Maintenance for the week of October 5:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 8, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) – 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 8, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) – 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
The Markarth DLC and Update 28 base game patch are now available to test on the PTS! Read the full patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts/
"Full Loot" "Server"
-
smeeprocketnub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »
Just a hunch based on the quantity of MMO's available that are have world PvP where your gear and possessions are lost on death.
Supply and demand sometimes have impact on what gets developed and released.
so you have no evidence. There are a number of MMOs available, free and pay that have this, they're just not up your alley.
Habbo Hotel isn't up my alley, personally. Not everything is for everyone. It doesn't mean there is no interest in it.
Evidence is in the number of games developed and released with this aspect.
You are correct that they are not up my alley, but that has no relevance to my statement. I also did not state there was no interest, I stated that there was not sufficient interest to warrant development in that direction.
right, so then you have the statistic for the number of games that do this and their success then, obv
If I have time I will go and do some statistics on the number of MMO's that have world PvP + loot right to the victor, if that will make you happy. I think that is fairly obvious though that these types of MMO's are in the minority. Even the OP thinks so and I'd say he has looked around considering his passion for that type of game.
I'm not questioning that it is in the minorty, I'm just challenging the 5% number. It seems lower than I would have guesstimated.Dear Sister, I do not spread rumors, I create them. -
Delith✭✭✭✭This type of game is coming back whether people like it or not. Everyone's tired of the mindless grind, and equally as tired of relying on indie developers who cannot create an MMO that appeals to both people who want to remain safe and those who want to challenge themselves.
Darkfall is not a good suggestion; it's a poorly made game, with terrible combat, and makes no attempt to protect the players who do not want to be involved in the PvP. -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭In this thread:
People so risk averse that they cannot even stand the idea of OTHER people playing the game the way they want.
And to the people saying there are "no servers," we were told we would get a checklist of things to mark so that we would only be phased with the types of players we want to play with.
Adding "full loot" to this implementation so we are only phased with other volunteers would work fine. Stop being babies.
A checklist would be a great idea, if the technology allowed for as many choices, as say, Dungeon Hack did when designing a custom game.
PvP always, PvE always, full loot, no corpse looting, half blocking, full blocking, allow my player to walk around town all day singing "Dominique" so everyone can hear.
Choice is great, as long as it doesn't conflict with the choices of others.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on July 23, 2014 1:37PM -
Delith✭✭✭✭UO also continued to lose players after making the decision, as people went to free shards to get BACK into that environment where a specific type of player was not catered to. Your example doesn't really work.
And you identified the problem with modern MMOs. Nobody wants to work to get their gear. They want to play a game. Working for gear you can lose is stupid. Making gear more easily and readily available by forcing players to rely on crafters creates a social environment, and giving the crafters the ability to create the best of the best makes losing gear less detrimental and frustrating, as it can be replaced through social interaction.
This is how it worked in UO, and how it could work if people would stop being such gigantic terrified children in online games.
How is it that people are so afraid of loss in a virtual world? It's quite sad. -
Anastasia✭✭✭✭Hassgrinsen wrote: »I would really love to see a "full loot" server, where, if you die the enemy can take all of your stuff. Because of the loot rule gear would be devalued, so there wouldn't be a need for bind on equip etc, so that would be done away with. Gold would also need to be bank-deposit-able.
As for world-pve/pvp, I would suggest that when you die in PVE other players be able to loot you, but if anyone sees them then they become a criminal / subject to justice system. Any items recovered by guards would be given back to you at some point.
Other than that the game is mostly good to go. The dynamics of the game really lend themselves to this kind of gameplay already. It's the type of game many "Old UO Veterans" have been looking for since 1997, I think console players and TES fans would get a kick out of it too.
Aside from player-run servers ESO would be the only source of this type of gameplay. Thousands of people play buggy armature MMOs or player-run UO and Shadowbane servers to satisfy their want for this gameplay type. Whichever AAA dev does this first will make a truckload of money serving this nitch.
