Guild Wars 2 will survive (They have sucessfully faked sympathy by saying they care about the quality of their game, plus it looks like they know what they are doing).
The star wars one will probably survive.
I doubt Rift will do as well as the above 2 and I can't really talka bout Tera ;p.
Yeah, because when I look to play a game...I choose the one whose company is most appealng to sympathy! Dont we all!?
Like others have said, Guild Wars and Star Wars have the name going for them, and believe it, it's gonna help them succeed. Gamers know Guild Wars, almost everyone knows Star Wars, gamers know Bioware, MMOers know Guild Wars, and the hype machine is building it up well. These other games...not so much, and with good reason:
"Let's play TERA!"
Doesn't have that ring to it, and the atmosphere REALLY puts off popular, key audiences. The only selling point here is the combat, which looks interesting, but rather shallow , honestly. Badger/Racoon people? A class that ONLY uses ridiculously huge lances (active combat system pioneering in MMOs and you make the tank slow and stupid)? I'm an anime fan, I'm a fantasy fan, but that's just weak and lame.
"Lets play Rift!"
Again, where's the intrigue here? It looks like every other MMO on the market, and their selling point is invasions, which quite honestly, is boring as hell. Sure, it would be fun for awhile, but then it'll never end, it'll just be an event that keeps occuring that you can't escape.
"Lets play Star Wars or let's play SWTOR!"
There's a nice ring! Instantly you know what to expect, they've got a good team behind it, a good narrative, established atmosphere. As soon as someone mentions the name you have an image and maybe a character in mind.
"Lets play Guild Wars!"
Wars is always a nice title for a game or movie because you know there's gonna be action. TERA, yay, trees? Rift, geeks know them as portals and wormholes, the average person doesn't care what a rift is. It's free to play, competitive fantasy action.
The OP is right, all around Star Wars and Guild Wars 2 are more accessible and will almost definitely triumph. WoW grew because it appeals to a broad range of people and it's accessible, and it just kept growing. These other games don't have that to begin with and seem to think an "innovation" or two is gonna save them from their other problems, too.
------------------------ Everyone on this site: 1: MMORPGs are DOOMED, and I have the answers to save them! 2: THIS game's gonna kill WoW! 3: I wish things would go back to the Golden Age of MMORPGs, which only existed in my mind...
I believe Rift and Terra will do well, but it will settle around where other MMOs are. Stable but not overpowering either.
The only two contenders really in the end are GW2 and ToR. Why?
Well GW2 has a really strong following from GW1. This helps a lot, not to mention the B2P stance is going to attract a lot of people to it. Plus Anet really can't go wrong as long as they add what they did from GW1 into GW2 and add a persistent world to it.
ToR however stands to either be the biggest success or failure depending on how it goes.
With Bioware developing, EA doing the publishing, Lucas Arts making sure it stays true to the lore, and having the IP of star wars. They have the best of all 4. Bioware knows how to make games people will buy. EA knows how to do a great marketing blitz and you know they'll do one for this one. Then you got Lucas art, and trust me they are very strict on what gets into a star wars game. Then you have the IP. Only a small amount of people haven't heard of star wars.
Now this can go both ways, IF BW pulls it off on what they are claiming then they have a winner on their hands and word of mouth will make it extremely popular. Whereas if they mess it up. People will shun them like they stepped into the bog of eternal stinch. They have everything they need to make it great. If they fail then they are out of the MMO scene for a very long time.
Jut my personal opinion on this.
For the short version, i agree with the OP.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
Rift is a WoW clone, in the sense its a fantasy game mainly focused on PvE but with certain PvP areas throwed for good measure.
if the market has taugh us something is that you shouldnt try to outWoW WoW. If you give the players the same experience they can get in WoW just with a different classes, polygonal models and background lore, 10 out of 10 people will stick to WoW anyway.
and lets get honest here, no game can give players the same experience they can get in WoW, 5 years of continued development put WoW far ahead of any competitor no matter how good that game is or how hard they try.
