't expected a debate about SWTOR in a Rift thread. Not to derail too much from this thread, I do want to say this (but I'm keeping it short): the devs have also said MANY times that SW:TOR is a MMORPG, with all the regular MMO features, as well as the playtest previews and impression reports said it, which btw were generally very positive over the whole line. But sure, I guess that most of the current MMORPG's enable solo play up to level cap these days and can thus be seen as a singleplayer game, WoW, LotrO, AoC and others included.
Regarding SWTOR being a bust or not, well, I guess it's best just to use a quote from the link you referred to yourself:
"Things SWTOR isn't"
A Dismal Failure
If you’re saying this already, I’m sorry, but you’re only guessing. People who do this professionally don’t actually know what the outcome is going to be at this point and calling it this early, no matter how qualified you think you are or how many times you post it on different forums just smacks of trolldom. You honestly don’t know and there may even be a slight chance that you’re spouting it as fact because deep down you’re hoping that your early proclamation will somehow influence the end result. Stop it. It’s way, way, way too early to say this with any credibility.
Back to the OP: what are the requirements for fail or flourish? Because some people would consider Aion or LotrO a fail too. So if it is so be as successful as WoW, then Rift will be a fail.
If it is to do well with at least a couple of 100k's of subs while being generally enjoyable for a longer period than a few months, then I think Rift will flourish and be a success. How much a success depends on how well the endgame is and how well CATA and the other upcoming MMORPG's as GW2, TERA, SW:TOR and others will do.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Cyphers
And its also followed by "It wont be a blockbuster success".
What you are failing to realize is that the measure of success cannot be comparable to the measure of failure. There is a reason why I didnt use Jon Wood's Blockbuster success or dismal failure pieces because they are subjective to the point where he doesnt actually explain the system, and to be quite honest, I believe he was trying to keep to the middle ground as much a possible, even if his opinion on that matter might differ.
That said. Is Vanguard a success? I mean, its still alive and some profit is being made. Does that make it a success? No its still a failure. Its still a bust. A game doesnt need to be dead in the water for it to be a bust. What it comes down to are Publisher expectations, budget (cost of making game) compared with expected profit (surpassing the cost of making the game in revenue). Just making your money back isnt enough to warrant success. It typically needs to at the very least double on the investment. It is for this reason that SWTOR, as an already established IP even (results in more expectations) will be a bust. No one is thinking it will be APB, but rather the game will just not do as well as their marketing people and producers are predicting. Its as simple as that. Dont be surprised to see perhaps an alternate business model pop up ala Turbine, EA cant lose face with having a mmorpg meet below their expectations.
That said, my explanation follows into the question you are posing about Rift as well and what defines the flourish or failure.
I hope it Flourishes. I see it starting off with tons of people half of them will leave because it's not going to be WoW. The people left will be the people who enjoy the game. I would take 1 hardcore player who likes the game over 100 people who just play every new MMORPG that comes out because they are looking for a duplicate of the WoW with new content.
Everquest and Everquest 2 Veteran.
I hope it does well but I'm afraid for the long term the game will fail because the dymanic events are too much like Guild Wars 2. Also games like Rift will only be time fillers before the majority leave to go play The Old Repulic and Guild Wars 2.
I think it'll do as good as AoC and LotRO, WoW's age is showing despite the expansion. So it'll get its chunk of people who will like it. It looks to have enough quality put in to it if they can make a good first impression (FFXIV didn't) it'll get decent numbers.
It'll be worth of mouth and exceptional updates to make it flourish. I have no idea if the developer is capable or not until I see it.
But I see it being a success in comparison to some recent titles.
RIFT & GW2 are the new cool kids on the block that could pull pass a niche market (like DCUO and some other titles).
