lineage2 or wow or AC/AC2

thelawoflogic · July 2005

try to deside witch is better lineage2 or wow or AC/AC2? as for as exploering and game play and stuff to do etc o and number or people that play

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by xantho10
try to deside witch is better lineage2 or wow or AC/AC2? as for as exploering and game play and stuff to do etc o and with people

None of the above

thelawoflogic · July 2005

could u maybe explain why? and come up with something better?

kparton · July 2005

You want us to decide on...in your words..."as for as exploering and game play and stuff to do etc o and with people" ???????

Holy Flerkin Schmit, what does that mean???

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by xantho10
could u maybe explain why? and come up with something better?

Ok I'll give you a brief rundown:
AC: FLOP, this game is dead it just doesn't know it yet. It peaked UNDER 100k subscribers and now is on a downward trend and is below 40,000 subscribers.

AC2: FLOP, this game never really even got off the ground, peaked at around 50k subscribers and is now at/below 20k.... not good.

WoW: Not a bad game but it's mostly soloers running around with kewldood attitudes and doesn't have a lot of depth. I hear it may be improving so this would be the best bet of the 4 but there are better games out there.

Lineage II: Errr.... I found this one colossolly boring. If the gold-farming-bots don't kill the game for you the level grind will. They eased up the grind a bit but the game has very little depth other than a pretty decent seige system and lots of PVP (since it's involuntary). If you like PVP it COULD be an ok title but be aware that it's only got lots of subscribers in Asia. In the North American Market I think it's under 70k users.

Of the titles you listed only WoW is worth playing at all. And I personally found it pretty shallow and not exactly group oriented. If you want group oriented gaming go with EQ2, DAOC, SWG, EvE or another title out there. None of the ones you listed are particularly group friendly and of the ones you listed only WoW is at all fun to play. (Note: This is all in my opinion) Other folks swear by WoW and love it. Some folks like AC and AC2 but the numbers I posted are accurate.

WoW has around 2 million people playing but from my experience in the game and everything I've read it's not exactly a 'group friendly' environment.

Greatness · July 2005

Lineage 2 has more PvE and grouping content now because of Seven Signs(Great Stuff). It is very cool. Also, they made lvling easier too, now from lvl 1-25 you can go to a newbie guide(gives you free buffs, soulshots, and spiritshots) and when you group, you get bonuses too. Though, not much people in da starter towns, maybe like 1-10 people there usually. Also, you are an RPer, you might want to back away, this is OPEN PvP.

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by Greatness
Lineage 2 has more PvE and grouping content now because of Seven Signs(Great Stuff). It is very cool. Also, they made lvling easier too, now from lvl 1-25 you can go to a newbie guide(gives you free buffs, soulshots, and spiritshots) and when you group, you get bonuses too. Though, not much people in da starter towns, maybe like 1-10 people there usually. Also, you are an RPer, you might want to back away, this is OPEN PvP.

I'm an RP'er... and I loved UO... which was open PVP as well. Matter of fact most people who roleplay favor open PVP if it's implemented properly. Matter of fact when I beta tested (and bought) Lineage II originally it was directly because it had open PVP... What killed the game for me was:
1) Lack of any real content
2) Farmer Bots Wiping entire areas that people could get decent loot from
3) The Character Graphics were too Anime'... I got sick of watching elves running around bent in half The graphics are awesome, don't get me wrong, but the humans run around like they have a corncob up their rumps, the elves run hunched over in half. The dwarves are ok if all you want is 2 attacks. The Orcs were the best of the bunch but even they didn't really appeal to me. On top of that the characters all looked VERY Anime'.
4) Crafting system was primative at best.
5) No uniqueness to your character. Every elf looks like every other elf. Every human, etc.
6) No player housing.

As a RP'er who loves open PVP the game appealed to me, but the lack of any depth whatsoever killed it for me.

Klorin · July 2005

IMO you left out 2 alot of BETTER MMO,

Shadowbane-best pvp game period, City building, Politics, forming your own lore, Most indepth Character Setups.(to bad people are afraid of decent instead of awesome graphics and the bugs that where there on release... fixt now.)

SWG- Starwars game that gives it awesome hype right there, Politics, decent PvP, fun overall.

IMO the other games flaw in all the same areas, community and PvP.

Knightblast · July 2005

Also, you are an RPer, you might want to back away, this is OPEN PvP.

