I dont know if I would consider Overwatch a big success in MMO terms just because it sold a lot of copies. Heck, WoD sold 15M? and then lost all those subs in just 2-3 months. Only way to tell is to see how many people are still playing a few months from now
I would consider it a big success in games. How often do you make ~$300M in its first week, particularly, it is a lot cheaper than a MMORPG (not counting all the losses by scrapping titan).
But yeah, let's see how it does in a few months. On another note, there are still people player Diablo 3, WoW, Heathstone, and heck, even Diablo 2 .. so their track record is excellent.
I agree it is not a failure but Blizzard does not make a game to rest at third. That is what they are.
Let's be fair. HOTS clearly does not enjoy the same success level as ALL the other blizz game. But only one so-so out of many successes is not a bad record. In fact, it is probably the best in the gaming world.
Lets just hope games like over watch become super main stream, then we can get back to making real MMOs again for people who actually like to play a game in a virtual world. Ones with real challenges and communities. get all these ADHD kids out of here.
This is so popular because it isn't a mmo. If this was a mmo it would have 1/8th the players. Gamers just don't like mmo's. Never have been very popular compared to other games. Small scale pvp games is where all the money and players are. This isn't a new thing it has been this way for about 8 years now.
I would consider it a big success in games. How often do you make ~$300M in its first week, particularly, it is a lot cheaper than a MMORPG (not counting all the losses by scrapping titan). <snip>
Repeat this mantra. A company does NOT make "number of boxes sold times box price".
Retailers (Amazon, Gamestop, etc.) do not work for nothing. The price of a game (nearly always) includes tax; the company does not get the tax. Third party companies in e.g. China operate to - you guessed it - make a profit. Transaction charges - Visa, Mastercard, Paypal - are typically around 2%. Microsoft and Sony do not operate their XBox / Playstation networks for nothing.
Conversely unless a game is sold 100% direct from the publisher "through sales" (to players) are less than "sales to retailers". (Remember though that retailers pay some fraction of the box price.)
So the mantra is: number of boxes times box price is "gross (consumer) sales" not what the company "gets" (out of which it has to cover its costs).
I dont know if I would consider Overwatch a big success in MMO terms just because it sold a lot of copies. Heck, WoD sold 15M? and then lost all those subs in just 2-3 months. Only way to tell is to see how many people are still playing a few months from now
I would consider it a big success in games. How often do you make ~$300M in its first week, particularly, it is a lot cheaper than a MMORPG (not counting all the losses by scrapping titan). <snip>
Repeat this mantra. A company does NOT make "number of boxes sold times box price".
Retailers (Amazon, Gamestop, etc.) do not work for nothing. The price of a game (nearly always) includes tax; the company does not get the tax. Third party companies in e.g. China operate to - you guessed it - make a profit. Transaction charges - Visa, Mastercard, Paypal - are typically around 2%. Microsoft and Sony do not operate their XBox / Playstation networks for nothing.
Conversely unless a game is sold 100% direct from the publisher "through sales" (to players) are less than "sales to retailers". (Remember though that retailers pay some fraction of the box price.)
So the mantra is: number of boxes times box price is "gross (consumer) sales" not what the company gets.
CC charges are 5% but these only apply to purchases from blizzard. Unless its a debit or bank purchase then idk what the charge is. It is sound to say they make 90% of their online pc purchases and if lucky 40% of the xbox and playstation sales. But we are forgetting the fact that they have an item mall and they are selling rng boxes.
well twitch and mmofps are more popular now than ever. i prefer tab targetting in my mmo's. keeps the RPG element about it, and removes the FPS out of it. I like MMORPG's and not MMOFPS. ppl can debate it all they want, but rpg's on console and pc for the most part do not have twitch based combat.
IMPORTANT: Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING. Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally. If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead. I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING. Thank you.
a) Did they play PlanetSide 1 or 2? We had MMOFPS before we had WoW. And then WoW devoured PS1's audience.
b) Again had MMOFPS since May 2003. Over 13 years. What do we learn from OW? Only Blizzard makes quality video game products. Nothing is stopping anyone from making MMOAction / MMOFPS games. But the lesson learned from nostalrius begins, people want to play a quality made tab targeting combat MMORPG possibly for free. ID-Tech code has been open source for years, has anyone turned it into a money make the size of "nb"? Any sane developer when asked why didn't we build "OW", will answer because we aren't Blizzard.
c) Small team based shooter of a limited duration or Population segmented into small manageable "zone" populations with the semblance of a persistent world, which of these two is the MMO? Both, now get over yourselves and live with it. The only ones not fully on board with this new world are you. Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
b) Again had MMOFPS since May 2003. Over 13 years. What do we learn from OW? Only Blizzard makes quality video game products. c) Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Were those serious declarations? Both are quite laughable IMO. Only Blizzard makes quality Video games? They did it better than an almost decade old game?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem with MMORPG's done today is "Nothing Is Innovative", the honest reason over-watch is doing so great is because the game is a "MOBA" not really a MMORPG, but its a FPS its casual, I can get off work, I can go Role-Play in other games, come back just hop in and immediately play for a couple of hours (MMORPG Games) are not like this, and even if picking a full time MMORPG, the problem with such is lack of innovation, new features etc.
