So what's Mass Market Again? Conan hits 1M (shipped).

[Kirth]

Team Fortress 2? to me it seems more like an FPS thats moving towards mmorpg land. 

[schild]

I took PVP - ironically - pretty seriously in SWG. Mostly because I ran out of other content. I have no problem with PVP and I look forward to the battlekeep stuff in AoC. I find those terms far more interesting than an unbalanced wild west. Control, sometimes, is good. Actually, in games, most of the time it's good.

Team Fortress 2? to me it seems more like an FPS thats moving towards mmorpg land.

More like diluted couldn't leave well-enough alone land.

[slog]

And honestly I don't see the need to incorporate pve into a pvp game. I knew one guy from WoW who loved leveling up a new alt to arena with, or do bgs with and he is the minority everyone else I know hated the pve grind <snip>

He's in a minority of the people that you are friends with (who co-incidentally tend to have the same preferences as you which is why you are friends with them), for WoW players in general (or pretty much any AAA MMO you care to mention) he's in the middle of the bell curve.

Sorry for going back a few pages but I've just got back from Dreamhack and I'm catching up on forums.

So you saying that a small minority want PvP only, another small minority want PvE only, and a majority want some mixture of both?

I'll buy that.

[cevik]

So you saying that a small minority want PvP only, another small minority want PvE only, and a majority want some mixture of both?

I'll buy that.

Wait, there is middle ground?  NO IT CANNOT BE.

[Brogarn]

Wait, there is middle ground?  NO IT CANNOT BE.

 

[IainC]

And honestly I don't see the need to incorporate pve into a pvp game. I knew one guy from WoW who loved leveling up a new alt to arena with, or do bgs with and he is the minority everyone else I know hated the pve grind <snip>

He's in a minority of the people that you are friends with (who co-incidentally tend to have the same preferences as you which is why you are friends with them), for WoW players in general (or pretty much any AAA MMO you care to mention) he's in the middle of the bell curve.

Sorry for going back a few pages but I've just got back from Dreamhack and I'm catching up on forums.

So you saying that a small minority want PvP only, another small minority want PvE only, and a majority want some mixture of both?

I'll buy that.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

[tazelbain]

Doesn't matter if there is a middle ground.  It's a zero-sum game because of the finite developement resourses.  Most people aren't going to get them allocated to their tastes.

Also its not a smooth transition from all pvp to all pve.  Remember all the infighting about Raid vs Solo pve and FFA vs Team vs Sport pvp.  There is no middle ground with that.

Anyway mixing PvP/PvE is still a work in progress.  WAR/AoC are moving us forward. We are still a couple genrations away from the true formula, but the first one to find it and invest AAA money and polish will be the WoW killer.

[lamaros]

I didn't think this thread could get worse, but fuck me it did. It's almost painful. I had to skip most posts.

[Triforcer]

And honestly I don't see the need to incorporate pve into a pvp game. I knew one guy from WoW who loved leveling up a new alt to arena with, or do bgs with and he is the minority everyone else I know hated the pve grind <snip>

He's in a minority of the people that you are friends with (who co-incidentally tend to have the same preferences as you which is why you are friends with them), for WoW players in general (or pretty much any AAA MMO you care to mention) he's in the middle of the bell curve.

Sorry for going back a few pages but I've just got back from Dreamhack and I'm catching up on forums.

So you saying that a small minority want PvP only, another small minority want PvE only, and a majority want some mixture of both?

I'll buy that.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

I can't believe how far the conventional wisdom has moved from, let's say, where it was in 2000-2001.  At that point, the high-water mark of PvE ultra-radicalism, PvP was openly mocked and it was conventional SWG pre-beta/EQ forum wisdom that anyone who wanted to PvP had serious psychological problems.  SB was a big revolutionary deal, but now its features are implemented in mainstream MMOs (AoC and WAR, WoW to some extent) with nary a blink.  The Armageddon between PvE and PvP did not come to pass. 

[El Gallo]

I can't believe how far the conventional wisdom has moved from, let's say, where it was in 2000-2001.  At that point, the high-water mark of PvE ultra-radicalism, PvP was openly mocked and it was conventional SWG pre-beta/EQ forum wisdom that anyone who wanted to PvP had serious psychological problems.  SB was a big revolutionary deal, but now its features are implemented in mainstream MMOs (AoC and WAR, WoW to some extent) with nary a blink.  The Armageddon between PvE and PvP did not come to pass. 

It changed because PvPers were domesticated. PvP can be a part of mainstream MMOGs if it is consensual, optional, and most importantly meaningless. It must be a sideshow or, at best, a sport. It can never resemble a battle, much less a war. Meaningless because nobody must ever be allowed to experience a negative consequence from PvP. They cannot be allowed to lose anything substantial or denied access to any content of note.  Sure, the winners can get some shinies, but the losers mustn't lose anything and the shinies mustn't be too important (and players with too many shinies mustn't be allowed to play with those who do not). That's WoW PvP, and that's assuredly *not* the kind of PvP being debated back on the "SWG beta" era.  Back then, people were debating Felucca, where a PvP loss meant you lost everything you wore, and Darktide/Zek, where PvP means your team can lock down every valuable zone in the game. Hell, EQI PvE servers arguably had more meaningful PvP than any WoW server.