There are RPers in Lineage II actually, I don't think having PvP detracts from RPing, it actually enhances the RPing, as you can see in a game like EVE. The Lionna server seems to be the centre of the RP community in Lineage II. But in any case the other issues (grinding, botting, importance of IGE to the game, etc.) are real ones.

ste2000 · July 2005

Originally posted by xantho10
try to deside witch is better lineage2 or wow or AC/AC2? as for as exploering and game play and stuff to do etc o and number or people that play

Mhhh......I would suggest Mourning..............Joking mate

I know you loved it, but I think you got over it already.............I hope.

Anyway, avoid Lineage 2 unless you are a professional ganker.

AC is good but it is an old game and not enough people to play with.
AC2, I never understood that game, very average.

At the moment I am playing WoW and I am enjoying it (strangely enough).
I grinded all the way to lvl 45 (which took me about 3 weeks) and only now I noticed that the game is getting more raid oriented the more you advance in level.
Only cons is that there are still too many noobs around even at higher levels, what a shame.

Elapsed · July 2005

AC1 was not a flop. It is not possible for every game to reach the amount of subscribers that WoW and EQ have. Plus does subscribers make a good game? No, look at EVE, SoR, and AC1 itself. Did you even play it or you just like looking at numbers on a graph and using it to judge the quality of a game?

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by -Jaguar-
AC1 was not a flop. It is not possible for every game to reach the amount of subscribers that WoW and EQ have. Plus does subscribers make a good game? No, look at EVE, SoR, and AC1 itself. Did you even play it or you just like looking at numbers on a graph and using it to judge the quality of a game?

AC1 lookd like it was going to be the next big MMO for a while as it shot up to about 100,000 players then it just tanked, bigtime, as players got sick of the inability to communicate and it kind of topled after that dropping DRAMATICALLY in number of subscribers very very quickly. Interestingly that was right around the time DAOC and AO hit the market, about 1 year after AC came out. Everyone said DAOC would kill EQ.... instead it killed AC. Today AC has less than 40,000 players... more like 35,000. Any MMO that has under 40k players is in danger of being cancelled (Just look at Earth & Beyond... cancelled at 37,000) because it's just not very profitable to run the servers at that point and there isn't really enough revenue to enhance or modify the game without taking a loss because you can't afford to pay developers for that kind of work.... Unless they reverse the current downward subscription trend AC is in seriously dangerous territory. And, yes, I did play it. I played it both in Beta and for about 5 months after release... I never could get completely into it even though I was already desperate to find a game to replace EQ because I was fairly fed up with it's issues at the time.

AC was never a very good game, it had some neat ideas and it was cool that there were no 'zones'. I think the social system (or complete lack thereof) is what ultimately killed it. The #1 complaint that I heard from everyone I knew who tried it was that you couldn't talk to other players easily and you felt like you were all alone almost all the time. Even in a "guild" you could only talk to your direct superior or your direct reports. Which was really lousy. The game was "ok" but it curtailed communications too much. The graphics were nice for it's time but are dated now. Players are steadily leaving for other titles.

AC2 never even really made it off the ground and is actually BELOW 20k subscribers, barely over 10k in fact. I'm surprised it's even still running to be honest.

BOTH titles are failing.

scaramoosh · July 2005

Originally posted by Elnator

Originally posted by -Jaguar-
AC1 was not a flop. It is not possible for every game to reach the amount of subscribers that WoW and EQ have. Plus does subscribers make a good game? No, look at EVE, SoR, and AC1 itself. Did you even play it or you just like looking at numbers on a graph and using it to judge the quality of a game?

AC1 lookd like it was going to be the next big MMO for a while as it shot up to about 100,000 players then it just tanked, bigtime, as players got sick of the inability to communicate and it kind of topled after that dropping DRAMATICALLY in number of subscribers very very quickly. Interestingly that was right around the time DAOC and AO hit the market, about 1 year after AC came out. Everyone said DAOC would kill EQ.... instead it killed AC. Today AC has less than 40,000 players... more like 35,000. Any MMO that has under 40k players is in danger of being cancelled (Just look at Earth & Beyond... cancelled at 37,000) because it's just not very profitable to run the servers at that point and there isn't really enough revenue to enhance or modify the game without taking a loss because you can't afford to pay developers for that kind of work.... Unless they reverse the current downward subscription trend AC is in seriously dangerous territory. And, yes, I did play it. I played it both in Beta and for about 5 months after release... I never could get completely into it even though I was already desperate to find a game to replace EQ because I was fairly fed up with it's issues at the time.