PS: I understand not everyone is a fan of this type of gameplay and doesn't want resources wasted, but it could be implemented in such a simple/clever way that it would have little to no impact on dev resources, we're talking a few minor changes to the ESO scripts. With the money they make less resources would be lost than found.
After all, this is the kind of thing armature UO:Gamers devs do from scratch in teams of 4 over the course of a few weekends; it would likely bring in more resources than it would use. If the codebase is such a pile of spaghetti that it would be a chore to implement it likely needs refactoring anyway.
LOLOLOLOLOL!
Not at you Hassgrinsen for discussing this. But at the idea that a company which won't even stick to its original design plans to have group-encouraged difficulty levels for Vet Content longer than 3 months after its launch even CONSIDERING a full loot feature on any kind of server.
Heh. Such fantastical imaginings for TESO. *Shakes head and reminisces about the reasons this veteran MMO PvE'r/PvP'r bought and subbed to this MMO originally.
Exciting imaginings Hassgrinsen, but, not gonna be realized in any way shape or form in an mmo where current players demand solo viability at all levels in all zones all the way to endgame to make it 'more comfortable and fun'.
-
Delith✭✭✭✭Hassgrinsen wrote: »I would really love to see a "full loot" server, where, if you die the enemy can take all of your stuff. Because of the loot rule gear would be devalued, so there wouldn't be a need for bind on equip etc, so that would be done away with. Gold would also need to be bank-deposit-able.
As for world-pve/pvp, I would suggest that when you die in PVE other players be able to loot you, but if anyone sees them then they become a criminal / subject to justice system. Any items recovered by guards would be given back to you at some point.
Other than that the game is mostly good to go. The dynamics of the game really lend themselves to this kind of gameplay already. It's the type of game many "Old UO Veterans" have been looking for since 1997, I think console players and TES fans would get a kick out of it too.
Aside from player-run servers ESO would be the only source of this type of gameplay. Thousands of people play buggy armature MMOs or player-run UO and Shadowbane servers to satisfy their want for this gameplay type. Whichever AAA dev does this first will make a truckload of money serving this nitch.
PS: I understand not everyone is a fan of this type of gameplay and doesn't want resources wasted, but it could be implemented in such a simple/clever way that it would have little to no impact on dev resources, we're talking a few minor changes to the ESO scripts. With the money they make less resources would be lost than found.
After all, this is the kind of thing armature UO:Gamers devs do from scratch in teams of 4 over the course of a few weekends; it would likely bring in more resources than it would use. If the codebase is such a pile of spaghetti that it would be a chore to implement it likely needs refactoring anyway.
LOLOLOLOLOL!
Not at you Hassgrinsen for discussing this. But at the idea that a company which won't even stick to its original design plans to have group-encouraged difficulty levels for Vet Content longer than 3 months after its launch even CONSIDERING a full loot feature on any kind of server.
Heh. Such fantastical imaginings for TESO. *Shakes head and reminisces about the reasons this veteran MMO PvE'r/PvP'r bought and subbed to this MMO originally.
Exciting imaginings Hassgrinsen, but, not gonna be realized in any way shape or form in an mmo where current players demand solo viability at all levels in all zones all the way to endgame to make it 'more comfortable and fun'.
I hate you for making this post, but you're right. ZOS is designing the game for the exact same group of players MMOs have been made for in the past decade, and it will suffer the exact same fate given a few more months because of this.
One day, a big publisher will grow some balls and see that the interest is there.
There's a reason Star Citizen has $50million in donations with no publisher. People are tired of the exact same game being remade and reskinned in a new world. -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭UO also continued to lose players after making the decision, as people went to free shards to get BACK into that environment where a specific type of player was not catered to. Your example doesn't really work.
And you identified the problem with modern MMOs. Nobody wants to work to get their gear. They want to play a game. Working for gear you can lose is stupid. Making gear more easily and readily available by forcing players to rely on crafters creates a social environment, and giving the crafters the ability to create the best of the best makes losing gear less detrimental and frustrating, as it can be replaced through social interaction.
This is how it worked in UO, and how it could work if people would stop being such gigantic terrified children in online games.
How is it that people are so afraid of loss in a virtual world? It's quite sad.