So at best Rift can give players a much smaller experience they can get in WoW, for the same monthly cost.
Well the op thinks the two will survive based on story telling?Have we even heard the story told yet and how it has been implemented in game?I think the OP is grasping here on a hunch it will be done good.IMO even if it were done good,i hardly beleive that is why the two games will succeed on a financial basis.Remember people will be buying this game before they even know anything about it,this is what a NAME BRAND does for sales,people buy on a hunch and nothing more.
GW2 will survive becuase it is free,that is my honest belief.Of course this is an early hunch ,i really have no clue and neither does anyone else,if this game is going to be good or not.I do know when i see corners cut like making FAKE water zones,it sends a message that they are cutting corners and not creating a true quality game.Yes i look at even the smallest detail such as this,they are true tell signs.
SWTOR imo will survive becuase of it's BRAND NAME.This means it will sell millions and even if the game is crap ,will probably maintain a large enough player base to still be called successful.
As you can see,i did not give either game credit for being a success based on a quality game,i can in no way make that judegment yet,until i see the FINISHED product,i think that would be the appropriate time to make proper judgement.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Given that nobody here has a crystal ball in which to look into the future, nobody knows which of them will fall and which will survive for certain.
Offering my own opinion on the matter though, TOR and GW2 have more chance simply due to the IP of the former and the subless nature of the latter. Personally I also don't see the massive innovation that some seem to see in the likes of Rift and Tera.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I completely disagree, I recon SWTOR will fail even with it's large budget because it's going to fail to deliever solid end-game content past your own voice acted story line. I don't see a long term game here.
GW2 will survive but it won't be a 'threat' because it's free, people will most likely have a blast playing this game but it won't stop them from playing another P2P game.
Tera is looking to be ok, the art style seems to throw a lot of people off (giant weapons, bikini armour) but the combat system is something that people are getting interested in.
Rift I would say is looking to be the most promising out of the P2P games, boasting a polished set of gameplay features, random dynamic rifts which are not static, innovative class system allowing players more freedom (almost sandbox like), the same old features millions of people love but done slightly better. Rift appears to be the next big thing for roleplayers too, http://www.riftgame.com/en/world/fiction/index.php reading stories like this makes me excited about RP'ing in-game but we'll see I suppose.
Yes it is. And if you already don't know that, i don't really see how can you make any analysis about this game....
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
no idea, go ask ANet. it IS a MMO anyway, regardless the pricing model.
Well, I always called GW1 an MMORPG even though Anet themselves said it really wasn't one, so my standards on what makes an MMORPG aren't really that high, but I will acknowlege that I certainly didn't get the same type of experience playing GW that I did, for example, playing WoW. For one, gear variety was nonexistent. Every character per class looked exactly the same minus variations in the color of their armor. Secondly, while the areas were all gorgeous, each area was very boxed in with little room for exploration. Even in the towns, it was almost impossible to interact with the gameworld in any way. Lastly, the breadth of the content simply wasn't the same. There was a PvE storyline mixed with sidequests and once that was finished, the game was pretty much over aside from PvP. All "expansion" were basically standalone games that really didn't do a whole lo to expand previous characters' abilities.
I look to see more MMORPG related features in GW2 such as has already been announced like an AH and additional persistent world zones, but seeing as this game is running off of a modified GW1 engine, I think those of you hoping for a buy to play title with all the bells and whistles of a modern MMORPG will be disappointed.
Yes it is. And if you already don't know that, i don't really see how can you make any analysis about this game....
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
no idea, go ask ANet. it IS a MMO anyway, regardless the pricing model.
Box sales alone will more than recover development costs, cash shop which they will no doubt have will more than cover server running costs.
Another factor is GW is not always a players primary MMO its something you jump into from time to time.