AC was never a very good game, it had some neat ideas and it was cool that there were no 'zones'. I think the social system (or complete lack thereof) is what ultimately killed it. The #1 complaint that I heard from everyone I knew who tried it was that you couldn't talk to other players easily and you felt like you were all alone almost all the time. Even in a "guild" you could only talk to your direct superior or your direct reports. Which was really lousy. The game was "ok" but it curtailed communications too much. The graphics were nice for it's time but are dated now. Players are steadily leaving for other titles.

AC2 never even really made it off the ground and is actually BELOW 20k subscribers, barely over 10k in fact. I'm surprised it's even still running to be honest.

BOTH titles are failing.

Actually having 40,000 players you do make a profit from depending on how expensive the game costs to run!

Planetside for EG. It has around 40k users and SOE said they wont cancel it because it makes a profit!

The less people the less servers you have so it works out, until it gets too low.

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by scaramoosh
Originally posted by Elnator
Originally posted by -Jaguar-
AC1 was not a flop. It is not possible for every game to reach the amount of subscribers that WoW and EQ have. Plus does subscribers make a good game? No, look at EVE, SoR, and AC1 itself. Did you even play it or you just like looking at numbers on a graph and using it to judge the quality of a game?
AC1 lookd like it was going to be the next big MMO for a while as it shot up to about 100,000 players then it just tanked, bigtime, as players got sick of the inability to communicate and it kind of topled after that dropping DRAMATICALLY in number of subscribers very very quickly. Interestingly that was right around the time DAOC and AO hit the market, about 1 year after AC came out. Everyone said DAOC would kill EQ.... instead it killed AC. Today AC has less than 40,000 players... more like 35,000. Any MMO that has under 40k players is in danger of being cancelled (Just look at Earth & Beyond... cancelled at 37,000) because it's just not very profitable to run the servers at that point and there isn't really enough revenue to enhance or modify the game without taking a loss because you can't afford to pay developers for that kind of work.... Unless they reverse the current downward subscription trend AC is in seriously dangerous territory. And, yes, I did play it. I played it both in Beta and for about 5 months after release... I never could get completely into it even though I was already desperate to find a game to replace EQ because I was fairly fed up with it's issues at the time.
AC was never a very good game, it had some neat ideas and it was cool that there were no 'zones'. I think the social system (or complete lack thereof) is what ultimately killed it. The #1 complaint that I heard from everyone I knew who tried it was that you couldn't talk to other players easily and you felt like you were all alone almost all the time. Even in a "guild" you could only talk to your direct superior or your direct reports. Which was really lousy. The game was "ok" but it curtailed communications too much. The graphics were nice for it's time but are dated now. Players are steadily leaving for other titles.
AC2 never even really made it off the ground and is actually BELOW 20k subscribers, barely over 10k in fact. I'm surprised it's even still running to be honest.
BOTH titles are failing.
Actually having 40,000 players you do make a profit from depending on how expensive the game costs to run!
Planetside for EG. It has around 40k users and SOE said they wont cancel it because it makes a profit!

The less people the less servers you have so it works out, until it gets too low.

Actually PlanetSide, at last datapoint, has over 55,000 players. That's 20,000 more than AC has. It's also a lot less difficult to update and expand because the only content they provide is PVP. They don't have to code missions, quests, mobs, ai or anything of that nature. It's 100% player driven.

AC on the other hand, if they want to expand the game or add content has to mess with quests, AI, Skins, pathing, faction, loot, coinage etc. PlanetSide is much less expensive to maintain and update and has a shorter development cycle because of it as well.

AC may be making money, but not enough to pay developers to come up with expansions or do dedicated work on it. When was the last expansion for AC? How often do they post new content now? When it first came out new sutff was fast and furious... it's slowed down dramatically... I used to keep up with the main website from time to time and it's rather depressing seeing how slow new stuff is added to the game now. I don't remember the last time they added content to the game. The game isn't dead yet.... but it's only a matter of time at this point barring a big turnaround in subscriptions.