Guild Wars 2 for example, Could have been a great game, Same with FFXIV Online, but the problem is Both Games have (Bad Development IMO) Things that they could do to make the games better but they don't for example in GW2 (all maps) should have a list of bosses and times they spawn so people can go to them, Housing should be in the game, but its not and, players just get burnt out on the game pretty fast.
FFXIV Could be great but again housing very limited, rather than keeping so players can enjoy the game, this is where RIFT takes its place and is better than FFXIV in this aspect, but until a Grade A MMORPG hopefully developed by Blizzard based off the Warcraft Game, comes out with better character models (Like Korean Games) (Cosmetic Items) (Grade A Housing) and so on features that GW2 should have like showing locations of bosses making the game fun and more casual in that aspect, then MMO's are pretty much done for, except for games like "Dark Fall" and perhaps "Crow Fall"...
Even EVE Online is no longer any fun because of games like "Star Citizen" and "Elite Dangerous" as well as other games that are likely going to take place of those or be released on...
Take for example "Cross Out" and "Star Conflict" both MOBA based games great games, but lack of any MMO action or Game Lobby where players can walk around, chat, hang out, play mini games and so on (Gambling is illegal) with (Real Money) but if gambling existed in such MMO games with 3D Avatars, and customization like the (3DX MMO) in such a game, even in (EVE Online) it would attract more players, imagine being able to sit down in EVE Online with (ISK) not real money and (Gamble it Between players at a table with your Virtual avatars.
Would be great huh, but nope all these games made today I see as a failure pretty much nothing that is great anymore.
Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Since I played TF2 and have not played OW, can you please fill me in on how Blizzard did it better? I'm curious as to what Blizzard added or removed from what Valve did to make OW better than TF2.
Overwatch is very simply unrelated to the question of if MMOs are going to see more shooter-type gameplay.
The answer to if we are going to see more progress towards shooter style gameplay in MMOs, however, is "that's been a background trend for a long time already".
Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Fallen Earth, Firefall, WW2 Online, Neocron, Huxley, Entropia, etc. Not counting the medieval and fantasy themed ones we still have a long list of titles that have at least attempted to be such, and that will continue to be the case for a long time.
I forgot about Huxley. Can someone confirm this for me, wasn't Huxley the most anticipated game at the time on the Hype list? What this tells me is what I have been saying for year. The people who hate on WoW, the Trinity, and Tab Targeting are not fans of MMORPGs. They are fans of either action or fps games. And neither fan base is large enough to support a MMOAction or MMOFPS. As a result, they are a noise we (fans of MMORPGs) are inflicted with on such sites and forums.
If only they would start their posts by saying, "I am not a Fan of MMORPG, so what I am about to say is irrelevant." That would make me so happy. I played PlanetSide 1, I took Master Medic, Master Engineer, and Master Hacker as my first skills. My vehicles of choice was the AMS. Only once (below level 20) did I try the advanced armour with two back slots. My weapon of choice was the default Suppressor. I saw what SWG and WoW did to its population.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
To make it short. OW is not mmo, and will be considered boring pretty fast as soon as the hype wears off. Its a cute wannabe-shooter game but that is where it ends. It will not have any effect on mmo market at all. Just my 2 cents.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
Overwatch is very simply unrelated to the question of if MMOs are going to see more shooter-type gameplay.
The answer to if we are going to see more progress towards shooter style gameplay in MMOs, however, is "that's been a background trend for a long time already".
Planetside, Tabula Rasa, Fallen Earth, Firefall, WW2 Online, Neocron, Huxley, Entropia, etc. Not counting the medieval and fantasy themed ones we still have a long list of titles that have at least attempted to be such, and that will continue to be the case for a long time.
I forgot about Huxley. Can someone confirm this for me, wasn't Huxley the most anticipated game at the time on the Hype list? What this tells me is what I have been saying for year. The people who hate on WoW, the Trinity, and Tab Targeting are not fans of MMORPGs. They are fans of either action or fps games. And neither fan base is large enough to support a MMOAction or MMOFPS. As a result, they are a noise we (fans of MMORPGs) are inflicted with on such sites and forums.
If only they would start their posts by saying, "I am not a Fan of MMORPG, so what I am about to say is irrelevant." That would make me so happy. I played PlanetSide 1, I took Master Medic, Master Engineer, and Master Hacker as my first skills. My vehicles of choice was the AMS. Only once (below level 20) did I try the advanced armour with two back slots. My weapon of choice was the default Suppressor. I saw what SWG and WoW did to its population.
