The bugs finally got them?

who's techage?

lol techage.

I can make lists too! And 1999 Everquest is still on top

kieso wrote: »

who's techage?

OP's blog?

If you start a thread like this, you should link the article you're referring to. I have never heard of Techage, I can't find this top 10 on Google and I don't even know if the authors talk about sub numbers, financial results, their personal opinions or what. So... What are we supposed to discuss here?

ESO is actually not a very good MMO.

* Underdeveloped Features
* No global AH/Market
* Phase group lockouts
* Focus on Single-Player gameplay
* Poor Crafting systems
* Major quest defects still in game after 4 months
* No ability to even setup channels in Chat
* World is heavily instanced with players funneled into random populations
* Bugs abound in old and new content

I have not played Single-Player games since about 2001, and don't play Multi-Player games. Just play MMOs. And really, ESO is not an MMO at all.

ESO is a Single-Player game with Multi-Player optional content based on a single shard 'Mega-Server' tech that places players into an invisible lobby, then funnels them into an available instance area with a random set of players.

Just my own opinion, based on my own experience.

Rosveen wrote: »

If you start a thread like this, you should link the article you're referring to. I have never heard of Techage, I can't find this top 10 on Google and I don't even know if the authors talk about sub numbers, financial results, their personal opinions or what. So... What are we supposed to discuss here?

http://techgage.com/news/world-of-warcraft-remains-1-revenue-generating-mmo-topping-1b-annually/

Innocente wrote: »

ESO is actually not a very good MMO.

* Underdeveloped Features
* No global AH/Market
* Phase group lockouts
* Focus on Single-Player gameplay
* Poor Crafting systems
* Major quest defects still in game after 4 months
* No ability to even setup channels in Chat
* World is heavily instanced with players funneled into random populations <- That's typical of all MMOs.
* Bugs abound in old and new content <- Changes from user-to-user, and no online multiplayer game of this huge breadth in size is ever bug-free.

I have not played Single-Player games since about 2001, and don't play Multi-Player games. Just play MMOs. And really, ESO is not an MMO at all.

ESO is a Single-Player game with Multi-Player optional content based on a single shard 'Mega-Server' tech that places players into an invisible lobby, then funnels them into an available instance area with a random set of players.

Just my own opinion, based on my own experience.

I don't know how many MMOs you have played from the outset of their launches, but the first few months are never indicative of the entire lifespan of an MMO. If you don't consider over 200 people in battle in Cyrodiil "massive multiplayer", then it's clear that you just don't think it's an MMO because of how PvE content is structured (in which case I agree that there isn't enough content for LARGE GROUP RAIDS). That's not the case for PvP, though.

ZeniMax calls it a new type of genre that it is defining for itself, and I agree with that partly because half of the game is this new cross between being a Single-Player Online RPG that is injected with bits-and-bobbles of Massive Multiplayer aspects, though it's not entirely indicative of what most people expect out of an MMO. Every MMO out there uses zoning, though, and the Megaserver can store huge amounts of players, which is when that other 50% with PvP and other types of large raids you can have with those features in Cyrodiil come into play which lean far more to it being an MMO.

However, I'm not going to get into that whole debate again with whether or not this game is an MMO. Everyone thinks of the game differently. I say that it is better to just keep this game as an in-between genre, rather than straight-out label it as a "Single Player Online game" or an "MMO". It's both while also being neither. ESO is a game that just defines itself as you play it 'based on how YOU play'.

All that said, many of the issues you take with the game are solely generated by your own personal opinion because you want the game to be catering to your needs specifically and those needs you have may not be the best thing to implement for the long-lasting appeal of the game. Because of that, I took the liberty of crossing out the problems you have with the game that are your own opinions and change from player-to-player. In this case, I 'don't' take any qualms with those functionalities.

I see what you did here ...

Um...ok please look up the term "close reading". The article dictates it's list based on top ANNUAL revenue.

Guess which year the numbers are from? Go on...guess. I'll give you a hint...it's only August.

Guess which game doesn't have annual revenue yet?

If you read the entire article, the list is top 10 in annual revenue. It specifically states that since ESO hasn't been around long enough to have a known annual revenue, it doesn't yet qualify for the list.

vyndral13preub18_ESO wrote: »

rbenkepub19_ESO wrote: »

If you read the entire article, the list is top 10 in annual revenue. It specifically states that since ESO hasn't been around long enough to have a known annual revenue, it doesn't yet qualify for the list.

So what you are saying is, that in direct relation to the question posed, 'What happened?' The answer is, someone cant read?

As stated above, that article references another with current game play, showing that ESO has dropped 12 slots since May, and 15 since April, to come in at number 20.

d.crosgrove_ESO wrote: »

Korozenn wrote: »

Haters gonna hate.

Numbers speak, and if ESO's subscriber base has anything to say about it, I can guarantee you that games like EVE Online do not have a larger subscriber base at all. In 2013, EVE Online had 500,000 Subs after almost 10 years (it's highest number of Subs ever, mind you) of being out while ESO managed 750,000+ Subs in less than four months.

As far as top MMOs are concerned, anyone who adds "Best" or "Top" anything is automatically generating an opinion. However, factual information still stands that the #1 most played MMO at this point in time is World of Warcraft and that Elder Scrolls Online isn't far from being #2 if it keeps accelerating at this rate.

ESO achieved that 750,000 by losing far more than that in the first 3 months.

Further, top as in "good" is an opinion. Top as in "most subscribers" is not.

Read everything bolded and tell me where you got off saying that last line.

Also, nobody here knows what numbers ESO pulled off at launch. You saying that it lost 'far more than that 750,000+ it has now is based on no factual evidence whatsoever. The numbers we 'do' have speaks volumes of how people are taking to the game after its first few months on the market already. With the game now being available on Steam and soon coming to PS4/Xbox One, those numbers will certainly change and be interesting to see develop over the course of the next two years of the game being on the market.

As it stands, the game is pulling very similar subscriber numbers than WoW did in the same months of its first year on release. We can't judge how ESO will manage with subscribers as you can't do that with any online game out there. There are periods of drought when subs go down, and other periods where it skyrockets. which is a fact when you look at the charts of how WoW did in the past during holiday season of 2004 when it launched.

ESO launched in early April...you haven't even seen how it performed for the holiday season yet. None of us have. Therefore, no one can say how this game will do on its first year in terms of subs.

ESO has a very large subscriber base for this early in its lifespan. That is an opinion.
In comparison to other MMOs in the past, ESO is accelerating with the number of sales and subscribers the game has had on its four months of being out on the market. That is a fact.