Elapsed · July 2005

AC1 lost subscribers largely because of a lack of distribution. It isn't in stores and hasn't been for quite some time. Even when it was released it was only on shelves for a relatively short time compared to DAoC and EQ. So, it lost visability. When people thought of MMORPG's in the early days they always saw and thus thought of UO, EQ, DAoC, and AO, few knew about AC.

The thing about communication is BS. You can talk to anyone in game.

AC is one of the most unique worlds and doesn't rely on skill trees or typical fantasy stuff like most other MMO's. The allegiance system is one of the greatest strengths and weaknesses as people (admittedly like myself) learned to exploit it.

If anything killed AC other than lack of visability because of distribution, it would be macroing and Decal. From the sounds of it DAoC isn't much better off than AC since it too has bots. I'm not sure about EQ.

AC2 also does not help AC1's rep. AC2 being bad at launch and only average now leads people to presumably think AC1 is more of the same if not inferior. It is AC"2" after all, it should be superior yet if AC2 stinks that means AC1 has to be even worse, which it is not. AC1 and AC2 are completely different games and only share a couple of names and pieces of lore.

AC1 was and presumably is (I haven't played in over a year) a good game. The amount of subscribers does not make a game. Even when I played over a year ago the populations were similar to what they are now, and I could always find people to play with and I still had a good time with the relatively low subscribers. The game world is large but people hang out mostly in key areas. A newbie may have trouble finding people to play with but that is the problem with most older games. Most people have been playing a while and are involved in the upper level content. If they made a free trial that could solve the problem, but Turbine has lacked marketing intelligence from the very beginning. That and there ability to crack down on cheating are their biggest faults.

Turbine is releasing an expansion in 5 days. I would say the game has a way to go before it's dead. Yes, they have slowed down on content and I agree it is because of the smaller amount of subscribers.

Aldaron · July 2005

Originally posted by -Jaguar-

...

(deleted post to save page space)

I agree with pretty much everything said.

It was not the communication; whoever said that, I don't know who you talked to. The people I ever talked to (I played the game for over 2 1/2 years. Played beta till a couple years out of release) said their peeve was the exploitation, the macro'ing, and the exp chains.

And as someone said, the lack of numbers was bad marketing. It had next to NO marketing. I never even heard of AC1 except on MMORPG related sites. And even then it was given little attention. What got me into it was that my brother managed to have access to a beta account, and it all bloomed from there.

In numbers...some may would call it a failure. But in gameplay; it was a masterpiece. In the first year 1/2 the community in that game felt exactly like that...A community. People were renowned for certain things, and their name was known across the server.

The whole thing just had a sense of immersion and freedom - I know some may not of liked it, but I personally loved it.

P.S. I'm not sure how you(whoever said the following) or anyone else could of thought AC1 would of been the next thing, or even how it had 100K subscribers for that matter. We had about 6-7 or so servers, and they peaked at about 2K.

And the first 6 months peaked at about 800. I strongly doubt it was THAT big.

Unknown · July 2005

Originally posted by xantho10
try to deside witch is better lineage2 or wow or AC/AC2? as for as exploering and game play and stuff to do etc o and number or people that play

If your ONLY choices are Lin2, WoW, AC, or AC2 then... first erase AC2 off the list. It is a FAILED mmorpg. The profits from AC1 are the only thing keeping AC2 on life support. AC2 is NOTHING like AC1. Two completly different games!

AC1 (aka AC ) is the best mmorpg on that little list of yours. A game world with almost no zones, and tons of unique features. AC still has one of the most closeknit, tightknit, player communities out of any MMORPG ever made. It also has one of the most brutal death systems. You will feel your heart pound as you go deeep into dungeons. Monsters will hunt you down and chase you down no matter where you try to run. There are almost no zones in AC! AC is also NOT a level based game. This means it is easier to play, you can make your character unique and not be "Warrior # 3447" exactly like every single other warrior in the whole game. This means you can litterally do anything!

Use a bow and arrow, cast spells, use a sword, etc... Unlike level based games in which if you are a wizard you automatically are unable for some strange reason to pick up a sword and use it.

WoW would be second. It is a fun game. It has a huge player base. But it is a level based game. And has copied all its features from all other mmorpgs. (Notably EQ, and AO).

Lin2 is more of Lin1. I have a friend who plays it and likes it. It is a hardcore level based game. Some like it, some don't. There is a reason why 90% of all its players are Korean.