Its made in the U.S.A. we should all support this one
If rift was anything like the real paladium books then i think it will have a go. But to tell you the truth im not even sure they own the title. the game rifts as a pen and paper game was awesome and d&d still has its folowing so this game is alot more like wow and is going to draw more players from it. well i guess time will tell
last but not least play safe
This debate complements nicely another discussion I was posting in, namely that of an Aion thread where people consider Aion to be a failure. Even if it's doing better in subs and player numbers than all the other P2P MMORPG's around besides WoW. As I mentioned in that thread, it's very relative and subjective what is seen as a success or failure, and there's a difference between financial success and being successful as a MMO game.
It all comes down to expectations, since those are subjective and for a large part individual also the conclusion and interpretation whether a game is a success suffers from that subjectvity.
Are for example SWG and LotrO considered to be failures? Maybe in the eyes of their companies where those games didn't make the impact that the companies behind them had hoped or wanted, it certainly didn't reach the sub numbers that many before had expected of them. But those games aren't considered a failure as games in the eyes of the enthusiastic playerbases of those games that adored those MMORPG's.
If it's that debatable to make a 'fail or success' judgement of existing MMORPG's with no solid parameters to work with, it's even harder for upcoming MMORPG's as Rift and SW:TOR. In this I personally follow the same line of thought as Jon Wood did in his article, that it's ok to speculate but that it's best to refrain from making surefire claims and hard predictions.
Although Trion has set its bar on a more reasonable level than EA Bioware, where Rift's company is happy with a few 100k of subs, EA Bioware needs 1 million and more subs. In however way you look at it, 1 million subs is a LOT. I guess 2011-2012 will show if WoW's sub numbers was a fluke, a singularity, or if 1 mil+ subs (or player numbers) for global MMO's can be achieved and maintained by the like of a GW2, SW:TOR, Rift and/or TERA.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
No we shouldn't. Not because of that reason.
First of all is half of us not from the US.
Secondly is GW2 also made in the US while TOR is half Canadian, half American.
Thirdly: You should support MMOs because they are good, not because who made them. If you support a crappy American made game over a good game from someone else it actually promotes crappy games on the cost of good ones.
The reason we should support the game is if it is good (I havn't got that beta key yet so I only seen vids and read about it, dunno how good it is yet). There are not that many MMOs releasing every year and the game you should support should deserve it.
If it is good I will support it will all my heart, if it sucks I will see it close down fast.
While I don't always agree with you Loke, this reply confirms my opinion that you are more intelligent than the average poster. Supporting something that is crappy only tells the manufacturer that they can go on producing crappy products. This applies to cars, clothes, mmorpgs and everything in between.
I kinda think SWG is a failure today or at least close, it have very few subs and most companies besides SOE would have canned it a long time ago. NGE is not something I would call a success.
Failure might be a big word, barley goes by is closer to it, just like Vanguard.
LOTRO on the other hand still makes money and can't be considered a failure. The devs hoped for more subs and the publisher who hoped for millions of subs probably don't see it as a success but that is more due to overestimating the MMO market than the game.
A true failure is a game that gets canned within a year of the release, like APB and Tabula rasa.
A regular failure is a game that never gets back the money they used to make it and the running cost of it during it's lifetime (if you reuse the GFX engine you probably have to split the development cost between the games who uses it).
Then there is a middle line where most games come, they get in a few bucks extra but no huge sums.
Successes are games that got in several more times money than it have cost, like Wow, EQ and GW. They are rather rare but MMOs have a huge potential for money and Blizzard are rich as trolls now.
Agreed with everything.
I voted flourish. By that I mean that I predict it will get good reviews in the 70-90% range and will have over 100k subscribers for a few years.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
I was actually referring to SWG Pre-NGE, it never did bring in the sub numbers that Lucas Arts and SOE had hoped for, nor did it capture or stayed true to the 'Star Wars' essence as fully as LA and SOE wanted, why else changing it so drastically with the NGE? Or why have a 2nd Star Wars MMO not even that long after the first one?