Thing is, I'm sure you'd love to hear my character run around singing "Dominique" as much as I'd enjoy being looted of stuff I played hard for. Listening to Dominque being sung all day - by me, in mangled Quebecois on top of it - would be less irritating to a lot of folks than getting their stuff ripped off.
And believe me, I can't either sing or speak either kind of French.
- -
Delith✭✭✭✭isengrimb16_ESO wrote: »UO also continued to lose players after making the decision, as people went to free shards to get BACK into that environment where a specific type of player was not catered to. Your example doesn't really work.
And you identified the problem with modern MMOs. Nobody wants to work to get their gear. They want to play a game. Working for gear you can lose is stupid. Making gear more easily and readily available by forcing players to rely on crafters creates a social environment, and giving the crafters the ability to create the best of the best makes losing gear less detrimental and frustrating, as it can be replaced through social interaction.
This is how it worked in UO, and how it could work if people would stop being such gigantic terrified children in online games.
How is it that people are so afraid of loss in a virtual world? It's quite sad.
Thing is, I'm sure you'd love to hear my character run around singing "Dominique" as much as I'd enjoy being looted of stuff I played hard for. Listening to Dominque being sung all day - by me, in mangled Quebecois on top of it - would be less irritating to a lot of folks than getting their stuff ripped off. And believe me, I can't either sing or speak either kind of French.
-
A proper implementation of the system would generate plenty of content for people afraid of being murdered to experience, creating more and more reward for braving the risk of entering into territory where you can be murdered without being protected by guards or other players.
Like Eve's null-sec system, or Ultima Online's dungeon and guard system. -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
-
AlexDougherty✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »Arsenic_Touch wrote: »...how would this be even remotely feasible?
Many many games have done this, UO comes to mind.
How many of those games are on two megaservers?? Which reduces the variety of setups drastically.
If they did this on ESO it would force half the subscribers onto a server set-up for this. Unless you are proposing they set up a new server for this.People believe what they either want to be true or what they are afraid is true!
Wizard's first rule
Passion rules reason
Wizard's third rule
Mind what people Do, not what they say, for actions betray a lie.
Wizard's fifth rule
Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to one's self
Wizard's tenth rule -
Delith✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
-
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority. -
Delith✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay. -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox. -
Delith✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox.
You're going to be in for a really, really rude awakening this time next year if you think theme park MMOs can maintain any level of subscription for more than a few months.
And when these big name sandboxes start dropping, you will watch the subscription on the theme parks drop like flies.
Pretending it isn't happening is not going to change the fact that it is happening. You can ignore as much evidence as you want by pretending that somehow WoW is indicative of anything other than the fact that people are surviving on nostalgia.
If the type of game they had made was still desirable, the constant rehashes and reskins with new properties wouldn't be flopping left and right, or surviving on name alone. -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox.
You're going to be in for a really, really rude awakening this time next year if you think theme park MMOs can maintain any level of subscription for more than a few months.
And when these big name sandboxes start dropping, you will watch the subscription on the theme parks drop like flies.
Pretending it isn't happening is not going to change the fact that it is happening. You can ignore as much evidence as you want by pretending that somehow WoW is indicative of anything other than the fact that people are surviving on nostalgia.
If the type of game they had made was still desirable, the constant rehashes and reskins with new properties wouldn't be flopping left and right, or surviving on name alone.
I won't be in for a rude awakening I prefer sandbox I just don't agree that the ones coming are going to make the same dent you seem to think they are going to make.
I do think the fact that WoW has more subs than all other MMOs combined is indicative of something and I think their numbers will only go up when their upcoming xpac comes out. -
Delith✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox.
You're going to be in for a really, really rude awakening this time next year if you think theme park MMOs can maintain any level of subscription for more than a few months.
And when these big name sandboxes start dropping, you will watch the subscription on the theme parks drop like flies.
Pretending it isn't happening is not going to change the fact that it is happening. You can ignore as much evidence as you want by pretending that somehow WoW is indicative of anything other than the fact that people are surviving on nostalgia.