No MMOPRG is "better" than other mmorpgs. It all comes down to what each individuale player likes. You barely hint at what your playstyle is. Exploring. Game play? There is soo much different types. Do you like PvP? PvE? Taking other people's land?

Exploring IS one type of gameplay. Stuff to do? LOL! And what is "ect"? Are we suppose to read your mind? If you are not sure what you like, play the free downloads and free trials.

- EvE Online - is FREE to download and try.

- Rubies of Eventide. FREE to DL and try.

- Anarchy Online. FREEEEEEEEE to download and FREEEEEEE to play for 1 YEAR!! (Actually until around January 2006, since the free 1 year program started earlier this year.)

Unknown · July 2005

The main reason I decided to post in this thread is to comment on the silly idea that AC is a flop.

AC (Asheron's Call aka AC1) is not a flop. It is one of the oldest, longest running, mmorpgs. It was the first 3-D MMORPG. Created before EQ, but released AFTER EQ released. For a while the ONLY major mmorpgs were EQ and AC. (Lin1 was popular only in Asia and Korea, not worldwide.)

AC easily made enough profits to re-coup all its investment money. It now runs itself. Just like EQ, AC is a money machine. AC now costs almost nothing to run. AC cost roughly 5 million to make. It has made enough proft to allow Turbine to waste 25 million on making AC2, as well as make 2 more MMORPGs that cost roughly 20 million each - Middle Earth Online, and Dungeons Dragons Online. (Both are not out yet.)

AC peaked at roughly 100k accounts. Which fulfills the definition of a HIT mmorpg. AC has been out for almost as long as EQ. AC currently has roughly 40k to 50k accounts. Still more than some brand new mmorpgs have!

---------------------------------

Reasons AC is not even bigger than it is:

1. It released in EQ's shadow. Early bird gets the worm. EQ was the "early bird".

2. AC was never aggresivly marketed. AC to this day has only had ONE free trial. EQ has litterally had roughly 25 free trials! LOL! AC is not advertised in any major computer magazines, nor on any gamer sites.

3. Parent company Turbine spent many years owned by MicroCrap... errr... MicroSoft. MC did nothing to increase AC's growth. Invested nothing into AC. In fact, MS pennypinched sooo much it is what resulted in AC2 failing. MicroSoft has the RECORD of most number of FAILED mmorpgs:

- Mythica = 25 million wasted down the drain. - AC2 = 25 million wasted down the drain. Thbat is 50 million total bucks MicroSoft flushed down the drain. MS finally sold Turbine back to itself.

4. The mmorpg market went from having 2-3 major MMORPGs, to now having 10 - 20 major MMORPGs. There is far, far, far, more competition for players. And also far more newer MMORPGs. AC still has NICE game features, playability. But alas, its graphics and game engine, are outdated. This COULD be made up for IF AC were aggresivly marketed. EQ has outdated graphics, but it is aggresivly marketed and right now has roughly 200k accounts while AC has roughly 50k accounts.

-Personal Website (A Work still in progress):
http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html

-AC, AC2, AO, EQ, Freelancer, SWG:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor

-More SWG:
http://community.webshots.com/user/captain_sica_xol

-More EQ, Dungeon Siege, *UXO*, Diablo II:Lords of Destruction:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01

-EverQuest II, Horizons:
http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_eq2archives01

-EVE Online !!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01

-DAoC
http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives02

-Coming sooner or later... CoH, WoW, MXO, UO, GW, As3, RS

Zaxx99 · July 2005

Originally posted by Elnator
AC: FLOP, this game is dead it just doesn't know it yet. It peaked UNDER 100k subscribers and now is on a downward trend and is below 40,000 subscribers.

... It amazes me the insane idiocity of some peoples' remarks. Especially coming from people who know absolutely NOTHING about a game they speak so much on. This poster obviously never even played AC1 to speak so foolishly.

First of all, to say that a games greatness and quality is based only on sheer numbers of players is like saying that the best and most qualified president always gets elected...you know 'cuz people never make decisions foolishly or follow others like blind sheep. Naw that would never happen. Not ever! Heh.

