Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

A thread in which Kotaku almost has something nice to say...Follow

#1 Nov 26 2012 at 3:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
3,825 posts
http://kotaku.com/5963155/new-final-fantasy-xiv-director-talks-about-what-went-wrong-with-the-original

Naoki Yoshida is about as far away from the stereotypical image of a Japanese businessman as you are likely to get. Clad in designer jeans with expertly styled hair and numerous finger rings, he looks more like a rock star than anything else. His business card even features a caricature of himself smoking while relaxing with a cup of coffee. But regardless of what he looks like, he is, at heart, a passionate MMO gamer who wants to turn Final Fantasy XIV from colossal failure into striking success.

While not a member of the team working on the original version of Final Fantasy XIV, Yoshida feared the game was doomed even before its release. After the bad reaction from players during the Beta test, even the staff thought the game wasn't ready for it to go on sale. "When I heard that it was going to go on sale as planned, I thought, that will probably be a big mistake."

To Yoshida, the biggest problems with the original Final Fantasy XIV came from how the game itself was envisioned and developed. Final Fantasy XI, Square Enix's other Final Fantasy MMO, was developed as a game where Final Fantasy would meet EverQuest—the top MMORPG of the day. In fact, according to Yoshida, the entire staff played EverQuest for at least a year while developing FFXI, trying to figure out just what exactly made it work so well. "I think it would've been good to do the same thing [for the original FFXIV]."

In Yoshida's opinion, the reason FFXI was a success is that it took the areas where Final Fantasy was strongest—cutscenes, dramatic scenarios, and story-driven content—and input them into an EverQuest inspired framework.

However, when the original FFXIV was in development, the goal of the project was simply to make a game that was different from Final Fantasy XI. Yoshida feels that the creators didn't recognize that the global standard of MMOs had been significantly raised in recent years. He would have suggested a different path for the game—one that mirrored FFXI's own creation. "I think it would've been good if they tried seeing what happened if they turned World of Warcraft into Final Fantasy. So, because they tried only to make something that was 'different from FFXI,' they ended up with not much of anything."

"They should have said, 'Hey you, go play WoW for a year [for inspiration].'"

Yoshida then talked at some length about the origins and development of MMORPGs. How they developed from tabletop RPGs into games like Ultima and Wizardy—before moving to the online world. What was important in his eyes is how early RPGs borrowed the best elements from and influenced each other. That's how the genre advanced and made new games. "Unless you are a genius, you cannot make something completely new from nothing."

When it comes to his FFXIV, A Realm Reborn, Yoshida believes they are on the right track. He has the best of the best from inside the company to work on this game and they are adamant the game not be released until it is ready. "We won't make a mistake like FFXIV again—if we did, it would be like at the level of destroying the company."

That said, Yoshida said his biggest worry while making A Realm Reborn has been the schedule. World class MMOs have so much in them that time is always an issue. There's got to be a lot for players to do. When coding started for A Realm Reborn, Yoshida and his team only had 16 months until the planned relaunch. At times, he had wondered if it was really possible to do all the work in two years. He lamented that he knows players wanted it fixed as quickly as possible, but if it is released before next year, he thinks they won't enjoy it.

When asked in closing how he would play A Realm Reborn, on PC or PlayStation 3, Yoshida responded, "I became an online gamer 16 or 17 years ago and I've always played on the PC. I played Diablo, Ultima Online, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot, and World of Warcraft—all always on the PC." He feels that, personally, if he did things like PvP without his trusty mouse and keyboard, he would definitely lose. But he mentioned that there was more than a little appeal to lying on his couch with the controller.

Coming out of the interview, I found myself more than a little impressed. Yoshida was upfront and frank about the problems of Final Fantasy XIV and the challenges that await Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn. But more than that, our short talk left me with faith that if anyone can fix the game, it's him.
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#2Poubelle, Posted: Nov 26 2012 at 4:19 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Kotaku is the worst blog/gaming site of all time.
#3 Nov 26 2012 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
3,825 posts
Poubelle wrote:
Kotaku is the worst blog/gaming site of all time.

by the way, why post this wall of text instead of just linking the article? full ******

Edited, Nov 26th 2012 5:19pm by Poubelle


You mean the link to the article before the wall of text...?

Though now that you mention it, I did forget to put said wall in a qoute box.

Edited, Nov 26th 2012 10:34pm by Perrin
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#4 Nov 26 2012 at 8:02 PM Rating: Good
***
3,530 posts
Perrin wrote:
"I think it would've been good if they tried seeing what happened if they turned World of Warcraft into Final Fantasy... They should have said, 'Hey you, go play WoW for a year [for inspiration].'"


Yoshida may really be on to something: why hasn't any MMORPG been "inspired" by WoW before? It sounds like it'd pull in the casuals and be a resounding success - just look at those Blizzard numbers, right? - it's a totally untouched market where you can offer Final Fantasy fans something that only Square-Enix can give them: a generic standard!
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

"Thus opium is pleasing... on account of the agreeable delirium it produces." (Burke para.6)

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#5 Nov 26 2012 at 9:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,339 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Perrin wrote:
"I think it would've been good if they tried seeing what happened if they turned World of Warcraft into Final Fantasy... They should have said, 'Hey you, go play WoW for a year [for inspiration].'"


Yoshida may really be on to something: why hasn't any MMORPG been "inspired" by WoW before? It sounds like it'd pull in the casuals and be a resounding success - just look at those Blizzard numbers, right? - it's a totally untouched market where you can offer Final Fantasy fans something that only Square-Enix can give them: a generic standard!


I would imagine that's because the other companies more than likely take a glance at WoW and pull apart certain features to throw into theirs, but they don't sit down and think *WHY* certain things are really popular. Plus, as I've seen from the launch of a lot of MMOs since WoW they fall into the trap that Blizzard seems to have fallen into a few years ago -- why go the extra mile when people will pay for less?

I'm really looking forward to ARR: FFXI's nice but I can only play it for a few weeks tops before I remember why I quit. If they can envelope WoW style mechanics and QoL features with the character progression and compelling storylines from FFXI then I'll be sold. I *REALLY* do miss being able to be pretty much anything with one character. If anything, the achievement system from WoW (which I do like and find compelling enough to find things to do) has illustrated the major drawback to one class per character.
#6 Nov 26 2012 at 9:30 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,033 posts
Good interview. I've always liked Yoshida. He has the right attitude for this sort of project.
#7 Nov 26 2012 at 9:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Well there is one thing SE has over other unknown MMO's that tried to copy World of Warcraft - An idenity.

Let's face it. World of Warcraft started by pulling in the Warcraft Fans into an Everquest Like world. However, aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard, on top of further developing a world based on the Warcraft Universe.

Other MMO's that imitated WoW never had that standard base to work off of like Final Fantasy does, and FFXI never really innovated the way the other MMO-clones did.

Yoshida's putting two and two together, not only looking on how FFXI succeeded, but how FFXI also failed where WoW took off. He's a smart cookie and I hope he stays 'thirsty' as far as innovation and development goes.
#8 Nov 27 2012 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
Guru
***
1,673 posts
Yoshida sounds like a good guy. I'm rooting for him to turn this game around. Not just because I want the game to succeed but because of all his hard work, I want to see him succeed. Who knows, maybe they can put him in charge of future FF titles so they will be better.
#9 Nov 27 2012 at 8:11 AM Rating: Good
****
4,957 posts
"In Yoshida's opinion, the reason FFXI was a success is that it took the areas where Final Fantasy was strongest—cutscenes, dramatic scenarios, and story-driven content—and input them into an EverQuest inspired framework.":


I agree with this completely and this is exactly what SHOULD be being done with FFXIV... instead of trying to use WoW for inspiration....


Also someone else said this:

"BIG Final Fantasy fan here!
Thing is... that from whatever footage was released on A Realm Reborn, the game is still not all that appealing. The endless map roaming (GOD how I hated it in FF14) and the stiff combat are still there. I was playing Guild Wars 2 the other day (a fine game, not the revolutionary game that ArenaNet promised to deliver, but still a fine MMO) and was thinking how miles ahead their combat was on FF14's.
It will take nothing short of a miracle to get me back as a subscriber. It's like trying to eat a dish that made you sick some years ago, the taste alone can make your hairs stand. This is how HARD I want them to succeed, that I am willing to return to a place that made me sick.
For the record I played FF14 for 6 months, by the end of the 6th month I was pretty much numb as I went through all the phases of insanity. I remember playing some RIFT after and it was so much enjoyable: the wow-ish combat, how fluid were the animations and how easy was to get around, the rich environments, creative monsters and class abilities... put next to FF14 it was a stark contrast to say the least.
And yet the FF funboys were defending FF14 on the forums, "... the game is fine as it is." "Go back to WOW!", "... this isn't your cup of tea etc..."... it boggles the mind how people found this game even remotely enjoyable.
I linked a video, in case everyone forgot how abysmal the combat in FF14 was! "A Realm Reborn" presented flashier animations but there was the same lack of fluidity to combat, like playing a turn-based game."

someone should tell him some ppl actually like turn based games?
#10 Nov 27 2012 at 9:24 AM Rating: Default
***
3,530 posts
Hyrist wrote:
aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard


That's some pretty loaded language. I wouldn't say that WoW "raised" the standard, just made one. With WoW, Blizzard established a baseline of easily imitable quest-grinding combined with rudimentary combat and a now-recognizable UI. As far as I'm concerned, both the gameplay and the story in the game is sub-par and incredibly stilted; it retains a huge following due to its wide, casual appeal and a unique place in popular culture.
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

"Thus opium is pleasing... on account of the agreeable delirium it produces." (Burke para.6)

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#11 Nov 27 2012 at 10:04 AM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
Hyrist wrote:
Well there is one thing SE has over other unknown MMO's that tried to copy World of Warcraft - An idenity.