Tto provide some perspective a hardcore 14 hrs a day player costs a company roughly $1.50 to host, those players who are more casual which GW2 will appeal to have exceptionally low server overhead costs.
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
Well, I always called GW1 an MMORPG even though Anet themselves said it really wasn't one, so my standards on what makes an MMORPG aren't really that high, but I will acknowlege that I certainly didn't get the same type of experience playing GW that I did, for example, playing WoW. For one, gear variety was nonexistent. Every character per class looked exactly the same minus variations in the color of their armor. Secondly, while the areas were all gorgeous, each area was very boxed in with little room for exploration. Even in the towns, it was almost impossible to interact with the gameworld in any way. Lastly, the breadth of the content simply wasn't the same. There was a PvE storyline mixed with sidequests and once that was finished, the game was pretty much over aside from PvP. All "expansion" were basically standalone games that really didn't do a whole lo to expand previous characters' abilities.
I look to see more MMORPG related features in GW2 such as has already been announced like an AH and additional persistent world zones, but seeing as this game is running off of a modified GW1 engine, I think those of you hoping for a buy to play title with all the bells and whistles of a modern MMORPG will be disappointed.
There will be no ''additional persistent zones''. Game is as persistent as any other MMORPG in the market. GW2 uses ''modified'' engine from GW1, the same way WoW used ''modified'' engine from Warcraft 3.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
You didn't answer my question.
Because it uses a different buisness model perhaps ?
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
You didn't answer my question.
Because it uses a different buisness model perhaps ?
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
You didn't answer my question.
They are undoubtedly not charging a subscription whilst providing a full mmo's worth of content because their financial analysts have:
A) Decided that a switch from the successful box sale method would be unadvisable as they predict they can have an effective ROI whilst keeping that model and..
Because it allows them greater flexibility to add in a cash shop facility in the future which many in the industry will no doubt see as the future payment method of choice.
Whilst GW2 looks like it will be a full blown mmo, time will tell if that is the case or not. But using the payment model alone to come to a conclusion as to whether it will be or won't be seems somewhat ill conceived.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
GW2 will have an ingame shop. And from what i saw from Rift DEMO, GW2 appears more content rich and varied...
This is all pretty much speculation. While I can appreciate a good story, there are other features in a MMO I find much more important. I wouldn't want to sub to a game just to read the story if the combat was painfully boring, for example.
I cannot say who will succeed or fail. However, since this seems to be the thread to throw predictions around, here are mine:
1.GW2 will do well simply because it is B2P. It does not have to substain customers for the monthly fee- the good thing about that game is that you can always play it whenever you want or are bored. Apart from that, it has many good features going for it, like the class system, which does not seem to feature a holy trinity, the dynamic world and events just to name a few.
2.SWTOR will do well in selling boxes because Bioware has a large fanbase and Star Wars has a large fanbase. However, I cannot say how the subscription number will be. I can imagine it being a good game the first month, beyond that, it will settle with a solid number of subscribers. I guess it won't be a smashing success in subscription numbers, but will have many sold boxes and will be a good game for Bioware fans.
3.Rift...I'm unsure, since I'm not following that game too closely. From what I heard, it's polished, but not really something new. I can see it becoming a niche game of sorts, with it having a fanbase and enough subscribers to survive and continue to grow in content. It might have the smallest subscription/player base out of the four games, but it will grow slowly over time, since polish is not to be underestimated.
4.TERA...is my personal favorite, so I admit I'm biased. I know many don't like the art, but it does have a fanbase. I can see it being a success for the Asian players and a moderate success for the American/European players. The artstyle and system requirements will scare off some, but if it is polished enough and if the combat is just pure fun, I can see it having its players, no question asked.
And just to come back to the story one more time...1): Rift: Who says Rift cannot have an engaging story too? I don't know much, but why do SWTOR and GW2 have a good story and Rift doesn't?
2): All the lore for TERA is being rewritten and redesigned to suit the Western market better. Also, they will be addressing the grind, making it so that the Western market isn't put off by that.