- Also to say that Asherons Call is a flop is like saying that THE SPICE GIRLS and BRITNEY SPEARS are all much, much better musicians and much more talented then say.. Stevie Ray Vaughan. Ofcourse because they sold "millions" more albums and had soo many more number 1 hits! Stevie Ray Vaughan was a total "flop" I'm telling you what! Not near as talented as The Spice Girls! {sighs}

Look, Asherons Call has not even been on store shelves for almost 3 years. People couldn't even buy the damn game for a long time unless they bought a rare copy for sale on the likes of Ebay or some other second hand sales medium. - And Asherons Call STILL has about 40,000 (and growing now) subscribers. Asherons Call has been in existence for SIX YEARS now and it will not go anywhere anytime soon. The loyalty of their current subscriber base is much, much, much deeper and higher then more recent games like WoW and Guild Wars will ever see. Ever. In fact, I doubt like hell that WOW or GW will still have running servers six years after their release. And AC1 will still be running with faithful supporters who love the game. There is a reason that games like AC1 and UO take so long to die. They are quality games that were made with heart and passion to make a top notch mmo game. Games like Blizzards "World of Warcraft" were not made this way. They have no passion for the game, instead the passion used to make a game like "World of Warcraft" only came from greed and the desire to make as much cash as possible, as quickly as possible. They care not about the true mmo players desires for a hard core mmo. They only want to make a main-stream mmo that people will like from all areas of the gaming community and cash in quickly. They have already made millions more then Turbine has in its whole six years of running AC. But does that mean its a better game? If you have honestly played both games, and you honestly think that WoW is a higher quality and more fun game then is AC, then you must also be the same kind of person who would value a $50 present purchased at a store over a hand-made, well thought out from the heart gift made with love. You would rather have CASH then you would have a handmade gift from the heart.

AC is sooo much deeper and well thought out with the gamer in mind than is WoW or EQ2 or GW or any of the current mainstream "make a quick million" carbon copy mmos. And it shows. The people who play AC are people who know how to make friends in a gameworld that are real lasting friendships. The kind of people that play games like GW and WoW and EQ2 are ummmm, nevermind. Just go play each game and discover which kind of people play each type of game. Sure there are random griefers and punks that play AC1. And there are a few people that are true mmo fans that play GW or WoW. But besides these rare exceptions, the type of people that play a game like AC are far different then what you'll see playing a game like WoW or EQ2. And their loyalty to each game will also reflect this. AC players loyalty, for the most part will last many, many years with a game world like what you find in AC. And ummm, we see all the threads constantly of how many people play a game like WoW and post how they played it for X weeks or X months and are bored to death of it looking for the next mmo with pretty and dazzling graphics.

Another thing to keep in mind is this. I guarantee you, despite AC's much lower gaming population compared to WoW, there are many, many more players who play a game like AC, leave it for a while to go try WoW, and get bored and come back to AC then vice versa. Just not many WoW players out there stop and go try AC, then get bored with AC and come back to WoW thinking "man I shouldn't have ever left WoW for that dumb game". But I guarantee you that many thousands of AC players have returned to the better game after taking short breaks trying out one of the prettier, newer games like WoW and EQ2.

My projection is despite its age and its much older graphics, Asherons Call will still outlast WoW, GW, and EQ2. It will still have loyal game players when all three of these much shinier games roll over dead because they aren't making the millions and millions of profit they need to make to be "profitable" enough for the company to support 'em anymore.

But yeh, yeh, I know. I am a loser and Osama Bin Laden is the coolest guy in the world. Ofcourse. Just compare our bank accounts, right? Like Duhh! Oh yeh, and Osama is also much more widely known then am I. He is MUCH BETTER! Ofcourse!! This is exactly the same mentality and logic used by anyone who has the nerve to call AC a "flop".

Have a nice day.

- Zaxx

hercules · July 2005

Well from THOSE games then WoW.Also WoW is still my number one choice for anyone wanting to kill a few months in a mmorpg or someone new trying to learn the genre.