Let's face it. World of Warcraft started by pulling in the Warcraft Fans into an Everquest Like world. However, aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard, on top of further developing a world based on the Warcraft Universe.

Other MMO's that imitated WoW never had that standard base to work off of like Final Fantasy does, and FFXI never really innovated the way the other MMO-clones did.

Yoshida's putting two and two together, not only looking on how FFXI succeeded, but how FFXI also failed where WoW took off. He's a smart cookie and I hope he stays 'thirsty' as far as innovation and development goes.


Innovation is a nice buzzword.

SE kept trying out new concepts in each expansion, though always with the technical limitations set in 2002 in place.

WoW kept raising the bar technically and most innovations that came from WoW had to do with the technical improvements that made them possible. Instancing (and later phasing), dungeon finder and the like. Improve the technology and you can do all sorts of cool things with it.

The innovations are not similar in nature, but to say that one game is innovating while the other isn't couldn't be further from the truth. Besieged is still the grandpa of dynamic events, though in a framework that couldn't quite handle it technically.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#12 Nov 27 2012 at 11:26 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
someone should tell him some ppl actually like turn based games?


The thing people (including SE) seem to forget is that in most turn-based games, you're controlling several characters, and not depending upon other players. Applying the same model to an MMO just really doesn't work that well.

It's true that GW2 isn't so incredibly special... they did a number of things really well, watered down by some lackluster design decisions on top of them. For example, their 8 classes have a really wide amount of play potential, but they're also not easy to change between. Even to change your playstyle on one character requires you to manually change your skills, traits, and equipment.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#13 Nov 27 2012 at 11:34 AM Rating: Good
****
4,150 posts
Hyrist wrote:
Let's face it. World of Warcraft started by pulling in the Warcraft Fans into an Everquest Like world. However, aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard, on top of further developing a world based on the Warcraft Universe.
Yoshida's putting two and two together, not only looking on how FFXI succeeded, but how FFXI also failed where WoW took off. He's a smart cookie and I hope he stays 'thirsty' as far as innovation and development goes.

Well put. The Final Fantasy brand was well established and had the opportunity to take off, but Blizzard really put forth more effort on that front.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
someone should tell him some ppl actually like turn based games?

Yes, but not everyone wants turn-based play in their MMOs and people have come to expect certain things from certain types of games. You could make a turn-based version of Street Fighter, but it probably wouldn't be well accepted as well as the original.

KaneKitty wrote:
I wouldn't say that WoW "raised" the standard, just made one.

Whether or not the standard was raised can be debated, but I think 'streamlined' is probably a better choice of word here. Quest-grinding and a functional UI wasn't really new, but Blizzard probably should get credit for making them more intuitive than what was found in most MMOs before WoW.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 12:35pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#14 Nov 27 2012 at 1:06 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,957 posts
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?
#15 Nov 27 2012 at 1:14 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,033 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?


It's a problem because FFXI's system is outdated and slow. If you like it, cool, but you're in the minority (as far as the MMO population goes). Personally I think turn based combat and MMOs don't mix well at all.

Times have changed and games have evolved. That type of system won't go well with the modern MMO audience, and that is who Square-Enix is targeting.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 2:15pm by BrokenFox
#16 Nov 27 2012 at 1:35 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,150 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?

It's either turn-based or it isn't.

The majority of players in MMOs want an active/reactive battle system that doesn't rely on them waiting. I personally wouldn't care if XIV went to turn-based, but that said; I don't really care for the current battle system anyway.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#17 Nov 27 2012 at 2:08 PM Rating: Decent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
Innovation is a nice buzzword.

SE kept trying out new concepts in each expansion, though always with the technical limitations set in 2002 in place.

WoW kept raising the bar technically and most innovations that came from WoW had to do with the technical improvements that made them possible. Instancing (and later phasing), dungeon finder and the like. Improve the technology and you can do all sorts of cool things with it.

The innovations are not similar in nature, but to say that one game is innovating while the other isn't couldn't be further from the truth. Besieged is still the grandpa of dynamic events, though in a framework that couldn't quite handle it technically.


WoW subscriptions alone brought in the revenue of 6 major Final Fantasy titles a year, not even counting the initial purchase, expansions, or glitter ponies.

You could slam SE for not doing enough, but they did a pretty good job with what little they had to work with compared to a company with near infinite wealth to make improvements with.
#18 Nov 27 2012 at 3:06 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,150 posts
Xoie wrote:
WoW subscriptions alone brought in the revenue of 6 major Final Fantasy titles a year, not even counting the initial purchase, expansions, or glitter ponies.

It's sparkle ponies, not glitter ponies.
Xoie wrote:
You could slam SE for not doing enough, but they did a pretty good job with what little they had to work with compared to a company with near infinite wealth to make improvements with.

My ******** meter is approaching critical mass. What little they had to work with? Puh-leez!

SE is decades old and has generated more than enough revenue(especially from FFXI, their highest grossing FF title to date) to be able to pull off what Blizz did. Had they decided to do so, it's completely possible that we'd all be here in the WoW forum asking if WoW2 was going to be an 'XI killer' instead of the other way around.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#19 Nov 27 2012 at 3:18 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
BrokenFox wrote:
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?


It's a problem because FFXI's system is outdated and slow. If you like it, cool, but you're in the minority (as far as the MMO population goes). Personally I think turn based combat and MMOs don't mix well at all.

Times have changed and games have evolved. That type of system won't go well with the modern MMO audience, and that is who Square-Enix is targeting.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 2:15pm by BrokenFox


On the other hand, you have GW2, where you're so busy that you can barely talk during combat. You're always moving and pressing buttons. You can barely talk to your group or guild while playing the game at all. The thing that games like WoW, GW2, and the early FFXIV demonstrate (to me, at least) is that you can be pushing buttons constantly and still be bored. You know what's fun in an MMO? Talking to other players from time to time. But it also sucks when you have very little to do but plod along through a battle with little to do but sit and watch.

This is not a difficult problem to solve-- you just give players the option to queue up attacks. Pretty much any game in which you have to be regularly activating skills, you have certain patterns that you're going to rely on at times, and times when you'll break from those patterns. If I can set up a sequence of four skills that activate as soon as they're ready, but then cancel them if the need arises, then I can be both actively engaged in the gameplay and also give myself a second to breathe and talk to other players. It's not that different from the macros people would use in FFXI, just a lot more flexible and intuitive. By the way, I submitted this suggestion very early in the original alpha.

It's all about giving players a bit of control over the level of stimulation they want in the game at any given moment. Again, this is basic game psychology, but it allows them to play at their own optimal level of arousal. When you lock them into a certain pace, you take away that very important freedom and you work against the regular fluctuations in their neurology.

____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#20 Nov 27 2012 at 3:21 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Perrin wrote:
"I think it would've been good if they tried seeing what happened if they turned World of Warcraft into Final Fantasy... They should have said, 'Hey you, go play WoW for a year [for inspiration].'"


Yoshida may really be on to something: why hasn't any MMORPG been "inspired" by WoW before? It sounds like it'd pull in the casuals and be a resounding success - just look at those Blizzard numbers, right? - it's a totally untouched market where you can offer Final Fantasy fans something that only Square-Enix can give them: a generic standard!



that was a really weird comment that he made...i mean, of course everyone borrows from everyone (and they should, that's the way evolution works in the gaming world), and everyone borrows from WoW (which borrowed from EQ, Ultima, Might and Magic, and all the way back), but just bluntly saying "yeah, i think we should take WoW and slap a FF skin on it" seems less than creative.
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#21 Nov 27 2012 at 3:29 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
Hyrist wrote:
Well there is one thing SE has over other unknown MMO's that tried to copy World of Warcraft - An idenity.

Let's face it. World of Warcraft started by pulling in the Warcraft Fans into an Everquest Like world. However, aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard, on top of further developing a world based on the Warcraft Universe.

Other MMO's that imitated WoW never had that standard base to work off of like Final Fantasy does, and FFXI never really innovated the way the other MMO-clones did.

Yoshida's putting two and two together, not only looking on how FFXI succeeded, but how FFXI also failed where WoW took off. He's a smart cookie and I hope he stays 'thirsty' as far as innovation and development goes.


Innovation is a nice buzzword.

SE kept trying out new concepts in each expansion, though always with the technical limitations set in 2002 in place.

WoW kept raising the bar technically and most innovations that came from WoW had to do with the technical improvements that made them possible. Instancing (and later phasing), dungeon finder and the like. Improve the technology and you can do all sorts of cool things with it.