So overall, 2011 might just be a great year for us MMO players! There is a lot of variety, all four games promise us polish and content and all of them attract different players. Why can't we be happy that there are so many quality MMO released and look forward to playing them instead of throwing around "this one will fail...no, that MMO will fail!"?
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
You didn't answer my question.
They are undoubtedly not charging a subscription whilst providing a full mmo's worth of content because their financial analysts have:
A) Decided that a switch from the successful box sale method would be unadvisable as they predict they can have an effective ROI whilst keeping that model and..
Because it allows them greater flexibility to add in a cash shop facility in the future which many in the industry will no doubt see as the future payment method of choice.
Whilst GW2 looks like it will be a full blown mmo, time will tell if that is the case or not. But using the payment model alone to come to a conclusion as to whether it will be or won't be seems somewhat ill conceived.
True, but all we really have to go on is Anet's previous effort, and given what I've seen from that, I feel pretty sure the reason their financial analysts said what they've said is simply because Anet will not be giving this game the same amount of love that Blizzard gives WoW or SOE gives EQ2.
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
GW2 will have an ingame shop. And from what i saw from Rift DEMO, GW2 appears more content rich and varied...
Will the cash shop actually sell items that players will feel compelled to buy? If so, wouldn't that raise a red flag with this anti-cash shop community here at mmorpg.com?
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
GW2 will have an ingame shop. And from what i saw from Rift DEMO, GW2 appears more content rich and varied...
Will the cash shop actually sell items that players will feel compelled to buy? If so, wouldn't that raise a red flag with this anti-cash shop community here at mmorpg.com?
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
Anti-cash shop crowd is fighting a loosing battle. Cash shops are the future of MMO. The better question would be, how come GW2, Earthrise etc. can survive with box sales and cash shop, yet Blizzard, SOE, CCP and rest of the p2p bunch can't and still demand a sub fee AND have a cash shop ?
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
GW2 will have an ingame shop. And from what i saw from Rift DEMO, GW2 appears more content rich and varied...
Will the cash shop actually sell items that players will feel compelled to buy? If so, wouldn't that raise a red flag with this anti-cash shop community here at mmorpg.com?
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
Anti-cash shop crowd is fighting a loosing battle. Cash shops are the future of MMO. The better question would be, how come GW2, Earthrise etc. can survive with box sales and cash shop, yet Blizzard, SOE, CCP and rest of the p2p bunch can't and still demand a sub fee AND have a cash shop ?
I don't play EVE, so I don't know what CCP is offering, but neither Blizzard's nor SOE's MMOs (EQ2x excluded) survive off of their cash shops, and that is why there are both filled with needless fluff items.
Unless GW2 adopts some sort of a LotRO or DDO F2P model, do you really think they can sustain the entire game off of vanity item purchases?
I think GW2 will depend more on the cash shop than the sub-based MMORPGs that I've mentioned, but not to the point where the purchases in the item shop will make up for a lack of a sub-fee. The game simply won't be as much of a resource hog as the sub-based games.
Comments
Yeah, because when I look to play a game...I choose the one whose company is most appealng to sympathy! Dont we all!?
Like others have said, Guild Wars and Star Wars have the name going for them, and believe it, it's gonna help them succeed. Gamers know Guild Wars, almost everyone knows Star Wars, gamers know Bioware, MMOers know Guild Wars, and the hype machine is building it up well. These other games...not so much, and with good reason:
"Let's play TERA!"
Doesn't have that ring to it, and the atmosphere REALLY puts off popular, key audiences. The only selling point here is the combat, which looks interesting, but rather shallow , honestly. Badger/Racoon people? A class that ONLY uses ridiculously huge lances (active combat system pioneering in MMOs and you make the tank slow and stupid)? I'm an anime fan, I'm a fantasy fan, but that's just weak and lame.