The problem with many of the old mmofps is that they tend to be mediocre as both mmorpg's and shooters. However, as mmofps get better shooter aspets you see far better sales, games like destiny and the division sold more than 5 million copies during the first month.
If you are a fan of mmorpg's you probably already play wow, swtor, ff14, gw2 or any of the other mmorpg's out there. While there is a huge crowd that play those games new mmorpg's aren't close to having the same sales as mmofps.
If mmorpg devs only wish to satisfy people that just enjoy mmorpg they will fail reaching a crowd large enough to pay for the development costs.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
MMOs have already become more like shooters. Almost every new release has a targeting reticle of sorts, action combat, and limited skills. You were going to see more games like Destiny and Division regardless. Overwatch won't have much of an influence on that, it's not even in the same genre. Although I'm sure blizzard is already thinking about a pve, loot focused Overwatch spinoff.
I would hope not. There is plenty of room for both genre's of game I see no reason why one would replace the other. I could see a hybrid Shooter/MMORPG happening somewhere in the future and of course what games look like today may not be what they look like in future but I believe we will still see a distinction between these games.
What I would really like to see, and I believe a few others would as well, is quality over quantity. It seems like every 5 minutes or so another MMOWhatever is being released I would really like to see a truly innovative games release. I do not think we will see that soon, but there is always hope.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
More MMO's would be like Planetside 2. Call of Duty players often come into PS2 thinking they'll be owning it up, yet get slapped around like a little baby until they learn how to play in a mass battles and train the situational awareness needed in such game. You have more people in just one Platoon than a whole game server of Call of Duty.
My opinion is that combat has always been the weak point of MMOs. This did not matter early on because the games were immersive and social, so you could forgive repeating a rather dull tab-targeted rotation because the world in which it took place more than made up for it.
Then MMOs became more solo-centric, hub-based and involved far more time-saving convenience and mindless distractions. This reduced immersion and socialization, and the time people were prepared to spend learning the best order in which to play several hundred alternative skills.
While I bemoan the loss of immersion and socializing in MMOs, I do not, in any way, miss overly-complex and involved combat that was mind-numbingly tedious to play. Why did we ever need hundreds of skills, each of which vary by the smallest margin from the next? Did we mistake skill for the ability to memorize many items, or for the time to learn the best rotation through trial and error? Because neither of those things involve skill, they merely involve a level of pedantry and a commitment of time that is greater than the average player's.
I have never been more happy to see the rise of action combat, and finally full blown FPS/ TPS. Long may combat continue to evolve from a pedantic game of top trumps to something that requires skill, reaction and coordination.
Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Since I played TF2 and have not played OW, can you please fill me in on how Blizzard did it better? I'm curious as to what Blizzard added or removed from what Valve did to make OW better than TF2.
The characters and world are more polished. And the hitboxes are larger making it easier to hit someone. There will probably be more playable characters in the future.
Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Since I played TF2 and have not played OW, can you please fill me in on how Blizzard did it better? I'm curious as to what Blizzard added or removed from what Valve did to make OW better than TF2.
The characters and world are more polished. And the hitboxes are larger making it easier to hit someone. There will probably be more playable characters in the future.
As @Distopia said, you're comparing Overwatch to a decade old game.. The very fact that it's comparable seems to say more for TF2's masterful longevity than it does Overwatch.
Overwatch is, essentially, the sequel to TF2 we never got from Valve.
Hit boxes being larger is, more than likely, a result of Overwatch being built with consoles in mind. Valve created TF2 as a strictly PC shooter. The extra precision a mouse provides made the hit boxes just the right size for the game. It's likely one of the reasons the port never caught on with console gamers.
Comments
But yeah, let's see how it does in a few months. On another note, there are still people player Diablo 3, WoW, Heathstone, and heck, even Diablo 2 .. so their track record is excellent.
Let's be fair. HOTS clearly does not enjoy the same success level as ALL the other blizz game. But only one so-so out of many successes is not a bad record. In fact, it is probably the best in the gaming world.
Retailers (Amazon, Gamestop, etc.) do not work for nothing.
The price of a game (nearly always) includes tax; the company does not get the tax.
Third party companies in e.g. China operate to - you guessed it - make a profit.
Transaction charges - Visa, Mastercard, Paypal - are typically around 2%.
Microsoft and Sony do not operate their XBox / Playstation networks for nothing.
Conversely unless a game is sold 100% direct from the publisher "through sales" (to players) are less than "sales to retailers". (Remember though that retailers pay some fraction of the box price.)
So the mantra is: number of boxes times box price is "gross (consumer) sales" not what the company "gets" (out of which it has to cover its costs).
