All Posts by openedge1

I spent an hour in game...

After standing in the same place killing stuff over and over, with stiff animations, and latency issues, along with ugly graphics (some of the faces look like they were done with charcoal or pencils)..

Boredom kicked in, and I logged out...deleted the files (after taking 6 hours to patch) and then canceled my pre-order.

CYA

Originally posted by Rebn77

Originally posted by openedge1

Originally posted by Jackdog

Originally posted by Ghist

Read the reviews on EQ2.  By no means were most players happy with it out of the gate.  SWG was a solid game destroyed by an expansion/patch.

Back to topic I was playing LoTRO last night and I agree that Xfire does not give good indications of raw numbers. LoTRO is just ahead of AoC in the rankings but i saw half a dozen active fellowships ( groups) playing in a mid 30's area. LoTRO is not all that for PvP and has it's own voice chat system so I really do not think many PvE players use Xfire in ratio to the population.

 

So, what are you trying to say here exactly? AoC should be higher on that list?

Thanks to PvP that is just as good as LOTROs though is one reason it is so low on the list now.

This is too sad too. With WAR upon us, AoC will fall even further (should be interesting to see hours played for this Sunday), and I will even speculate that those who would like some PvP in their PvE will leave LOTRO also.

Guess all we can do is wait and see how things progress over the next couple of weeks.

 

Having played LotRO since closed beta, worked on the LotROVault, played on the preview server and been active with the community (at least on Silverlode) I'd guess that not many long time LotRO players will be leaving for WAR.

Though I'm sure a few of the new guilds that popped up after AoC crashed will head out, though thats to be expected. I think a lot of those guys sought refuge in LotRO instead of heading to WoW with the mindset they would leave when WAR hit.

Lifetimers CAN NEVER LEAVE (lol)

But, I do believe you are right. I can imagine that core group of lore based players never leaving unless LOTRO is pulled from their cold dead fingers.

Well, that and they may cry when they PvP.

Originally posted by Jackdog

Originally posted by Ghist

Read the reviews on EQ2.  By no means were most players happy with it out of the gate.  SWG was a solid game destroyed by an expansion/patch.

Back to topic I was playing LoTRO last night and I agree that Xfire does not give good indications of raw numbers. LoTRO is just ahead of AoC in the rankings but i saw half a dozen active fellowships ( groups) playing in a mid 30's area. LoTRO is not all that for PvP and has it's own voice chat system so I really do not think many PvE players use Xfire in ratio to the population.

 

So, what are you trying to say here exactly? AoC should be higher on that list?

Thanks to PvP that is just as good as LOTROs though is one reason it is so low on the list now.

This is too sad too. With WAR upon us, AoC will fall even further (should be interesting to see hours played for this Sunday), and I will even speculate that those who would like some PvP in their PvE will leave LOTRO also.

Guess all we can do is wait and see how things progress over the next couple of weeks.

And what is amazing is it is the second largest selling RPG based online MMO style game behind WoW (Amazon lists GW sales at 16% of the market behind WoWs huge lead of course)

I really think because it is not a "true" MMO in the sense of MMOs, so the players of GW really do not come to MMORPG.

Now, go look at Xfire, and we will get more of an idea of how much people play GW

Xfire

#7 no change for 10 days
Highest: #4 on 2007-10-31

Xfire users playing per day
8,974
Minutes played per day
1,364,772

Originally posted by jarish

I don't believe this game will ever go F2P, but what they might do is have like a 4.99/mo model in which you would then pay a bit extra for the free content updates. It seems this is something they want to do for casual gamers without as much time on there hands. Or they might chagre a small fee for access, like 4.99/mo for 30hrs of play. Something like that.

This is truly what I imagine, and I think would be the most awesome move.

This would be innovative for Western audiences who like to play casually, and could be a major money maker overall for Turbine.

I imagine this more than the GW model of pay once, play forever.

GW2 I think will have to introduce a new model. Should be interesting there as well, or else, they could lose some cash big time.

Turbine could be considered a pioneer if they come out of the gate with this model.

Originally posted by Talyn

#1: Steefel does not say he thinks LOTRO will overcome WoW. What he said was that WoW is the only MMO to date to achieve critical mass. MMO's are social games, and within the context of sociodynamics critical mass means sufficient momentum is achieved where it becomes self-sustaining and continues to grow based on that momentum. WoW has done this by slick marketing but mostly word-of-mouth. "Everyone" plays WoW, "everyone" has heard of WoW, it's the "in" thing. That's what Steefel is hoping for, that between the game itself, the movie marketing, etc. that LOTRO will gain its own critical mass for its own growth and success. At no point is Steefel laying out numbers or saying LOTRO will "beat" WoW, WAR, or anything else. He's just wanting it to gain a self-sustaining growth.