"Lets play Rift!"
Again, where's the intrigue here? It looks like every other MMO on the market, and their selling point is invasions, which quite honestly, is boring as hell. Sure, it would be fun for awhile, but then it'll never end, it'll just be an event that keeps occuring that you can't escape.
"Lets play Star Wars or let's play SWTOR!"
There's a nice ring! Instantly you know what to expect, they've got a good team behind it, a good narrative, established atmosphere. As soon as someone mentions the name you have an image and maybe a character in mind.
"Lets play Guild Wars!"
Wars is always a nice title for a game or movie because you know there's gonna be action. TERA, yay, trees? Rift, geeks know them as portals and wormholes, the average person doesn't care what a rift is. It's free to play, competitive fantasy action.
The OP is right, all around Star Wars and Guild Wars 2 are more accessible and will almost definitely triumph. WoW grew because it appeals to a broad range of people and it's accessible, and it just kept growing. These other games don't have that to begin with and seem to think an "innovation" or two is gonna save them from their other problems, too.
------------------------
Everyone on this site:
1: MMORPGs are DOOMED, and I have the answers to save them!
2: THIS game's gonna kill WoW!
3: I wish things would go back to the Golden Age of MMORPGs, which only existed in my mind...
My personal predictions are as follows:
I believe Rift and Terra will do well, but it will settle around where other MMOs are. Stable but not overpowering either.
The only two contenders really in the end are GW2 and ToR. Why?
Well GW2 has a really strong following from GW1. This helps a lot, not to mention the B2P stance is going to attract a lot of people to it. Plus Anet really can't go wrong as long as they add what they did from GW1 into GW2 and add a persistent world to it.
ToR however stands to either be the biggest success or failure depending on how it goes.
With Bioware developing, EA doing the publishing, Lucas Arts making sure it stays true to the lore, and having the IP of star wars. They have the best of all 4. Bioware knows how to make games people will buy. EA knows how to do a great marketing blitz and you know they'll do one for this one. Then you got Lucas art, and trust me they are very strict on what gets into a star wars game. Then you have the IP. Only a small amount of people haven't heard of star wars.
Now this can go both ways, IF BW pulls it off on what they are claiming then they have a winner on their hands and word of mouth will make it extremely popular. Whereas if they mess it up. People will shun them like they stepped into the bog of eternal stinch. They have everything they need to make it great. If they fail then they are out of the MMO scene for a very long time.
Jut my personal opinion on this.
For the short version, i agree with the OP.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
Rift is a WoW clone, in the sense its a fantasy game mainly focused on PvE but with certain PvP areas throwed for good measure.
if the market has taugh us something is that you shouldnt try to outWoW WoW. If you give the players the same experience they can get in WoW just with a different classes, polygonal models and background lore, 10 out of 10 people will stick to WoW anyway.
and lets get honest here, no game can give players the same experience they can get in WoW, 5 years of continued development put WoW far ahead of any competitor no matter how good that game is or how hard they try.
So at best Rift can give players a much smaller experience they can get in WoW, for the same monthly cost.
Rift will fail.
Well the op thinks the two will survive based on story telling?Have we even heard the story told yet and how it has been implemented in game?I think the OP is grasping here on a hunch it will be done good.IMO even if it were done good,i hardly beleive that is why the two games will succeed on a financial basis.Remember people will be buying this game before they even know anything about it,this is what a NAME BRAND does for sales,people buy on a hunch and nothing more.
GW2 will survive becuase it is free,that is my honest belief.Of course this is an early hunch ,i really have no clue and neither does anyone else,if this game is going to be good or not.I do know when i see corners cut like making FAKE water zones,it sends a message that they are cutting corners and not creating a true quality game.Yes i look at even the smallest detail such as this,they are true tell signs.
SWTOR imo will survive becuase of it's BRAND NAME.This means it will sell millions and even if the game is crap ,will probably maintain a large enough player base to still be called successful.