The innovations are not similar in nature, but to say that one game is innovating while the other isn't couldn't be further from the truth. Besieged is still the grandpa of dynamic events, though in a framework that couldn't quite handle it technically.


well said. what WoW did, and why it became so successful, was streamline* the whole experience. Subsequent games like rift and gw2 have piggybacked off of this. FFXI may have beat rift by 5+ years on dynamic events (campaign/besieged/etc), but trion was able to employ better tech. really, dynamic events in rift are just like fancy, better working, faster campaign battles. with a streamlined WAR public quest system thrown in. evolution.

imo there are always the people coming up with new creative concepts, and then there are other people who take those concepts and run with them. its like Sega, in the 90s. always coming up with wacky new gadgets for their genesis. modem. cd-rom. weirdos. the problem was, someone else would just come along and do it one better, with the aid of this year's tech, and maybe that's why Sega isn't in hardware anymore. the price for creativity?


*edit: looks like i wasn't the first person to think this, oops
Quote:
Whether or not the standard was raised can be debated, but I think 'streamlined' is probably a better choice of word here.

(i tend to reply to the thread as i read it, which can be annoying for others i suppose)



Edited, Nov 27th 2012 4:34pm by Llester
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#22 Nov 27 2012 at 3:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Well, if SE had been more proactive about game updates, that probably wouldn't have been an issue, but they let things go for years without any kind of fixing despite constant badgering from their players, so they gave other games plenty of time to one-up them.

But the idea that the success of games like WoW is purely due to "streamlining" misses the mark. Making everything a thoughtless, easy process for players, as if they're just on a factory line of quest completion, isn't what makes games fun. ****, if that's the case, we need to break from the keyboard and mouse interface, stat-- it's a very clumsy hardware configuration for gaming. I know a lot of people who are shut out from MMOs altogether because they find the controls too complicated and not at all "streamlined."

Unfortunately, much of the success of WoW was simply good marketing. Not that it's a poorly designed game, of course, but not every aspect of a product's success is a nod to its quality. Look at Angry Birds and Farmville, for example. Fine enough games, but not at all original or even an exceptional execution of a borrowed idea. Just marketed well to a massive audience til it reached a degree of self-sustainability through word of mouth and high sales figures which "speak for themselves."

You can also see it with those **** ***** enlarging pills, Enzyte. They advertised the **** out of them and gave tons of free samples away until they could talk about just how many people had used them, hence how incredibly successful they are. The product must be good! Look at how many people are using it! No, they don't actually enlarge your *****, but that hasn't stopped people from buying into the hype.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#23 Nov 27 2012 at 3:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Hyrist wrote:
aside from resting on their laurels like FFXI did, WoW kept innovating, raising the standard


That's some pretty loaded language. I wouldn't say that WoW "raised" the standard, just made one. With WoW, Blizzard established a baseline of easily imitable quest-grinding combined with rudimentary combat and a now-recognizable UI. As far as I'm concerned, both the gameplay and the story in the game is sub-par and incredibly stilted; it retains a huge following due to its wide, casual appeal and a unique place in popular culture.


I'll grant you the larger advertising campaign.

However, the standard when WoW was released was Everqusest. WoW went far an beyond Everquest's systems. Many of their adjustments were built towards a more casual audiance, which, in turn with it's popular culture references and smart business decisions (they tapped China for subscriptions and it is their largest single source for them, SE shut out China.)

So yes. WoW Raised the standards, they even fine tuned the UI to the point where most games use it as a base reference for where to start, which is why we hear so many 'WoW clone' issues.


As far as mentions to SE making innovations. They were slow coming and usually behind the curve, and yes, caught by limitations of not only the PS2, but the jumbled, messed up code they started with.

Quote:
well said. what WoW did, and why it became so successful, was streamline* the whole experience. Subsequent games like rift and gw2 have piggybacked off of this. FFXI may have beat rift by 5+ years on dynamic events (campaign/besieged/etc), but trion was able to employ better tech. really, dynamic events in rift are just like fancy, better working, faster campaign battles. with a streamlined WAR public quest system thrown in. evolution.


No, no no no.

WoW streamlined the process yes. But they did come up with other concepts as well.

But you're forgetting the other major component in this, the reason why Rift floundered in Subscriptions while FFXI maintianed a strong base for the better part of a decade, and why WoW took off.

They had a captive audience.

FFXI also had a captive audience and failed to innovate at a rate and pacing that kept it with the times. When WoW noticed the coming causal trend, it went head over heels to claim that base, even to the point of alienating some of their hardcore fans. FFXI went the opposite direction and doubled downed on their difficulty with CoP, alienating all but their dedicated fanbase of about half a million.

If FFXI had taken the time to realize they should have shifted with the trends, their success would have likely been far greater.


FFXI had the captive audience and not the trend-influence innovation.

WoW-clones went for the innovation yet did not have the identity needed to capitalize.

Yoshida's realizing it's quite possible that he's still sitting on a possible gold mine, even if his predecessors heaped a crap-ton of garbage on it. Is it too late to dig it out? SE doesn't think so. They've invested quite a deal into this.
#24 Nov 27 2012 at 4:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Kachi wrote:
BrokenFox wrote:
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?


It's a problem because FFXI's system is outdated and slow. If you like it, cool, but you're in the minority (as far as the MMO population goes). Personally I think turn based combat and MMOs don't mix well at all.

Times have changed and games have evolved. That type of system won't go well with the modern MMO audience, and that is who Square-Enix is targeting.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 2:15pm by BrokenFox


On the other hand, you have GW2, where you're so busy that you can barely talk during combat. You're always moving and pressing buttons. You can barely talk to your group or guild while playing the game at all. The thing that games like WoW, GW2, and the early FFXIV demonstrate (to me, at least) is that you can be pushing buttons constantly and still be bored. You know what's fun in an MMO? Talking to other players from time to time. But it also sucks when you have very little to do but plod along through a battle with little to do but sit and watch.

This is not a difficult problem to solve-- you just give players the option to queue up attacks. Pretty much any game in which you have to be regularly activating skills, you have certain patterns that you're going to rely on at times, and times when you'll break from those patterns. If I can set up a sequence of four skills that activate as soon as they're ready, but then cancel them if the need arises, then I can be both actively engaged in the gameplay and also give myself a second to breathe and talk to other players. It's not that different from the macros people would use in FFXI, just a lot more flexible and intuitive. By the way, I submitted this suggestion very early in the original alpha.

It's all about giving players a bit of control over the level of stimulation they want in the game at any given moment. Again, this is basic game psychology, but it allows them to play at their own optimal level of arousal. When you lock them into a certain pace, you take away that very important freedom and you work against the regular fluctuations in their neurology.




eh..kind of.

thing is, not everyone is going to agree with you. im probably in the minority, but one of the things i like about gw2 is that i can play it without talking to anyone. its a very casual game for me, and i enjoy being able to fight with/around/against other players without the need for extensive communication. i'll go a step further and say my current favorite online rpg is Dark Souls. You can barely even communicate with other players in that game, and even more rarely ever actually see/help/fight them.

for me, the combat mechanics are a bigger part of the experience than the social bits, so the queue system probably wouldnt be all that fun for me. SWG did it, and FFXI had a pretty good ratio of action to typing time, and i certainly enjoyed that game for 7 years. but these days i would need some kind of serious motivation to play a game where i could hit a macro to fight, while typing.

Basically im tired of the "run my avatar up to the mob and stand still while i hit keys" model of mmo combat. and for all the SATAing and such, thats pretty much what XI is. SWG was far far worse. on the other hand, SWG had arguably one of the best communities in mmo history. so while i don't entirely agree with your opinions on what is most fun gameplay-wise, i do agree with your premise: namely, that a shift towards more interactive/action based combat means less talking, which leads to a less social experience.

i almost said "different social experience". again, because i was thinking of dark souls, and wondering just how much "less social" it actually is. When you're wandering alone in the dark in some dungeon, literally nerve wracked because the game is an absolute old school *****, and you come across a note from another player warning you of the trap around the next turn, or the secret door in front of you, or the safezone bonfire that you (finally!) are about to reach, it feels good. in that same way that having people to help you through CoP felt good. idk. its definitely different. just not sure how much "less" it is. but i digress. dark souls isn't even an MMO, but it does understand the powerful social mechanism of bonding through shared agony.

tanaka understood it too
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#25 Nov 27 2012 at 4:20 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Hyrist wrote:


Quote:
well said. what WoW did, and why it became so successful, was streamline* the whole experience. Subsequent games like rift and gw2 have piggybacked off of this. FFXI may have beat rift by 5+ years on dynamic events (campaign/besieged/etc), but trion was able to employ better tech. really, dynamic events in rift are just like fancy, better working, faster campaign battles. with a streamlined WAR public quest system thrown in. evolution.


No, no no no.

WoW streamlined the process yes. But they did come up with other concepts as well.

But you're forgetting the other major component in this, the reason why Rift floundered in Subscriptions while FFXI maintianed a strong base for the better part of a decade, and why WoW took off.

They had a captive audience.

FFXI also had a captive audience and failed to innovate at a rate and pacing that kept it with the times. When WoW noticed the coming causal trend, it went head over heels to claim that base, even to the point of alienating some of their hardcore fans. FFXI went the opposite direction and doubled downed on their difficulty with CoP, alienating all but their dedicated fanbase of about half a million.

If FFXI had taken the time to realize they should have shifted with the trends, their success would have likely been far greater.