#2: Like it or not, the subscription model's days are probably numbered. That doesn't mean it's going to happen in the immediate future, and that also doesn't mean the only other alternative is the F2P+Item Mall model. 15 years ago I was paying hourly to play what became MMO's. In the present I'm paying monthly. 15 years in the future, I suspect I'll be paying on a different model.

Stuff like this is what I was referring to when I commented on Darren's thread about your tendencies to come to these forums and put up material in an intentionally provocative manner.

I will assume I know you, and you just happen to be using a different name here...

Anyways, lets me get to your comments.

#1. How does one attain "mass market MMO success"? By either matching or overtaking the champion of this genre. I am not the only one who feels Turbine is over reaching..

Tobold

"But step 3, market dominance, seems to be totally out of reach for LotRO. Even with the Mines of Moria expansion and The Hobbit movie."

It does not matter that I wrote this, it is an overall opinion of others.

The words are not spoken, but the implications are wide reaching. By making such statements (like Codemasters Million Subscriber mark) is where the issue of language applies. You read it as he was not saying market dominance like WoW, but to reach mass market appeal, you have to get pretty darn close.

Is EQ a part of national phenomena like WoW? Do you see TV shows or commercials touting EQ? No. Thus, EQ with such a larger legacy in the MMO space cannot reach that mass market. Yet Steefel is quoting LOTRO can.

This is not just about sales. This is about becoming part of culture...mass market, and critical success...which calls to mind Stargate episodes talking about WoW..

Thats mass market.

#2. I agree, as I believe we have in the past (if you are who I think you are) that the current monthly model may not work for much longer. The Asian markets model of pay by the hour or F2P with cash shop is going to move the payment model into a different direction.

As to provocative. I see no issue with calling out something being said that could have wide implications such as what is being said by Steefel.

Want to read provocative...try this...

Tobold again says "Well, he (Steefel) sure could use some better marketing, but I don't think he'll even reach Warhammer's numbers just with that."

or

Ardwulf - "Now, maybe Mines of Moria is going to be a blockbuster expansion, introducing hitherto unseen elements into LotRO. Like fun, perhaps."

I am pretty tame....

Cheers.

Originally posted by logicbox9

I think what Steefel has to say about adding Runekeepers more interesting than anything else...

 

"We're slowly trying new things; the addition of the Rune-Keeper in Moria, a straightforward magic using class, is a pretty big step in that respect. It's not something that a pure Tolkien lore person would accept, it just couldn't exist in Middle-Earth. On the other hand, this is an RPG, it must exist."

 

BUT TURBINE IS ADDING IT! BRAVO! That is absolutely hilarious... selling out to the generic fantasy crowd... Really, how can any fan of the lore even begin to accept something like this... what's next? Guns? Only going to get worse from here.

 

Also, imo, even though it would be an epic failure to Turbine's integrity... I bet if they went F2P with an item mall and released a console port, the game would make TONS more than it is now. F2P games are garbage, but that doesn't mean they don't make a shitload of money.

Look at how many F2P are in the top lists at Xfire? I do agree with that sentiment. Money CAN be made there, but the PvP has to be changed to allow more competitive players also (especially for Xbox players if they go Console)

I know these are all moves to make money. The lifetime deal was a cool move, yet it has to hurt the Turbine bottom line.

I really think this discussion perked up some ears on the net and started some wide discussion. But, is it good or bad? Is Turbine on the hype machine now like Funcom and Mythic have been?

Here is a direct link to the software

http://www.switchbladegaming.com/download/download.cfm
 

Also, Xpadder works quite well, as long as you take the time to configure it...it is awesome.

Originally posted by Theocritus

    I enjoyed LoTRO until I hit 35.....I worked so hard to get my mount taht by the time it finally happened I didnt feel like playing anymore......Also the quests at that point got to be very tedious and it felt like I was just running around aimlessly......I leveled every class to 25+ and maybe that was part of the problem also.....To new players I'd recommend picking 1-2 classes and sticking with it....If you do the 7 classes like I did you end up getting bored doing the same quests over and over.....4 races and 7 classes only just isn't enough variation and it wouldnt be so bad if there were more areas to explore early..... The elf and dwarf areas are too spread out and very boring.