As you can see,i did not give either game credit for being a success based on a quality game,i can in no way make that judegment yet,until i see the FINISHED product,i think that would be the appropriate time to make proper judgement.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
If it is a full MMORPG just like WoW, LoTRO, EQ2, WAR, and AION, why does it not charge a monthly fee?
no idea, go ask ANet. it IS a MMO anyway, regardless the pricing model.
So.... Game is not a ''full MMORPG'' if its devs aren't ripping you off for 15 dollars a month ? Interesting standpoint...
Given that nobody here has a crystal ball in which to look into the future, nobody knows which of them will fall and which will survive for certain.
Offering my own opinion on the matter though, TOR and GW2 have more chance simply due to the IP of the former and the subless nature of the latter. Personally I also don't see the massive innovation that some seem to see in the likes of Rift and Tera.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Just looking at the title;
I completely disagree, I recon SWTOR will fail even with it's large budget because it's going to fail to deliever solid end-game content past your own voice acted story line. I don't see a long term game here.
GW2 will survive but it won't be a 'threat' because it's free, people will most likely have a blast playing this game but it won't stop them from playing another P2P game.
Tera is looking to be ok, the art style seems to throw a lot of people off (giant weapons, bikini armour) but the combat system is something that people are getting interested in.
Rift I would say is looking to be the most promising out of the P2P games, boasting a polished set of gameplay features, random dynamic rifts which are not static, innovative class system allowing players more freedom (almost sandbox like), the same old features millions of people love but done slightly better. Rift appears to be the next big thing for roleplayers too, http://www.riftgame.com/en/world/fiction/index.php reading stories like this makes me excited about RP'ing in-game but we'll see I suppose.
Well, I always called GW1 an MMORPG even though Anet themselves said it really wasn't one, so my standards on what makes an MMORPG aren't really that high, but I will acknowlege that I certainly didn't get the same type of experience playing GW that I did, for example, playing WoW. For one, gear variety was nonexistent. Every character per class looked exactly the same minus variations in the color of their armor. Secondly, while the areas were all gorgeous, each area was very boxed in with little room for exploration. Even in the towns, it was almost impossible to interact with the gameworld in any way. Lastly, the breadth of the content simply wasn't the same. There was a PvE storyline mixed with sidequests and once that was finished, the game was pretty much over aside from PvP. All "expansion" were basically standalone games that really didn't do a whole lo to expand previous characters' abilities.
I look to see more MMORPG related features in GW2 such as has already been announced like an AH and additional persistent world zones, but seeing as this game is running off of a modified GW1 engine, I think those of you hoping for a buy to play title with all the bells and whistles of a modern MMORPG will be disappointed.
Box sales alone will more than recover development costs, cash shop which they will no doubt have will more than cover server running costs.
Another factor is GW is not always a players primary MMO its something you jump into from time to time.
Tto provide some perspective a hardcore 14 hrs a day player costs a company roughly $1.50 to host, those players who are more casual which GW2 will appeal to have exceptionally low server overhead costs.
You didn't answer the question, and no, that's not what I was alluding to at all because I don't believe I'm being "ripped off" as you put it. There's a reason GW1 was buy to play, and the reason was because it had nowhere near the content or upkeep of any of the games that I listed.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO. It was an Online roleplaying game made by 40 people with a 12 million dollar budget. WoW was made by 180 ppl with 63 million dollar budget.
You didn't answer my question.
There will be no ''additional persistent zones''. Game is as persistent as any other MMORPG in the market. GW2 uses ''modified'' engine from GW1, the same way WoW used ''modified'' engine from Warcraft 3.
Because it uses a different buisness model perhaps ?
If both RIFT and GW2 are comparable with one another in terms of content, variety, and features, why does one charge a monthly fee and the other does not?
Is Trion simply trying to rip off its customers or will GW2 lack the same amount of content, variety, and features of a subscription based MMORPG?