FFXI had the captive audience and not the trend-influence innovation.

WoW-clones went for the innovation yet did not have the identity needed to capitalize.

Yoshida's realizing it's quite possible that he's still sitting on a possible gold mine, even if his predecessors heaped a crap-ton of garbage on it. Is it too late to dig it out? SE doesn't think so. They've invested quite a deal into this.


i never said WoW didn't come up with new gameplay ideas. I said that streamlining the whole experience was what made the game so successful. why? accessibility.

i haven't forgotten the captive audience bit, of course thats why FFXI was able to shine for so long. There wasn't much else out there. Not to mention, the internet wasn't what it is now, so even if there were other options out there (there were.), many people didn't know (i didn't). And the reason WoW had a "captive audience" was because...no other mmo was that accessible and user friendly at the time. thats it right there. so i'm not sure what you're arguing with me about. are you arguing with me? yes yes yes? im not sure. anyway.

my point is that yes, in its infancy, the mmo genre was limited(naturally), but because it was such a niche market, and because social media was also in its infancy, you just didn't hear about options unless you were out there actively looking. these points, in addition to early MMOs being more coooperation-intensive/slower paced, led to people sticking with "their mmo" a lot more than they do today.

As for Rift, its doing just fine from the reports i hear. rift experienced the same thing every new mmo experiences. hype driven spike on launch followed by inevitable decline in subs, leading to a plateau. if the plateau is high enough, i consider it a success. In the case of rift, it appears to be high enough. people are still playing, the game is generating revenue, and its new features (insane player housing, 3 faction pvp etc) are being applauded.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 5:28pm by Llester

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 5:29pm by Llester
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#26 Nov 27 2012 at 4:56 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,426 posts
Kachi wrote:
Well, if SE had been more proactive about game updates, that probably wouldn't have been an issue, but they let things go for years without any kind of fixing despite constant badgering from their players, so they gave other games plenty of time to one-up them.

But the idea that the success of games like WoW is purely due to "streamlining" misses the mark. Making everything a thoughtless, easy process for players, as if they're just on a factory line of quest completion, isn't what makes games fun. ****, if that's the case, we need to break from the keyboard and mouse interface, stat-- it's a very clumsy hardware configuration for gaming. I know a lot of people who are shut out from MMOs altogether because they find the controls too complicated and not at all "streamlined."

Unfortunately, much of the success of WoW was simply good marketing. Not that it's a poorly designed game, of course, but not every aspect of a product's success is a nod to its quality. Look at Angry Birds and Farmville, for example. Fine enough games, but not at all original or even an exceptional execution of a borrowed idea. Just marketed well to a massive audience til it reached a degree of self-sustainability through word of mouth and high sales figures which "speak for themselves."

You can also see it with those **** ***** enlarging pills, Enzyte. They advertised the **** out of them and gave tons of free samples away until they could talk about just how many people had used them, hence how incredibly successful they are. The product must be good! Look at how many people are using it! No, they don't actually enlarge your *****, but that hasn't stopped people from buying into the hype.



i never said "streamlining makes games more fun". i said it made WoW more successful. I also never said "the success of WoW is purely due to streamlining".
but i can see how you could infer that from what i did say. i'm thinking the fault was mine for not being precise with my wording, since you are the second person to mention this. my mistake.

I 100% agree that we should break from the keyboard/mouse model tbh. i find it awkward to shoehorn a toolset that was designed for such-and-such into the role of game interface device. Ive always found it odd, but if the game is good enough ill still do it. will always prefer a controller.

WoW and marketing. Hmm. now that is an interesting one, because i remember when i first started seeing commercials for WoW. I remember because WoW was already popular when i started seeing them. people were already leaving XI and telling me "WoW is so much less stressful, i can actually get drops etcetc". Imo, marketing worked for WoW (and it was certainly the first MMO i saw on a tv commercial), and was surely a major factor in its 10mil subs, but it wasnt what made the game an initial success.

If they had tried marketing WoW right at launch, i just dont think it would have had as much of an impact. for one, the climate wasnt quite ripe yet. and im going to go out on a limb and blame Lord of the Rings. The movies. Before the mainstream success of that (and harry potter. ****!), i honestly dont see a fantasy based game being a huge commercial success. Am i simplifying? probably. But the increased acceptance of fantasy in pop culture really helped open the door for Mr. T to run in with his dwarf or whatever.


Edited, Nov 27th 2012 6:05pm by Llester
____________________________
monk
dragoon

#27 Nov 27 2012 at 6:01 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
SE is decades old and has generated more than enough revenue(especially from FFXI, their highest grossing FF title to date) to be able to pull off what Blizz did. Had they decided to do so, it's completely possible that we'd all be here in the WoW forum asking if WoW2 was going to be an 'XI killer' instead of the other way around.


Why put so much effort into something that won't bring returns to make up for it? Blizz could toss money into WoW because it kept growing and growing, the momentum was there. XI lost it's momentum once WoW came out, at that point it was all about trying to keep the remaining playerbase playing.

WoW faces similar fate today. Which is no surprise, as it's as old as XI was around the time of ToAU.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#28 Nov 27 2012 at 6:21 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,957 posts
BrokenFox wrote:
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FFXI was practically turn based.. and i played that for 8 years... not to mention 90% of the ppl on this board seem to think FFXI was fine/better than XIV sooooooo why would FFXIV being turn based suddenly be a problem?


It's a problem because FFXI's system is outdated and slow. If you like it, cool, but you're in the minority (as far as the MMO population goes). Personally I think turn based combat and MMOs don't mix well at all.

Times have changed and games have evolved. That type of system won't go well with the modern MMO audience, and that is who Square-Enix is targeting.

Edited, Nov 27th 2012 2:15pm by BrokenFox



so WoW and GW2 play like action RPGs where i can constantly swing my weapon my mashing X and manually evade attacks if my reflexes are fast enough? doubtful... until that becaomes the case in an MMO then theyre ALL turned based to some degree
#29 Nov 27 2012 at 6:46 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,150 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
SE is decades old and has generated more than enough revenue(especially from FFXI, their highest grossing FF title to date) to be able to pull off what Blizz did. Had they decided to do so, it's completely possible that we'd all be here in the WoW forum asking if WoW2 was going to be an 'XI killer' instead of the other way around.


Why put so much effort into something that won't bring returns to make up for it?

Bolded for emphasis. RotZ, CoP and ToAU all grew the subscriber base as they were released and if SE had kept on in this tradition, the game probably would have achieved it's top spot a lot sooner. A better question to ask would be "Why has it taken (what will be) 6 years to develop another proper expansion for the highest grossing FF title in history?"

Hyanmen wrote:
XI lost it's momentum once WoW came out, at that point it was all about trying to keep the remaining playerbase playing.

XI's population was still rising up through ToAU which was released in (correct me if I'm wrong) Winter of '06. WoW was released 2 years earlier.

Hyanmen wrote:
WoW faces similar fate today. Which is no surprise, as it's as old as XI was around the time of ToAU.

What fate is that? They still have 10 million subscribers; in large part due to the popularity of their recent expansion. Say what you will about WoW, but people who like it have nothing but good things to say about this expansion when compared to any of the others.


____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#30 Nov 27 2012 at 7:58 PM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
**
644 posts
WoW simply has run a much better PR campaign than the almost non-existent FFXI one.

Television commercials celebrity endorsements WoW still available for purchase at major retail stores. WoW is constantly promoting their product to New potential players.

Whereas FFXI focuses on it's current player base and promotes to them. Basicly if you don't or have never played a FF game you just don't know about FFXI. Yes the game is old but SE could at least do better than a 1 foot sq. poster at the GameStop stuck in a corner to announce the release of an Expansion. Whereas WoW has full size cutouts and an entire shelf full of the game.
____________________________
Pikko wrote:
I can't freaking believe I didn't click this thread earlier. YOU LITTLE TWERPS!!


Wint wrote:
You know, I can click the rate down button more than once Smiley: motz


>>>--Justice-->
#31 Nov 27 2012 at 8:14 PM Rating: Decent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
WoW subscriptions alone brought in the revenue of 6 major Final Fantasy titles a year, not even counting the initial purchase, expansions, or glitter ponies.

It's sparkle ponies, not glitter ponies.


I'll be sure to consult with you in the future whenever I'm in doubt of the luminosity of any pony.

FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
You could slam SE for not doing enough, but they did a pretty good job with what little they had to work with compared to a company with near infinite wealth to make improvements with.

My bullsh*t meter is approaching critical mass. What little they had to work with? Puh-leez!

SE is decades old and has generated more than enough revenue(especially from FFXI, their highest grossing FF title to date) to be able to pull off what Blizz did. Had they decided to do so, it's completely possible that we'd all be here in the WoW forum asking if WoW2 was going to be an 'XI killer' instead of the other way around.


My logic was more along the lines that I don't consider WoW to be as entertaining as 6 Final Fantasy titles a year. Not even close, really.

But even if you want to compare FFXI to WoW, I enjoyed FFXI even though it had a 24th the population of WoW. I could barely play WoW a few weeks at a time before I was bored to tears and I saw no point in playing. Do I need any more reason than that?