This is where I made it, but had a friend talk me into playing a bit more. I got to 40, and even with a group, I kept having the issues I did not enjoy.

Bad animations, characters that looked unrealistic, a bad UI, and just more of the same type of questing that I can get in WoW or EQ2.

I hope a lot of my issues get addressed in MoM.

Originally posted by Orphes

"There's another level of success, which is reaching a certain mass-market critical mass, which to be totally fair, only Blizzard has achieved completely so far. We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

 

------

What is he saying that he would be the second to do?

-Reach a mass-market critical mass.

Are there any other MMOs that have reached "mass-market critical mass"?

-According to him it is at the moment only Blizzard that have made that yet.

------

That is what he says.
He never says what he considers to be mass-market nor does he define what a critical mass would be.

So.

What is "mass-market critical mass"?

This is a good question. We need to really dig deep into his beliefs and if he really believes LOTRO can be AS big as WoW or just a major success, which i do not disagree with.

The wording right now is suspect is all.

Originally posted by Lazer7

You add more to his quotes than is there. You also fail to realize that he:

1: did not state he was going to trump WoW

Not in so many words, but the "implied" attempt at believing they could be as large as WoW ("We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that,") pretty much stands on its own.

2: did not say what monitary changes were in plan an when

I never did either, but gave the suggestions, based on the article.

3: no one really cares if consoles get to play the game.

This I would beg to differ on. The complaints of so many thinking AoC is going console, and their belief the audience will change is huge.

This is really not worth the arguement however, as you have your mind bent on some strange perspective. Have fun with it mate; and may your ranting free you of this built up frustration of who knows what.

But, who said we were arguing, I thought this was a discussion. And because I am discussing an interview, I am ranting? Do you even understand the word "rant"?

As well, I am not the only one to think this, based on the Eurogamer writer, and several blogs (and the MANY commenters of that blog) believe Steefel is reaching also is all. For example...

LOTRO Nonsense

"Jeffery Steefel over at Turbine says LotRO is going to be the next World of Warcraft, due to the Hobbit movie and the upcoming Mines of Moria expansion. Now, maybe Mines of Moria is going to be a blockbuster expnasion, introducing hitherto unseen elements into LotRO. Like fun, perhaps."

Codemasters did this, and got burned for it. Does Steefel think LOTRO is such a hot property that people will buy it in droves?

Originally posted by Itirel

Originally posted by Lazer7

 

Sigh, this is a bit of an attempt to make something more-so than it is.

What was actually said:

for number 1: "There's another level of success, which is reaching a certain mass-market critical mass, which to be totally fair, only Blizzard has achieved completely so far. We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

for number 2: "This is a franchise that's going to continue for years and years and years, and there's no way that the singular, monolithic, USD 14.95 a month subscription model is going to last for years and years and years all by itself... it has to change."

for number 3: "we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console."

 

I have to say, that is definately completely different from what the OP posted - interesting to see how people perceive things so differently to what was actually stated.

Actually the comments are from the posted article here

Eurogamer synopsis

And as the previous poster noted the wording, lets look at some other lines of value...

Steefel states...

"We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

Yet, goes on to say

"It's a challenge, but we're confident that we can get there, especially with something of this broad appeal and high quality."

So, yes, for #1, he thinks he can match or beat WoW! Those are some big statements.

#2 Actually can be much worse...

He goes on to state

"For people that want to have a more casual relationship with the game, and just have fun a couple of hours, a couple of times a week, right now I think we have a difficult value proposition. They're paying a premium price to get a whole bunch more than they actually want. So, maybe there's room to satisfy those people in a slightly different way."

So, if you are a lifetimer, you pay that full price, but play 10 -20 hours a month. Lets say they reduce to 10-20 hours a month for 5 bucks. Do you as the lifetime payee feel you got the best deal then?

Then for #3

"we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console"

This ends up being the only questionable material, as the author of the Eurogamer article specifically pulled LOTRO out of the conversation, but I do not see it when reading in depth...

But, the main point remains a biggie...

By stating these things the way that Steefel has, it's already grabbed some blogger attention also. Was it all in the plan to advertise MoM finally?

Tobold suggests Steefel is smoking too much pipeweed

"And as I don't have subscription numbers and can only "measure" the MMO blog buzz about LotRO, I must say that I think I'm not the only one with that attitude. The Mines of Moria will just get buried under WAR and WotLK."