If the type of game they had made was still desirable, the constant rehashes and reskins with new properties wouldn't be flopping left and right, or surviving on name alone.
I won't be in for a rude awakening I prefer sandbox I just don't agree that the ones coming are going to make the same dent you seem to think they are going to make.
I do think the fact that WoW has more subs than all other MMOs combined is indicative of something and I think their numbers will only go up when their upcoming xpac comes out.
It is absolutely indicative of something. It's indicative of the fact that nostalgia is an incredible force for game developers to leverage in order to maintain a stable playerbase.
The problem isn't with World of Warcraft; it's a good game in it's own right. The problem is that developers keep trying to REMAKE World of Warcraft, and WoW players already have WoW, so what is the point? -
kitsinni✭✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox.
You're going to be in for a really, really rude awakening this time next year if you think theme park MMOs can maintain any level of subscription for more than a few months.
And when these big name sandboxes start dropping, you will watch the subscription on the theme parks drop like flies.
Pretending it isn't happening is not going to change the fact that it is happening. You can ignore as much evidence as you want by pretending that somehow WoW is indicative of anything other than the fact that people are surviving on nostalgia.
If the type of game they had made was still desirable, the constant rehashes and reskins with new properties wouldn't be flopping left and right, or surviving on name alone.
I won't be in for a rude awakening I prefer sandbox I just don't agree that the ones coming are going to make the same dent you seem to think they are going to make.
I do think the fact that WoW has more subs than all other MMOs combined is indicative of something and I think their numbers will only go up when their upcoming xpac comes out.
It is absolutely indicative of something. It's indicative of the fact that nostalgia is an incredible force for game developers to leverage in order to maintain a stable playerbase.
The problem isn't with World of Warcraft; it's a good game in it's own right. The problem is that developers keep trying to REMAKE World of Warcraft, and WoW players already have WoW, so what is the point?
To cash in on players who want a similar experience but are tired of WoW. If WoW is accurate that 100,000,000 people have tried it and they had 12,000,000 at their peak even the overflow is plenty to make a game profitable.
For example I did the beta for WoW and played it for a few years. It was a great game. I got tired of the game, the design, aesthetics, the story and some of the choices but I still like the idea of the game and the core ideas of it. For someone like me the WoW model with a new story, new aesthetics and certain design choices is appealing. I personally think that market share is far larger than those that want a sandbox game.
Honestly I would probably prefer a game like SWG PreCU over all of those but I don't think SWG even at its prime had even half a million subs.
-
Robotukas✭✭✭Hassgrinsen wrote: »I would really love to see a "full loot" server, where, if you die the enemy can take all of your stuff. Because of the loot rule gear would be devalued, so there wouldn't be a need for bind on equip etc, so that would be done away with. Gold would also need to be bank-deposit-able.
As for world-pve/pvp, I would suggest that when you die in PVE other players be able to loot you, but if anyone sees them then they become a criminal / subject to justice system. Any items recovered by guards would be given back to you at some point.
Other than that the game is mostly good to go. The dynamics of the game really lend themselves to this kind of gameplay already. It's the type of game many "Old UO Veterans" have been looking for since 1997, I think console players and TES fans would get a kick out of it too.
Aside from player-run servers ESO would be the only source of this type of gameplay. Thousands of people play buggy armature MMOs or player-run UO and Shadowbane servers to satisfy their want for this gameplay type. Whichever AAA dev does this first will make a truckload of money serving this nitch.
PS: I understand not everyone is a fan of this type of gameplay and doesn't want resources wasted, but it could be implemented in such a simple/clever way that it would have little to no impact on dev resources, we're talking a few minor changes to the ESO scripts. With the money they make less resources would be lost than found.
After all, this is the kind of thing armature UO:Gamers devs do from scratch in teams of 4 over the course of a few weekends; it would likely bring in more resources than it would use. If the codebase is such a pile of spaghetti that it would be a chore to implement it likely needs refactoring anyway.