But my posts were more about how relative and subjective success and failure is: on these same forums there was a thread today about how Aion was a failure in the eyes of a number of people, while if you look at the financial revenues and sub numbers of the US and EU alone it easily surpasses other MMO's like a LotrO and others that are considered a success in the eyes of other people.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
it's really a failure on the OPs part to define exactly what he meant by "fail" and "flourish". in the absence of definition, i provided my own when i voted. to a lot of people on these forums "success" means "WoW-killer", which i don't think is a good measure at all.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
No qustion at all,it has and will attract atttention.I do not feel it is innovating anything at all,instead i see some flawed mistakes,that i know some like,but i strongly do not like.
Anything at all OFFLINE ,i will never support.
I do not beleive in a solo designed MMORPG.Sure you can have some solo content to do,but combat should be grouped.A game should be designed like FFXI was,your infancy start in the world would be realistic to solo,but eventually you mature as a player and need to group to fight more formiddable foes than the little bees and rabbits.
Even the best hype NEEDS to deliver,this game will NEED to deliver on it's content,all the talk goes out the window once players begin to play.I just have this gut feeling that this is not the next John Carmack,this is just another small developer trying to cash in on the MMO hype.
Could i be wrong?? oh god i hope so,i would love nothing more than to come onto these forums and say "man am i glad i was wrong,this game is amazing".I say this because right now i am bored and want someting to call home.
My problem is that after playing FFXI and seeing how well a class/multi class system with Renkai can work,all other games fail in comparison,so it is a huge task for this game to grasp my attention.I wanted to beta test it,but the questionnarie was totally loaded and to be frank i didn't like the questions.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
As the OP name is RIFT_something, and he/she made the account especially for this, I will report the thread for advertising.
The game is promissing, but god i hate advertising!
Paladium Books owns a separate IP. They tried to claim they have the trade mark on the word "Rifts" and therefore "Rift", but found out the hard way that they know nothing of copywrite and trademark law.
I can go out and trademark the word "Cat" but if anyone else tries to use "Cat", I wouldnt be able to hold up that trademark in court, in fact, it would get thrown out. Why? you cannot trademark single commonly used words especially if they are part of the Language of which you speak.
So no, Paladium doesnt own it anymore than Trion does in that regard.
a mutant copy of WoW and Aion?
this game gonna tank hard
Will it pull millions and millions of subs NO
Does it touch in enough areas of a bygone era as well as potentially push the genre forward with some of the announced features (if implemented well) YES
If RIFT can deliver on its features and stay balanced then I think RIFT will flourish I believe it will attract a respectable and loyal following that it will please many for years to come and if it can do that word of mouth can be a very valuable marketing tool and it can potentially grow to be very succesful.
Rift has 2 things most top shelf MMO's does not have and I think one is a direct spin off of the other.
a) it is lacking in the Rabid Fanbois proclaiming this to be the greatest thing ever!!!!!!1!!
b) as a result of that, and by sheer dint of being a fantasy MMO that is not WoW, it seems to have a large amount of "generic goodwill" aimed at it.
People don't hate Rift, they're intrigued by it. Even the mighty MMORPG.com and its universally recognised trolls are taking things easy on Rift because they're feasting on FFXIV, and the game looks like it might be decent and is not WoW.
I actually think it will do considerably better than people think, and may be the surprise hit of the year compared to the other titles.
I feel that at best it will be a niche game. I see most MMORPG players checking out GW2 and/or SWtor and most will not ever make it the Rift.
Oh No, Someone posted a thread on if people think Rift will flourish or not without giving their own opinion on a sub-forum dedicated to the game. Damn Advertisers, whats next people posting a thread about World of Warcraft on a forum dedicated to it. What has the world come to?
I know, I hate Guild Wars the mutant copy of EQ2 and Neverwinter Nights, World of Warcraft the mutant copy of Everquest, Aion the mutant copy of World of Warcraft and Lineage II, Warhammer the mutant copy of World of Warcraft, and all the rest of the mutant copys out there.
MMORPGs with multi class systems, quests, and a player based economy, next thing you know all FPS games will have guns.
Everquest and Everquest 2 Veteran.