Seems the feeling is overall that LOTRO cannot make it in the dog eat dog world of MMOs to be such a huge success as they think.

Is it possible that LOTRO could get a million players? Can LOTRO be bigger than WAR?

Seems an interview was done this past week with Mr. Steefel on LOTRO, and several things have been said that could upset many a player of LOTRO

1. Steefel feels LOTRO could be as big as if not the one to take the crown from WoW

Those are fighting words, and no indications exists that show it can do this right now. He uses the movie as an example of advertising, yet it is still 2 years down the road...

2. Change to the payment model of 14.99 a month

How does the Lifetimer feel about this if they go to Free to play with cash shop or other methods. I knew the Lifetime payment plan would burn some people eventually.

3. LOTRO is the game being discussed as a console port of some sort

How does the Lorist feel about an Xbox live crowd playing their game?

Thoughts on this? Is Steefel crazy?

Eurogamer talks to Steefel

Originally posted by Teiman

new ranks:

Lotro #29

AoC #32

Shaiya #34

Lineage II #35

What are people playing:

♦ World of Warcraft (60.6%)

♦ Guild Wars (4.4%)

♦ Silkroad Online (4.1%)

♦ CABAL Online (4.0%)

♦ Other (26.9%)

Simple...for people who do not like WoW, the second best option is Guild Wars.

Otherwise, I think we will see WAR take this second spot soon.

Originally posted by Azrile

My guess is they are just going to use 'word of mouth' to keep a few servers viable.   Speed of leveling is also an asset here.  If you are playing on a completely dead server, it's fairly easy to completely reroll one one of the servers that people say are full.

 

No, they decided to be more devious instead.

Forum post

"Servers with High Load should no longer show in server selection."
 

So, by removing more "popular" servers (like Wiccana and Cimmeria) they will force feed people into the low pop servers from this point.

Cool eh?

/tinfoilhat

Originally posted by DanBurke

I would have to say that my fave of all three would have to be prophecies, not just the fact that is was the first one i ever bought, but because i love the stroy line and the fact you have pre searing, where you have to complete a mission before you leave the place. Also the fact if you get to lvl 20 bfore you leave you get a kool title.

 

My least favourite would have to be Factions, not that i dont like it, i love them all but i just like Prophecies and Nightfall better than this one. i think its because Factions is a bit too fast paced for me and the whole game takes two seconds to complete (not literally of course).

 

I havent tried the new add on yet, (EOTN). Anyone like to tell me how good it is?

EoTN is incredibly good, incredibly hard, incredibly fun, incredibly gorgeous to look at.

The options of the new Heroes and new armor and of course the Hall of Monuments all adds to it. If you own at least two campaigns, you owe it to yourself to get EoTN. And if you are a Prophecies fanatic, the closure for Gwen is worth every penny.

Cheers

Originally posted by grimfall

You have no way of know if XFire is a representative sample of the player base for LOTRO, AoC or EVE.   It could be that XFire users (and I suspect that this is true) tend to be early adopters, who burn out on games more quickly than the general public.

Yet, they consistently stick to specific games...

Guild Wars, Warcraft 3, Silkroad, Cabal Online and...WoW (of course)

So, if they burn out so fast, why do these games which are long in the tooth still get the same average of players everyday?

I think it has to do with liking a specific STYLE of game. And most of these games are considered to have a good PvP implementation of some sort.

Guild Wars always known as a top PvP competitive game, Silkroad has the unique jobs system where you are either a trader by profession or a thief. WoW and the battlegrounds, etc, etc.

AoC could have been a contender if the Sieges would have worked or had a GOOD PvP meta game. It has neither. LOTRO has none of those and a poorly implemented PvP game added as an after thought.

This is why we do not see them rate very high.

Originally posted by Syno23

Here's why, there's casual players still in the hype, they'll leave, there's hardcore players, who are totally into Age of Conan, there's the people waiting on Warhammer Online, they'll leave, and there's the people waiting on their subscription to expire, and they'll leave too, so this game will be declining real fast, but to be frankly frank (freedom), if the game gets out of the Xbox360 it'll survive, if it doesn't, ANOTHER SWG!!!

But, you ASSUME that 400k is the number NOW. This number was skewed from previous months, with data of users who were still in their 30-60 days, etc.

The consensus is when the next period ends (beginning of September sometime) that this number will be less. As well, I think we will not see "scrip" numbers anymore from Funcom.

PS: WAR will also launch and WILL sell more copies than AoC as well.