They are undoubtedly not charging a subscription whilst providing a full mmo's worth of content because their financial analysts have:
A) Decided that a switch from the successful box sale method would be unadvisable as they predict they can have an effective ROI whilst keeping that model and..
Whilst GW2 looks like it will be a full blown mmo, time will tell if that is the case or not. But using the payment model alone to come to a conclusion as to whether it will be or won't be seems somewhat ill conceived.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
GW2 will have an ingame shop. And from what i saw from Rift DEMO, GW2 appears more content rich and varied...
This is all pretty much speculation. While I can appreciate a good story, there are other features in a MMO I find much more important. I wouldn't want to sub to a game just to read the story if the combat was painfully boring, for example.
I cannot say who will succeed or fail. However, since this seems to be the thread to throw predictions around, here are mine:
1.GW2 will do well simply because it is B2P. It does not have to substain customers for the monthly fee- the good thing about that game is that you can always play it whenever you want or are bored. Apart from that, it has many good features going for it, like the class system, which does not seem to feature a holy trinity, the dynamic world and events just to name a few.
2.SWTOR will do well in selling boxes because Bioware has a large fanbase and Star Wars has a large fanbase. However, I cannot say how the subscription number will be. I can imagine it being a good game the first month, beyond that, it will settle with a solid number of subscribers. I guess it won't be a smashing success in subscription numbers, but will have many sold boxes and will be a good game for Bioware fans.
3.Rift...I'm unsure, since I'm not following that game too closely. From what I heard, it's polished, but not really something new. I can see it becoming a niche game of sorts, with it having a fanbase and enough subscribers to survive and continue to grow in content. It might have the smallest subscription/player base out of the four games, but it will grow slowly over time, since polish is not to be underestimated.
4.TERA...is my personal favorite, so I admit I'm biased. I know many don't like the art, but it does have a fanbase. I can see it being a success for the Asian players and a moderate success for the American/European players. The artstyle and system requirements will scare off some, but if it is polished enough and if the combat is just pure fun, I can see it having its players, no question asked.
And just to come back to the story one more time...1): Rift: Who says Rift cannot have an engaging story too? I don't know much, but why do SWTOR and GW2 have a good story and Rift doesn't?
2): All the lore for TERA is being rewritten and redesigned to suit the Western market better. Also, they will be addressing the grind, making it so that the Western market isn't put off by that.
So overall, 2011 might just be a great year for us MMO players! There is a lot of variety, all four games promise us polish and content and all of them attract different players. Why can't we be happy that there are so many quality MMO released and look forward to playing them instead of throwing around "this one will fail...no, that MMO will fail!"?
True, but all we really have to go on is Anet's previous effort, and given what I've seen from that, I feel pretty sure the reason their financial analysts said what they've said is simply because Anet will not be giving this game the same amount of love that Blizzard gives WoW or SOE gives EQ2.
I suppose we will see though.
Will the cash shop actually sell items that players will feel compelled to buy? If so, wouldn't that raise a red flag with this anti-cash shop community here at mmorpg.com?
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
Anti-cash shop crowd is fighting a loosing battle. Cash shops are the future of MMO. The better question would be, how come GW2, Earthrise etc. can survive with box sales and cash shop, yet Blizzard, SOE, CCP and rest of the p2p bunch can't and still demand a sub fee AND have a cash shop ?
I don't play EVE, so I don't know what CCP is offering, but neither Blizzard's nor SOE's MMOs (EQ2x excluded) survive off of their cash shops, and that is why there are both filled with needless fluff items.
Unless GW2 adopts some sort of a LotRO or DDO F2P model, do you really think they can sustain the entire game off of vanity item purchases?
I think GW2 will depend more on the cash shop than the sub-based MMORPGs that I've mentioned, but not to the point where the purchases in the item shop will make up for a lack of a sub-fee. The game simply won't be as much of a resource hog as the sub-based games.