So in other thing you should get everything that you killing including NPC. Otherwise no point to do this system. But I will leave this game straight away because is not for PvE. You can put this system only in PvP server. -
Tubben✭✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »
I'm not questioning that it is in the minorty, I'm just challenging the 5% number. It seems lower than I would have guesstimated.
Yeah?
Try 0.5% that would be more precise.
5% who would play long term on an full loot server? No way.
For a month or two. For the thrill maybe. After the "shard" is opened to test it out.
-
Delith✭✭✭✭@Delith I like how you are optimistic that everything from the good ole days of gaming is "coming back" but I'm staring at a the bowl of pudding and there is no proof in it.
Where are these games that are even making up 5% of the market shared? We can point all day to things that have yet to come out and assume they will be huge but where are the current games you are describing that are pulling people in left and right.
You're staring at your own reflection in a mirror, then. I just gave you a list of evidence, you just decided not to actually acknowledge it.
Your list of "evidence" is not even close to 5% market share of MMO and included games that were not MMOs. >5% market share isn't exactly coming back it is a small minority.
$50,000,000 in crowdsourced funding for a game that doesn't exist yet, and you're talking to me about market share.
Okay.
50 mill is half of one months income of WoW not exactly groundbreaking when they said they brought in 1 Billion last year alone and that is a decline. Also that is only one game when by far the majority of MMOs are not sandbox.
You're going to be in for a really, really rude awakening this time next year if you think theme park MMOs can maintain any level of subscription for more than a few months.
And when these big name sandboxes start dropping, you will watch the subscription on the theme parks drop like flies.
Pretending it isn't happening is not going to change the fact that it is happening. You can ignore as much evidence as you want by pretending that somehow WoW is indicative of anything other than the fact that people are surviving on nostalgia.
If the type of game they had made was still desirable, the constant rehashes and reskins with new properties wouldn't be flopping left and right, or surviving on name alone.
I won't be in for a rude awakening I prefer sandbox I just don't agree that the ones coming are going to make the same dent you seem to think they are going to make.
I do think the fact that WoW has more subs than all other MMOs combined is indicative of something and I think their numbers will only go up when their upcoming xpac comes out.
It is absolutely indicative of something. It's indicative of the fact that nostalgia is an incredible force for game developers to leverage in order to maintain a stable playerbase.
The problem isn't with World of Warcraft; it's a good game in it's own right. The problem is that developers keep trying to REMAKE World of Warcraft, and WoW players already have WoW, so what is the point?
To cash in on players who want a similar experience but are tired of WoW. If WoW is accurate that 100,000,000 people have tried it and they had 12,000,000 at their peak even the overflow is plenty to make a game profitable.
For example I did the beta for WoW and played it for a few years. It was a great game. I got tired of the game, the design, aesthetics, the story and some of the choices but I still like the idea of the game and the core ideas of it. For someone like me the WoW model with a new story, new aesthetics and certain design choices is appealing. I personally think that market share is far larger than those that want a sandbox game.
Honestly I would probably prefer a game like SWG PreCU over all of those but I don't think SWG even at its prime had even half a million subs.
That's why WoW redesigns keep flopping then, eh? -
Delith✭✭✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »
I'm not questioning that it is in the minorty, I'm just challenging the 5% number. It seems lower than I would have guesstimated.
Yeah?
Try 0.5% that would be more precise.
5% who would play long term on an full loot server? No way.
For a month or two. For the thrill maybe. After the "shard" is opened to test it out.
You're very wrong.
Most of the people in this thread are. You guys are going to have a bad time over the next year when the sandbox MMOs start dropping. You really are.
And honestly? I cannot wait. You will see how it feels to have been ignored, like us who enjoyed vanilla UO have been ignored for the past decade, in favor of hand holding gear grinds.
Guess what? They're failing. They'll continue to fail, because everyone has already done this before, and now we're bored.
I have work to do now. Enjoy the thread. But remember: You're wrong. $50 million in donations to Star Citizen is just the tip of the iceberg for how bad people want emergent gameplay and true freedom in a game world. We're just getting started.
Prepare to be killed, looted, cooked, and eaten.
.. Last I looked this isn't Grand Theft Auto ... 