FFXI had some innovations that were copied. Probably the most famous was the Auction House. WoW's big trick was streamlining the grind and letting every mob spew out gear like they were pinatas (which really wasn't all that innovative since it's what the 2 Diablo titles that came before it did). Obviously, that was a big hit. Who knew? But ever since then, it's just been mostly riding the tsunami they've created with a few trick ponies... er, sparkle ponies, to keep the subscription money flowing in.

But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn. Sure they had a good concept to start, but what have they done for you lately? I've enjoyed many innovative games over the last few years which don't have the budget WoW rakes in. So what's their excuse?
#32 Nov 27 2012 at 8:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
thing is, not everyone is going to agree with you. im probably in the minority, but one of the things i like about gw2 is that i can play it without talking to anyone. its a very casual game for me, and i enjoy being able to fight with/around/against other players without the need for extensive communication. i'll go a step further and say my current favorite online rpg is Dark Souls. You can barely even communicate with other players in that game, and even more rarely ever actually see/help/fight them.

for me, the combat mechanics are a bigger part of the experience than the social bits, so the queue system probably wouldnt be all that fun for me. SWG did it, and FFXI had a pretty good ratio of action to typing time, and i certainly enjoyed that game for 7 years. but these days i would need some kind of serious motivation to play a game where i could hit a macro to fight, while typing.

Basically im tired of the "run my avatar up to the mob and stand still while i hit keys" model of mmo combat. and for all the SATAing and such, thats pretty much what XI is. SWG was far far worse. on the other hand, SWG had arguably one of the best communities in mmo history. so while i don't entirely agree with your opinions on what is most fun gameplay-wise, i do agree with your premise: namely, that a shift towards more interactive/action based combat means less talking, which leads to a less social experience.

i almost said "different social experience". again, because i was thinking of dark souls, and wondering just how much "less social" it actually is. When you're wandering alone in the dark in some dungeon, literally nerve wracked because the game is an absolute old school *****, and you come across a note from another player warning you of the trap around the next turn, or the secret door in front of you, or the safezone bonfire that you (finally!) are about to reach, it feels good. in that same way that having people to help you through CoP felt good. idk. its definitely different. just not sure how much "less" it is. but i digress. dark souls isn't even an MMO, but it does understand the powerful social mechanism of bonding through shared agony.


Well, it's not just you. I'm certainly not saying that everyone wants a more social game. I'm saying that it's a turnoff to a lot of people when socialization in your game is a distraction that keeps you from reaching your goals. Likewise, it's a turnoff to a lot of people when socialization in your game is necessary. In that regard, no game can be perfectly tailored to everyone. However, there are many features which can give players the option to play in different ways.

Queuing abilities isn't supposed to replace reflexive combat (in fact, there's a problem with encounter design if players can easily faceroll through any encounter with a preset macro). Queuing is supposed to prevent you from standing there doing nothing, or not using critical skills, because you were in the middle of typing a single sentence to your party member, or responding to a whisper. It shouldn't be an optimal way to perform in combat; just a tool for eeking out a sentence here and there.

My point is, there are lots of happy mediums where all players can flourish. Thing is, most players are not so easily boxed in to "more" or "less" social. I do know people that never talk to others in games. I can be one of them. But that's not always what I want. Yet in some games, that's always what you get. There is no throttle. "Here's your experience, and here's it's pace." I'm a human, and sometimes the thing I wanted five minute ago is not what I want now.

Quote:
I 100% agree that we should break from the keyboard/mouse model tbh. i find it awkward to shoehorn a toolset that was designed for such-and-such into the role of game interface device. Ive always found it odd, but if the game is good enough ill still do it. will always prefer a controller.

WoW and marketing. Hmm. now that is an interesting one, because i remember when i first started seeing commercials for WoW. I remember because WoW was already popular when i started seeing them. people were already leaving XI and telling me "WoW is so much less stressful, i can actually get drops etcetc". Imo, marketing worked for WoW (and it was certainly the first MMO i saw on a tv commercial), and was surely a major factor in its 10mil subs, but it wasnt what made the game an initial success.


Personally I'm devastated by the loss of keyboard/controller combos today. There were a couple of models used for console MMOs back in the day, and everyone I know to have used them LOVED them. But they just quit making them altogether, and they never even existed for the PC.

I wouldn't say that all of WoW's success was due to marketing, only that it helped WoW break a certain success threshold. It still has to be good to succeed, and certainly it was more receptive to casual players than Everquest-based games. The game definitely thrived on word of mouth in the beginning, and WoW had a responsive design team that listened to player feedback and quickly churned out content. That alone is more than most MMOs can muster. Most of that is also true, however, of Angry Birds and Farmville. Hence you heard for years that WoW catered to the casuals. But considering that roughly 80% of players are "casuals," that's how you make a successful game. But it's not going to make a lot of diehard FF fans happy to see the same thing.

And that's kind of where the divide is. For casual gamers, the first iteration is usually the most successful. No marginally improved version of Farmville is going to take away from Farmville. WoW owns the casual gamer's MMO sector. It will literally take a game that makes a very large amount of the people who have ever played WoW to say, "This new game is way better." Because casuals don't do research on games-- they try out what's getting good press.

The sad thing is that the game that is probably best poised to dethrone WoW right now could be FFXI (due to the large amount of "new" content it would present) if it were adapted for that purpose. Instead, it will probably go to some other game that picks up a few years of content and stakes a piece of the pie for itself, but it could remain the purview of WoW for another decade or more. Something that people take for granted is the death of MMOs. But we're approaching an era where MMOs will never die as long as they remain somewhat successful. The diminishing returns in technological capability are creating a longer shelf-life for MMOs, and replacing games isn't as appealing or necessary as it was when there were obvious improvements in hardware capability.

Quote:
so WoW and GW2 play like action RPGs where i can constantly swing my weapon my mashing X and manually evade attacks if my reflexes are fast enough? doubtful... until that becaomes the case in an MMO then theyre ALL turned based to some degree


This is basically true of GW2, actually. Blade and Soul is an upcoming game that is supposed to be very much action-oriented (and is actually supposed to be quite good in this regard, though apparently with ****-all questing and story). WildStar is an MMO that recently began development which actually has a dynamic dodging system-- you recognize enemy attack patterns and avoid them as an integral combat feature.

I wouldn't necessarily even say that most MMO primarily resemble turn-based combat.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#33 Nov 27 2012 at 11:44 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,150 posts
Xoie wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
WoW subscriptions alone brought in the revenue of 6 major Final Fantasy titles a year, not even counting the initial purchase, expansions, or glitter ponies.

It's sparkle ponies, not glitter ponies.


I'll be sure to consult with you in the future whenever I'm in doubt of the luminosity of any pony.

Go to google and type 'WoW sparkle' and see what the auto-fill comes up with. Now type 'WoW glitter'... nuff said.

Xoie wrote:
But even if you want to compare FFXI to WoW, I enjoyed FFXI even though it had a 24th the population of WoW. I could barely play WoW a few weeks at a time before I was bored to tears and I saw no point in playing. Do I need any more reason than that?

No. You actually don't need any reason at all to dislike WoW. The reason isn't relevant to the point anyway.

The only thing I really took issue with in what you quoted was that you suggested WoW was successful because Blizzard had money. Budget != successful MMO. /point SWtoR

Xoie wrote:
WoW's big trick was streamlining the grind and letting every mob spew out gear like they were pinatas (which really wasn't all that innovative since it's what the 2 Diablo titles that came before it did).

WoW loot drops just like XI loot does except in WoW the drop rates aren't insanely low. They expect you to clear content in a matter of months and it makes sense to allow people to get low level epics, before they move on to higher level epics... before everything becomes obsolete.

XI loot on the other hand is super rare because you needed something to do while you were waiting 3 years for the epic expansion storyline to be released.

As for Diablo, most of the loot is trash. Sure you kill something and it sprays you with rare gear, but everything has random stats. The chance you have of getting something valuable are decent, but the chance you have to get the weapon with all the stats you wanted are probably pretty close to XI drop rates. Imagine if everytime you killed Lord of Onzozo it dropped a Kraken Club but the stat was random. You might get 'Occasionally attacks 2-8 times' or you might get any one of thousands of combinations of 'Mind + x' or 'Defense + y'. Same sh*t.

Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.

Edited, Nov 28th 2012 12:44am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#34 Nov 28 2012 at 3:34 AM Rating: Good
Guru
***
1,310 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.


I don't really want to argue with you about this Filth, but, wow, that's enough vitriol for me to do a Haters Gonna Hate walk.

You've completely misunderstood me, though. I'm saying WoW earns enough to reinvest in new innovation; certainly enough to create vast, incredible adventures. With that kind of money, they could be hitting it out of the park all the time with inescapable entertainment and new never-before-seen ideas that keep you on the edge of your seat, but all anyone talks about is when a WoW-killer is going to show up, as though the best days of WoW are behind it.

And your McDonald's analogy doesn't make any sense. You're not buying a one-off sandwich, here, it's a subscription to a game you expect will get updated with new things as time goes on. Innovation is supposed to be part of what you're paying for.
#35 Nov 28 2012 at 6:19 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
XI's population was still rising up through ToAU which was released in (correct me if I'm wrong) Winter of '06. WoW was released 2 years earlier.