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by xplororor
The main reason I decided to post in this thread is to comment on the silly idea that AC is a flop.
AC (Asheron's Call aka AC1) is not a flop. It is one of the oldest, longest running, mmorpgs. It was the first 3-D MMORPG. Created before EQ, but released AFTER EQ released. For a while the ONLY major mmorpgs were EQ and AC. (Lin1 was popular only in Asia and Korea, not worldwide.)
AC easily made enough profits to re-coup all its investment money. It now runs itself. Just like EQ, AC is a money machine. AC now costs almost nothing to run. AC cost roughly 5 million to make. It has made enough proft to allow Turbine to waste 25 million on making AC2, as well as make 2 more MMORPGs that cost roughly 20 million each - Middle Earth Online, and Dungeons Dragons Online. (Both are not out yet.)
AC peaked at roughly 100k accounts. Which fulfills the definition of a HIT mmorpg. AC has been out for almost as long as EQ. AC currently has roughly 40k to 50k accounts. Still more than some brand new mmorpgs have!
--------------------------------- Reasons AC is not even bigger than it is:
1. It released in EQ's shadow. Early bird gets the worm. EQ was the "early bird".
2. AC was never aggresivly marketed. AC to this day has only had ONE free trial. EQ has litterally had roughly 25 free trials! LOL! AC is not advertised in any major computer magazines, nor on any gamer sites.
3. Parent company Turbine spent many years owned by MicroCrap... errr... MicroSoft. MC did nothing to increase AC's growth. Invested nothing into AC. In fact, MS pennypinched sooo much it is what resulted in AC2 failing. MicroSoft has the RECORD of most number of FAILED mmorpgs:
- Mythica = 25 million wasted down the drain. - AC2 = 25 million wasted down the drain. Thbat is 50 million total bucks MicroSoft flushed down the drain. MS finally sold Turbine back to itself.
4. The mmorpg market went from having 2-3 major MMORPGs, to now having 10 - 20 major MMORPGs. There is far, far, far, more competition for players. And also far more newer MMORPGs. AC still has NICE game features, playability. But alas, its graphics and game engine, are outdated. This COULD be made up for IF AC were aggresivly marketed. EQ has outdated graphics, but it is aggresivly marketed and right now has roughly 200k accounts while AC has roughly 50k accounts.

-Personal Website (A Work still in progress):http://www.geocities.com/xplororor/index.html
-AC, AC2, AO, EQ, Freelancer, SWG:http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor
-More SWG:http://community.webshots.com/user/captain_sica_xol
-More EQ, Dungeon Siege, *UXO*, Diablo II:Lords of Destruction:http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_archives01
-EverQuest II, Horizons:http://community.webshots.com/user/xplororor_eq2archives01
-EVE Online !!!http://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives01
-DAoChttp://community.webshots.com/user/sica_xol_archives02-Coming sooner or later... CoH, WoW, MXO, UO, GW, As3, RS

I'm sorry.
If AC flopped because of bad marketting how do you explain that it went from just over 100,000 users in December of 2001 to under 40,000 users now.

In September of 2001 it experienced it's first major drop in users then slowly recovered. That dip coincided with DAOC's release by the way.

Then in Jan 2002 it experienced a huge drop in users when Final Fantasy XI came out. After that it settled into a steady downward trend.

So what you're saying is because of 'bad marketting' the game is dying? Mind you, the game went from 0 to 100,000 users in almost no-time flat because of the mass jump of dissatisfied EQ users (I was one of them) to AC when it came out. The problem it had was that everyone who made the jump was dissatisfied with the game.

Yah you could talk to "anyone" via TELLS or in person. But there were no global chat channels and no global guild channels even. You could TALK to anyone around you and you could remotely "chat" with your suboordinates in the 'guild structure' or your immediate superior.... but not everyone at once.. it was a tiered communications system when it came out. They LATER added more easy ways fo talking but that poor initial implementation, which was in place for at least 4 months because they didn't change it till after I left, killed them.

It had some very neat concepts but it also had some serious flaws. The game is a decent game but by today's standards the graphics are sub-par and the gameplay is a little too complicated for most. It's still a decent enough game but it is, currently, what I would consider a failed MMO. If an MMO is running on less than 40,000 subscribers, most of whom are inactive, there aren't really very many people actually PLAYING The game. It's coasting on momentum. I know they're about to release an expansion and I hope it helps them but, traditionally, expansions haven't impacted game subscription numbers much, if at all. Typically it blips up briefly then resumes it's normal plot course. If AC continues to decline in subscriptions it will be losing money in a few months.

Like I said, it could come back, but they need to reverse the trend in subscriptions to do it. Right now? I wouldn't spend my money on it because it's in danger of dying and, frankly, isn't that much fun.

Elnator · July 2005

Originally posted by zaxtor99
Originally posted by Elnator
AC: FLOP, this game is dead it just doesn't know it yet. It peaked UNDER 100k subscribers and now is on a downward trend and is below 40,000 subscribers.