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
b) Again had MMOFPS since May 2003. Over 13 years. What do we learn from OW? Only Blizzard makes quality video game products. Nothing is stopping anyone from making MMOAction / MMOFPS games. But the lesson learned from nostalrius begins, people want to play a quality made tab targeting combat MMORPG possibly for free. ID-Tech code has been open source for years, has anyone turned it into a money make the size of "nb"? Any sane developer when asked why didn't we build "OW", will answer because we aren't Blizzard.
c) Small team based shooter of a limited duration or Population segmented into small manageable "zone" populations with the semblance of a persistent world, which of these two is the MMO? Both, now get over yourselves and live with it. The only ones not fully on board with this new world are you. Team Fortress 2 has been around for years (October 2007), again Blizzard did it better.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Guild Wars 2 for example, Could have been a great game, Same with FFXIV Online, but the problem is Both Games have (Bad Development IMO) Things that they could do to make the games better but they don't for example in GW2 (all maps) should have a list of bosses and times they spawn so people can go to them, Housing should be in the game, but its not and, players just get burnt out on the game pretty fast.
FFXIV Could be great but again housing very limited, rather than keeping so players can enjoy the game, this is where RIFT takes its place and is better than FFXIV in this aspect, but until a Grade A MMORPG hopefully developed by Blizzard based off the Warcraft Game, comes out with better character models (Like Korean Games) (Cosmetic Items) (Grade A Housing) and so on features that GW2 should have like showing locations of bosses making the game fun and more casual in that aspect, then MMO's are pretty much done for, except for games like "Dark Fall" and perhaps "Crow Fall"...
Even EVE Online is no longer any fun because of games like "Star Citizen" and "Elite Dangerous" as well as other games that are likely going to take place of those or be released on...
Take for example "Cross Out" and "Star Conflict" both MOBA based games great games, but lack of any MMO action or Game Lobby where players can walk around, chat, hang out, play mini games and so on (Gambling is illegal) with (Real Money) but if gambling existed in such MMO games with 3D Avatars, and customization like the (3DX MMO) in such a game, even in (EVE Online) it would attract more players, imagine being able to sit down in EVE Online with (ISK) not real money and (Gamble it Between players at a table with your Virtual avatars.
Would be great huh, but nope all these games made today I see as a failure pretty much nothing that is great anymore.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
If only they would start their posts by saying, "I am not a Fan of MMORPG, so what I am about to say is irrelevant." That would make me so happy. I played PlanetSide 1, I took Master Medic, Master Engineer, and Master Hacker as my first skills. My vehicles of choice was the AMS. Only once (below level 20) did I try the advanced armour with two back slots. My weapon of choice was the default Suppressor. I saw what SWG and WoW did to its population.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
If you are a fan of mmorpg's you probably already play wow, swtor, ff14, gw2 or any of the other mmorpg's out there. While there is a huge crowd that play those games new mmorpg's aren't close to having the same sales as mmofps.
If mmorpg devs only wish to satisfy people that just enjoy mmorpg they will fail reaching a crowd large enough to pay for the development costs.
I would hope not. There is plenty of room for both genre's of game I see no reason why one would replace the other. I could see a hybrid Shooter/MMORPG happening somewhere in the future and of course what games look like today may not be what they look like in future but I believe we will still see a distinction between these games.
What I would really like to see, and I believe a few others would as well, is quality over quantity. It seems like every 5 minutes or so another MMOWhatever is being released I would really like to see a truly innovative games release. I do not think we will see that soon, but there is always hope.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Then MMOs became more solo-centric, hub-based and involved far more time-saving convenience and mindless distractions. This reduced immersion and socialization, and the time people were prepared to spend learning the best order in which to play several hundred alternative skills.
While I bemoan the loss of immersion and socializing in MMOs, I do not, in any way, miss overly-complex and involved combat that was mind-numbingly tedious to play. Why did we ever need hundreds of skills, each of which vary by the smallest margin from the next? Did we mistake skill for the ability to memorize many items, or for the time to learn the best rotation through trial and error? Because neither of those things involve skill, they merely involve a level of pedantry and a commitment of time that is greater than the average player's.
I have never been more happy to see the rise of action combat, and finally full blown FPS/ TPS. Long may combat continue to evolve from a pedantic game of top trumps to something that requires skill, reaction and coordination.
Overwatch is, essentially, the sequel to TF2 we never got from Valve.
Hit boxes being larger is, more than likely, a result of Overwatch being built with consoles in mind. Valve created TF2 as a strictly PC shooter. The extra precision a mouse provides made the hit boxes just the right size for the game. It's likely one of the reasons the port never caught on with console gamers.
Plus, Overwatch is the literal example of a shooter replacing a classical mmorpg. Remember Blizz scrapped Titan for this?