I'm not sure where your information came from. At the start of ToAU the game had around 500k subscribers. Some reports stated that the game had hit even 700k subscribers somewhere pre-WoW, during CoP. Other reports stated that the sub base was around 550k at the time. Either way, no reports of the sub base growing have surfaced after the release of ToAU. Rather, even if there was no actual shrinking of the playerbase, it certainly stalled- and possibly long before ToAU came out, too. Not to mention, once ffxiah.com came out it was easier to monitor, if not totally accurate sub numbers at least the subscription trends- whether they weere growing, stalling, shrinking. Slowly but surely, all through ToAU, according to ffxiah's graphs, the sub base had shrunk.

And the reason is simple, too. Why would FFXI be left unaffected when the juggernaut started it's MMO demolition? Many who gave it a try swore for it's merits, and not for no reason. No MMO could escape WoW's wrath during the time.

Quote:
What fate is that? They still have 10 million subscribers; in large part due to the popularity of their recent expansion. Say what you will about WoW, but people who like it have nothing but good things to say about this expansion when compared to any of the others.


They were stalling for a long time, now their playerbase is shrinking. It's a similar fate, though in a different scale. But you can be certain that they sure as **** aren't putting more effort into the game due to it's stalling and shrinking, regardless of what sort of profits it brought in before.

During Cataclysm the patches have slowed down considerably, and each expansion has less and less stuff in them - though they are released more frequently, too, so that players can pay the price of a xpack more frequently on top of the monthly fee. Who knows what will happen with the Pandaria expansion in the long run, but Cataclysm's patch schedule was quite pathetic.

I don't blame them though, they do what SE did because it makes sense. Upholding the same sub base, not to mention growing it will take more and more effort as the games get older. There's no gains to be had on the publisher's side.

Edited, Nov 28th 2012 3:21pm by Hyanmen
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#36 Nov 28 2012 at 8:32 AM Rating: Decent
****
4,957 posts
Kachi wrote:


Quote:
so WoW and GW2 play like action RPGs where i can constantly swing my weapon my mashing X and manually evade attacks if my reflexes are fast enough? doubtful... until that becaomes the case in an MMO then theyre ALL turned based to some degree


This is basically true of GW2, actually. Blade and Soul is an upcoming game that is supposed to be very much action-oriented (and is actually supposed to be quite good in this regard, though apparently with sh*t-all questing and story). WildStar is an MMO that recently began development which actually has a dynamic dodging system-- you recognize enemy attack patterns and avoid them as an integral combat feature.

I wouldn't necessarily even say that most MMO primarily resemble turn-based combat.


so if the MMOs you listed play like action RPGs then that technically means if Im level 1 and good enough I could kill a level 100 monster or player if I can manage not to get hit.. since then the game is based more on skill than armor/equipment.. so although all theyd have to do is hit me once to kill me.. if Im a better player than them that hit would never happen and i could kill them even if i have to hit em 45 mins to do it....


kind a likein Space Cowboy online (a spaceship/aerial combat mmo, which was skill based so a level 1 pilot could beat a level 100 pilot if you could outfly him.. which Ive done multiple times)
#37 Nov 28 2012 at 10:43 AM Rating: Good
****
4,150 posts
Xoie wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.


I don't really want to argue with you about this Filth, but, wow, that's enough vitriol for me to do a Haters Gonna Hate walk.

It's not vitriol. Monthly MMO subs all hover around the same price and they all offer basically the same thing. Your sub fee gives you access to your account for 30 days. Nothing else. The 'innovation' you refer is merely incentive for you to continue your subscription.

We all expect these games to improve and offer more content. Blizzard has done this with WoW to the point that every other MMO in the industry considers it the standard. I'm just perplexed that you think that one business should provide better service than another at the same price simply because they have made more profit. That doesn't make any sense at all to me and probably even less sense to the business, whatever it might be.

Hyanmen wrote:
Some reports stated that the game had hit even 700k subscribers somewhere pre-WoW, during CoP.

WoW was released prior to CoP expansion so this can't be accurate.

Regardless, the point was that XI grew and maintained their sub numbers through their (what most would call) valid expansions. WoW soaked up people new to the MMO market.

ToAU is 6 years old, yet it's still getting content upgrades like Neo Nyzul Isle and Salvage changes. I'd argue that most of the playerbase that left XI did so because of lack of new content, not because WoW absorbed them.

Hyanmen wrote:
During Cataclysm the patches have slowed down considerably, and each expansion has less and less stuff in them - though they are released more frequently, too, so that players can pay the price of a xpack more frequently on top of the monthly fee.


MoP was released two months ago with more content than any expansion prior to it so your point about expansions offering less and less isn't valid. I'd be likely to agree if you said WotLK had more content than Cata, but that's the only exception. I don't think anyone would disagree that Cataclysm was the worst expansion in terms of content for raids, but they completely overhauled the quest mechanics and modified nearly all of the zones in the game. That sort of thing takes a lot of resources and even Blizz themselves said that they bit more than they could chew.

They also said that there will be less content in terms of raids in each patch, but they are offsetting it with more content overall and by releasing patches more frequently. If anything, this shows that they understand their base. Not everyone likes to do everything in the game. Releasing smaller content patches more frequently is a good way to combat the boredom that many people seem to suffer from.




Edited, Nov 28th 2012 11:47am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#38 Nov 28 2012 at 11:01 AM Rating: Good
****
4,957 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.


I don't really want to argue with you about this Filth, but, wow, that's enough vitriol for me to do a Haters Gonna Hate walk.

It's not vitriol. Monthly MMO subs all hover around the same price and they all offer basically the same thing. Your sub fee gives you access to your account for 30 days. Nothing else. The 'innovation' you refer is merely incentive for you to continue your subscription.



no your subscription gives you a lot more than just access to your account... I mean compare all the stuff you get and can do in FFXI or even WoW as opposed to a game you dont pay a dime for (GW doesnt count since you DO pay a dime for that.. its just not a monthly fee.. Im referring to completely free titles like DCUO where in a month youve done and seen everything there is to do and see and every day after that consist of doing the EXACT same thing everyday...

in FFXI on the other hand Ive played that for 8 years and there are still things I never done or seen/finishes.... such as Wotg.... never stepped foot in Einherjar... never been in dynamis tavnazia... never killed any of the toau kings outside of Beseiged, never once fought the bigger ZNMs, or PW, never farmed any jailers in sea or fought absolute virtue, etc etc and thats just the stuff that exist WHILE i was still playing.. Im not even counting the stuff that came AFTER i stopped (walk of echoes, abyssea etc etc)


so yeah that 15 bucks a month gave me a much bigger variety than ANY free game has EVER come close to.
#39 Nov 28 2012 at 12:04 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
^
Quote:
in FFXI on the other hand Ive played that for 8 years and there are still things I never done or seen/finishes.... such as Wotg.... never stepped foot in Einherjar... never been in dynamis tavnazia... never killed any of the toau kings outside of Beseiged, never once fought the bigger ZNMs, or PW, never farmed any jailers in sea or fought absolute virtue, etc etc and thats just the stuff that exist WHILE i was still playing.. Im not even counting the stuff that came AFTER i stopped (walk of echoes, abyssea etc etc)


Quote:
WoW loot drops just like XI loot does except in WoW the drop rates aren't insanely low. They expect you to clear content in a matter of months and it makes sense to allow people to get low level epics, before they move on to higher level epics... before everything becomes obsolete.

XI loot on the other hand is super rare because you needed something to do while you were waiting 3 years for the epic expansion storyline to be released.


And that's why I say that if FFXI was really prepared to, they could actually steal a lot of WoW's subs. But they'd have to go significantly more casual, significantly increasing drop rates, reducing death penalties, reducing travel time, and reducing XP tnl. (And though I hate to say it, they'd probably have to drop PS2 support, too). They have a ton of content, but for too long they relied too heavily artificially lengthening it, to the point where most players could never do all of the content. In that regard, they were successful, but they forgot something important: they weren't going to run out of content anyway. Because for all intents and purposes, new classes are new content (if you can't grasp why this is, you can at least understand that new classes provide a new way to experience the content).

For the majority of FFXI's lifespan, it's had more content than it needed to, and allowed player's to experience it too slowly. But if SE removed all of those artificial barriers to content, they have a real pearl underneath. The next biggest thing they'd need to fix is the rewards for encounters, to ensure that there's good incentive to experience the content other than for fun.

A lot of these changes could only upset the current subscriber base at the moment, but maybe someday when the game really is on the verge of death, the game will be reworked.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:


so if the MMOs you listed play like action RPGs then that technically means if Im level 1 and good enough I could kill a level 100 monster or player if I can manage not to get hit.. since then the game is based more on skill than armor/equipment.. so although all theyd have to do is hit me once to kill me.. if Im a better player than them that hit would never happen and i could kill them even if i have to hit em 45 mins to do it....


kind a likein Space Cowboy online (a spaceship/aerial combat mmo, which was skill based so a level 1 pilot could beat a level 100 pilot if you could outfly him.. which Ive done multiple times)


Just because a game is action-oriented doesn't mean that you can beat a level 100 encounter at level 1. Lots of games are based both on skill and equipment. You might have the skill, but not have the damage output, you might not be able to avoid 100% of attacks, etc... I have solo'd Champion enemies that were meant for a large group of players in GW2. But many enemies have ranged attacks that can't be dodged, or at least would require psychic ability to dodge. Most classes can play defensively enough where yeah, they could avoid the attacks, but if you don't engage the enemy heavily enough they walk away and regen. So theoretically it's possible, but it generally depends on the encounter.

Statistical equipment is really not the emphasis of GW2... getting equipment that rivals the best in the game is (too) easy. You could say that WvW or PvP is almost entirely skill-based, though the classes aren't balanced well for it, so it doesn't necessarily take a lot of skill to take down a mage as a fighter class.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#40 Nov 28 2012 at 12:06 PM Rating: Good
****
4,150 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.


I don't really want to argue with you about this Filth, but, wow, that's enough vitriol for me to do a Haters Gonna Hate walk.

It's not vitriol. Monthly MMO subs all hover around the same price and they all offer basically the same thing. Your sub fee gives you access to your account for 30 days. Nothing else. The 'innovation' you refer is merely incentive for you to continue your subscription.



no your subscription gives you a lot more than just access to your account... I mean compare all the stuff you get and can do in FFXI or even WoW as opposed to a game you dont pay a dime for

All of the 'stuff you can do' is included in the cost of your subscription fee. You do pay for it. The general statement of paying for access to your account includes everything you can use said account to do.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
Im referring to completely free titles like DCUO where in a month youve done and seen everything there is to do and see and every day after that consist of doing the EXACT same thing everyday...

We're not talking about completely free games here Max. The entire argument revolves around a game's profit so if a game makes no profit, why would it be included in the discussion? I'll give you a moment to let that sink in.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
in FFXI on the other hand Ive played that for 8 years and there are still things I never done or seen/finishes.... such as Wotg.... never stepped foot in Einherjar... never been in dynamis tavnazia... never killed any of the toau kings outside of Beseiged, never once fought the bigger ZNMs, or PW, never farmed any jailers in sea or fought absolute virtue, etc etc and thats just the stuff that exist WHILE i was still playing.. Im not even counting the stuff that came AFTER i stopped (walk of echoes, abyssea etc etc)

You played XI for 8 years and didn't participate in 90% of the content. It begs the question, why bother?

Again, free games do not apply here. This is a comparison between for profit games. Xoie thinks that because a company makes more profit than the next, they should essentially provide a more innovative service than their competitor who charges the same price. The concept is used here in a subscription model but the context applies to any business.

Now ask yourself... would you sell a product or service that was better than your competitor's product or service at the same price? I don't know about you, but if I was providing a better service than my customers would be able to find elsewhere, I would charge accordingly, regardless of how much more money I was making than they were.

I guess an argument can be made that a business might undercut the market in an effort to drive competition out, but WoW maintains complete dominance in the MMO market already. It wouldn't make sense to sacrifice profit for a larger share of the market, especially when it isn't guaranteed that people who leave the games struggling to compete would join you. Might be different if we were talking about necessities, but it probably doesn't translate well to entertainment.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#41 Nov 28 2012 at 12:16 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Personally I took the comments to suggest that WoW's popularity wasn't proportional to the quality of their product, which I'd agree with. It's quite common that if something is "the best" by a slim 10% margin, they can still be a hundred times more successful than the second place competitor. There are many ways in which companies become financial juggernauts without even offering any clear advantage to their product.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#42 Nov 28 2012 at 12:56 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
Quote:
WoW was released prior to CoP expansion so this can't be accurate.

I'd argue that most of the playerbase that left XI did so because of lack of new content, not because WoW absorbed them.


You should check your sources - CoP most definitely came first.

Most of the playerbase left XI due to reasons other than WoW's appearance, the point is that XI stopped growing and became stagnant instead.

Quote:
They also said that there will be less content in terms of raids in each patch, but they are offsetting it with more content overall and by releasing patches more frequently. If anything, this shows that they understand their base.


Their base is dropping and fast. Surely a sign that they "understand" the playerbase.

Perhaps I'd even argue that most of the playerbase that are leaving WoW do so because of lack of new content (deja vu?). Fortunately for them at least someone has eaten their PR without chewing first.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#43 Nov 28 2012 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
****
4,150 posts
Hyanmen wrote:
Quote:
WoW was released prior to CoP expansion so this can't be accurate.

I'd argue that most of the playerbase that left XI did so because of lack of new content, not because WoW absorbed them.


You should check your sources - CoP most definitely came first.


I had early September for WoW and late September for CoP. Actually now that I think about it, the anniversary is in November for WoW. Either way, WoW didn't make that immediate of an impact on XI and the popularity of the CoP expansion and continued support through ToAU proves that.

Hyanmen wrote:
Their base is dropping and fast. Surely a sign that they "understand" the playerbase.

The playerbase dropped at the end of Cata to sub 10 million but is currently above 10 million. That isn't an increase over the 13 million they had at one point in time, but the trend is upward, not downward; at least for the current time. Regardless, maintaining 10 million subs is by no means 'clinging to life support' as you make it out to be. You'd have a point if the subscriber base had been reduced by roughly 80% like that of XI.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#44 Nov 28 2012 at 2:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
The way I see it, lack of innovation is the explanation for the ennui that's settling into the MMO world at large.

I feel like all too often we just see barely enough improvements to make canceling your subscription regrettable, but nothing more. It's as though the idea is to keep you locked in with just enough nostalgia and guilt at leaving your character progress behind that you keep on shoveling out cash for a game you haven't found exciting in years. The raid-for-gear-to-raid-with trap just isn't the draw it used to be.

And it's a shame, because subscription-based MMOs are very lucrative when they succeed. It's like printing your own money. But all too often, I don't believe you get the entertainment value you're paying for with your subscription when you think of similarly priced experiences. And that's the thing that has to change for the better if this industry as a whole is going to survive.
#45 Nov 28 2012 at 2:40 PM Rating: Default
****
4,957 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Xoie wrote:
But I don't think of WoW's level of gaming excellence to match what they earn.

If McDonalds charges 3 dollars for a filet-o-fish sandwich then that's the fee. If you want a filet-o-fish, you pay it. If you don't, then you go somewhere else. You're basically saying here that you expect to have filet mignon for the price of filet-o-fish because McDonalds makes a lot of money.

Get the @#%^ out, right the @#%^ now.


I don't really want to argue with you about this Filth, but, wow, that's enough vitriol for me to do a Haters Gonna Hate walk.

It's not vitriol. Monthly MMO subs all hover around the same price and they all offer basically the same thing. Your sub fee gives you access to your account for 30 days. Nothing else. The 'innovation' you refer is merely incentive for you to continue your subscription.



no your subscription gives you a lot more than just access to your account... I mean compare all the stuff you get and can do in FFXI or even WoW as opposed to a game you dont pay a dime for

All of the 'stuff you can do' is included in the cost of your subscription fee. You do pay for it. The general statement of paying for access to your account includes everything you can use said account to do.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
Im referring to completely free titles like DCUO where in a month youve done and seen everything there is to do and see and every day after that consist of doing the EXACT same thing everyday...

We're not talking about completely free games here Max. The entire argument revolves around a game's profit so if a game makes no profit, why would it be included in the discussion? I'll give you a moment to let that sink in.

DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
in FFXI on the other hand Ive played that for 8 years and there are still things I never done or seen/finishes.... such as Wotg.... never stepped foot in Einherjar... never been in dynamis tavnazia... never killed any of the toau kings outside of Beseiged, never once fought the bigger ZNMs, or PW, never farmed any jailers in sea or fought absolute virtue, etc etc and thats just the stuff that exist WHILE i was still playing.. Im not even counting the stuff that came AFTER i stopped (walk of echoes, abyssea etc etc)

You played XI for 8 years and didn't participate in 90% of the content. It begs the question, why bother?

Again, free games do not apply here. This is a comparison between for profit games. Xoie thinks that because a company makes more profit than the next, they should essentially provide a more innovative service than their competitor who charges the same price. The concept is used here in a subscription model but the context applies to any business.

Now ask yourself... would you sell a product or service that was better than your competitor's product or service at the same price? I don't know about you, but if I was providing a better service than my customers would be able to find elsewhere, I would charge accordingly, regardless of how much more money I was making than they were.

I guess an argument can be made that a business might undercut the market in an effort to drive competition out, but WoW maintains complete dominance in the MMO market already. It wouldn't make sense to sacrifice profit for a larger share of the market, especially when it isn't guaranteed that people who leave the games struggling to compete would join you. Might be different if we were talking about necessities, but it probably doesn't translate well to entertainment.




lol youre joking right the stuff i listed not doing wasnt 90% of the content.. maybe 50% but not 90%... I mean for everything i DIDNT do I couldnt name 10 other things i DID do.

as for the things i didnt do... I had the skill and people wanting me to do those things.. I just never wanted too (as there was nothing i really wanted from them)... and i didnt have an endgame ls (thus not having to be "forced" to participate in stuff i dint want to) but other LSes who know of my skill would always invite me to certain events as a "free agent" that show I got stuff done... so yeah the only thing stopping me from doing those other things was myself
#46 Nov 28 2012 at 4:02 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
The way I see it, lack of innovation is the explanation for the ennui that's settling into the MMO world at large.

I feel like all too often we just see barely enough improvements to make canceling your subscription regrettable, but nothing more. It's as though the idea is to keep you locked in with just enough nostalgia and guilt at leaving your character progress behind that you keep on shoveling out cash for a game you haven't found exciting in years. The raid-for-gear-to-raid-with trap just isn't the draw it used to be.


There's definitely a problem of lack of innovation, but there's also a bit of a player paradox. Players really like the idea of starting a game that's getting off on the ground floor, which is paradoxically the time when the game content will be the least polished. At the same time, they don't want to jump into a game that may be on the decline, but the lifespan of MMOs is only growing longer and longer. Back when games like FFXI and WoW started, there was an implicit understanding that these games would eventually be shut down as bigger and better games came along. But that's not necessarily the case at all. It's actually entirely possible that these games will stick around for decades. New players are always entering the market, and older games can sustain years worth of playable content easily. Continuous updates make re-releases or sequel versions unnecessary. The player base is already there with an established culture, and they provide the social-side content... and that's half the battle.

We'll probably continue to see a revolving door of players in older games until they very slowly peter out for good. But you have to remember that even when that next highly innovative game comes along, it's going to take years before they have the level of content that will compete with older games. So players will almost definitely grow bored with it, and then go back to the games which have a decade of development behind them.

The problem in a sense isn't MMOs. It's that players expect the impossible-- for something "better" to come along, even though any new game will inevitably have less than half of the development time of its competitors. The new reality for players is that a new release MMO isn't likely to drastically improve upon its competitors overnight, and that the best time to get into a game from now on may be once it has a few years of live playtime under it's belt.

I'm speaking in wide generalities, of course. There are ways to design games around those paradoxes, but designers are far away from that mark.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#47 Nov 28 2012 at 4:09 PM Rating: Default
***
3,416 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Either way, WoW didn't make that immediate of an impact on XI and the popularity of the CoP expansion and continued support through ToAU proves that.


Yes, the playerbase did not drop by more than a couple hundred thousand at best (and did not happen in 2004 but throughout 2005 and 06). I did not claim anything else.

Hyanmen wrote:
The playerbase dropped at the end of Cata to sub 10 million but is currently above 10 million. That isn't an increase over the 13 million they had at one point in time, but the trend is upward, not downward; at least for the current time. Regardless, maintaining 10 million subs is by no means 'clinging to life support' as you make it out to be. You'd have a point if the subscriber base had been reduced by roughly 80% like that of XI.


Expansion releases should increase the sub numbers for a while. More interesting question is how much sub numbers increased with MoP as opposed to previous expansions. That's a better indicator of the current trends.
____________________________
SE:
Quote:
We really want to compete against World of Warcraft and for example the new Star Wars MMO.

#48 Nov 28 2012 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good
Kachi wrote:
There's definitely a problem of lack of innovation, but there's also a bit of a player paradox. Players really like the idea of starting a game that's getting off on the ground floor, which is paradoxically the time when the game content will be the least polished. At the same time, they don't want to jump into a game that may be on the decline, but the lifespan of MMOs is only growing longer and longer. Back when games like FFXI and WoW started, there was an implicit understanding that these games would eventually be shut down as bigger and better games came along. But that's not necessarily the case at all. It's actually entirely possible that these games will stick around for decades. New players are always entering the market, and older games can sustain years worth of playable content easily. Continuous updates make re-releases or sequel versions unnecessary. The player base is already there with an established culture, and they provide the social-side content... and that's half the battle.

The problem in a sense isn't MMOs. It's that players expect the impossible-- for something "better" to come along, even though any new game will inevitably have less than half of the development time of its competitors. The new reality for players is that a new release MMO isn't likely to drastically improve upon its competitors overnight, and that the best time to get into a game from now on may be once it has a few years of live playtime under it's belt.

I'm speaking in wide generalities, of course. There are ways to design games around those paradoxes, but designers are far away from that mark.


This. I understand that people want more from their games. It would be great if someone could release even a FFXI - calibre game with everything it currently has.

Nation missions
Sky
Sea
Dynamis
Einherjar
Salvage
Nyzul Isle
ZNM
HNM
Regular NM!
The missions and quests leading to the expansion areas
Ballista
Maze Mongers
LVL 75

Thats not everything, but ****, wouldn't it be awesome if all that came right out of the box?! Unfortunately, the general subscriber doesn't think about what all of this costs. Take SWToR; they spent what, $50 million just developing the game to the point of release? That was one of the largest budgets ever if my memory serves me right. And look how they did.

Imagine what it would cost to research, develop, and implement the above list all up front. Like Kachi said, developers are far from the mark on this one and we can't really blame them. It doesn't make sense to invest that much money into a volatile market with a a relatively uninfoormed population.
____________________________
Our team is like a flock of woodpeckers in a petrified forest. We just need to keep working and keep an eye open for opportunity.

FFXI
Toofar - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - WHM BLM SMN
Rafoot - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - THF SAM BRD
#49 Nov 28 2012 at 6:01 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Hyanmen wrote:

Hyanmen wrote:
The playerbase dropped at the end of Cata to sub 10 million but is currently above 10 million. That isn't an increase over the 13 million they had at one point in time, but the trend is upward, not downward; at least for the current time. Regardless, maintaining 10 million subs is by no means 'clinging to life support' as you make it out to be. You'd have a point if the subscriber base had been reduced by roughly 80% like that of XI.


Expansion releases should increase the sub numbers for a while. More interesting question is how much sub numbers increased with MoP as opposed to previous expansions. That's a better indicator of the current trends.


False presumption. Then agian, this is Alla, where the common wisdom prevails, often in error.

For example, people blame WoW's success on a powerful advertising campaign, as if this was the sole ingredient to their resounding success. This coulden't be further from the truth.

If FFXIV gave the same campaign a shot at the same time, it would still do equally as poorly. For what it's worth, and take this from someone who is NOT a fan of WoW, the game had all the correct ingredients from the interface to the class strcture to the timing of release to just plain luck. It's just foolishness to claim any one thing as credit, any more than you could for League of Legends, which has taken off in a similar fashion without the gigantic TV advertising campaign.


But back to your point. The same rules apply here. WoW is now a 10 year old game. That alone can have a signifigant impact in it's return value, rather than the current trends. It's hard to make statments like that when games like WoW have stood as exceptions to trends for quite some time. Truth of the matter is, we're in fresh territory. There simply isn't an established market trend for an aging giant like this, though some have been established with other MMO tities that have risen and then fallen to a plateau.
#50 Nov 28 2012 at 6:16 PM Rating: Decent
****
4,150 posts
DuoMaxwellxx wrote:
lol youre joking right the stuff i listed not doing wasnt 90% of the content.. maybe 50% but not 90%... I mean for everything i DIDNT do I couldnt name 10 other things i DID do.

as for the things i didnt do... I had the skill and people wanting me to do those things.. I just never wanted too (as there was nothing i really wanted from them)... and i didnt have an endgame ls (thus not having to be "forced" to participate in stuff i dint want to) but other LSes who know of my skill would always invite me to certain events as a "free agent" that show I got stuff done... so yeah the only thing stopping me from doing those other things was myself


90% may have been an exaggeration, but you still missed out on most of the game. People slaved away for months leveling up jobs to be able to participate in the events you listed. It's your prerogative and I won't tell anyone how or what to play, I'm just curious what you spent your time in game doing and what exactly you were doing it for if not to participate in most of the content.

Hyanmen wrote:
Yes, the playerbase did not drop by more than a couple hundred thousand at best (and did not happen in 2004 but throughout 2005 and 06). I did not claim anything else.

I'm just saying I think it happened much later than you do. XI didn't start to dump subs until after WotG. There were still 400k subs just prior to the mini-expansions in '09.

Hyanmen wrote:
Expansion releases should increase the sub numbers for a while. More interesting question is how much sub numbers increased with MoP as opposed to previous expansions. That's a better indicator of the current trends.

Subs had fallen to around 9 mil following Cata and MoP pushed that number back above 10 mil.

IKickYoDog wrote:
Take SWToR; they spent what, $50 million just developing the game to the point of release? That was one of the largest budgets ever if my memory serves me right. And look how they did.

Your estimate seems very conservative to me. 60 mil(twice their budget for XI by the way) is what SE is estimated to have spent on XIV up to it's release. Considering they've operated the game for 2 years and have had to scrap the majority of what they spent all that money on, I wouldn't be surprised if XIV equaled the money spent developing SWtoR.

Edited, Nov 28th 2012 7:16pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#51 Nov 28 2012 at 6:26 PM Rating: Decent
FilthMcNasty wrote:

IKickYoDog wrote:
Take SWToR; they spent what, $50 million just developing the game to the point of release? That was one of the largest budgets ever if my memory serves me right. And look how they did.

Your estimate seems very conservative to me. 60 mil(twice their budget for XI by the way) is what SE is estimated to have spent on XIV up to it's release. Considering they've operated the game for 2 years and have had to scrap the majority of what they spent all that money on, I wouldn't be surprised if XIV equaled the money spent developing SWtoR.

Edited, Nov 28th 2012 7:16pm by FilthMcNasty


Yes that was my bad. I just looked it up again and most people are estimating $150-$200 million. Which actually punctuates the point even more in a way.
____________________________
Our team is like a flock of woodpeckers in a petrified forest. We just need to keep working and keep an eye open for opportunity.

FFXI
Toofar - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - WHM BLM SMN
Rafoot - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - THF SAM BRD
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (20)