The lesson of WoW is that most PvPers will obediently report to their designated in-game ghetto if that's the only way they can play a real MMO. Which is something most of us knew back during the "SWG beta" era, because we saw it with Trammel and EverQuest.  AOC hasn't changed anything because it has no meaningful PvP yet. Ditto WAR.

[Triforcer]

Well, I grant you that that's an accurate description of WoW PvP as it has evolved (although I maintain that pre-arena, pre-BG, pre-BC PvP, where fully HALF the servers had the opportunity for almost as much ganking as pre-Tram UO, didn't lead to the gloom and doom PvEers said it would).

But that's why I am curious about WAR, because its taking a step out of esport.  And most of the good shinies come from PvP.  I think if it breaks a million we'll have some rethinking to do.   

[Margalis]

I fairly proud of myself for calling several years ago that sport PVP was a good way to add end-game content with minimal work that players would enjoy.

The mistake is thinking that PVP is the same and appeals to the same crowd, when in fact it appeals to totally different crowds:
People who want a fair fight and a test of skill - competitive gamers.
People who like wild-west style anything goes free-for-alls.

As WOW has moved to more structured PVP it's proven that competitve PVP is a big market. I think the jury is still out on the other form of PVP. It almost has to have meaning, but at the same time meaning = griefing.

[Slayerik]

I can't believe how far the conventional wisdom has moved from, let's say, where it was in 2000-2001.  At that point, the high-water mark of PvE ultra-radicalism, PvP was openly mocked and it was conventional SWG pre-beta/EQ forum wisdom that anyone who wanted to PvP had serious psychological problems.  SB was a big revolutionary deal, but now its features are implemented in mainstream MMOs (AoC and WAR, WoW to some extent) with nary a blink.  The Armageddon between PvE and PvP did not come to pass. 

It changed because PvPers were domesticated. PvP can be a part of mainstream MMOGs if it is consensual, optional, and most importantly meaningless. It must be a sideshow or, at best, a sport. It can never resemble a battle, much less a war. Meaningless because nobody must ever be allowed to experience a negative consequence from PvP. They cannot be allowed to lose anything substantial or denied access to any content of note.  Sure, the winners can get some shinies, but the losers mustn't lose anything and the shinies mustn't be too important (and players with too many shinies mustn't be allowed to play with those who do not). That's WoW PvP, and that's assuredly *not* the kind of PvP being debated back on the "SWG beta" era.  Back then, people were debating Felucca, where a PvP loss meant you lost everything you wore, and Darktide/Zek, where PvP means your team can lock down every valuable zone in the game. Hell, EQI PvE servers arguably had more meaningful PvP than any WoW server.

The lesson of WoW is that most PvPers will obediently report to their designated in-game ghetto if that's the only way they can play a real MMO. Which is something most of us knew back during the "SWG beta" era, because we saw it with Trammel and EverQuest.  AOC hasn't changed anything because it has no meaningful PvP yet. Ditto WAR.

One of the reasons why I love this site is that some guys (myself not included) can rationally weigh some of this shit out. Someday, and yes I have been saying this for years, there will be a game with solid sub numbers that involves full loot, risk, maybe even a skill based system. Someday devs will figure out that there is more to the genre than question marks and quests.

[Venkman]

I can't believe how far the conventional wisdom has moved from, let's say, where it was in 2000-2001.  At that point, the high-water mark of PvE ultra-radicalism, PvP was openly mocked and it was conventional SWG pre-beta/EQ forum wisdom that anyone who wanted to PvP had serious psychological problems.  SB was a big revolutionary deal, but now its features are implemented in mainstream MMOs (AoC and WAR, WoW to some extent) with nary a blink.  The Armageddon between PvE and PvP did not come to pass. 

It changed because PvPers were domesticated.

It changed because games need to differentiate themselves from WoW. They certainly can't go directly up against WoW. At best they'll leach players based on doing one part of WoW better. That alone isn't enough either because you can't turn on a computer without stumbling across yet-another-fantasy-PvE-diku. PvP's the easy adjacency. And it's still a bit wild west, in that realm of the genre back in the late 90s when you're rewarded for just trying at all. Eventually there'll be a heavily-slanted MMO that gets PvP right just as WoW got PvE right, and there'll need to be something else to explore for competitive advantage.

I doubt it'll be crafting though 

[UnSub]

Someday, and yes I have been saying this for years, there will be a game with solid sub numbers that involves full loot, risk, maybe even a skill based system. Someday devs will figure out that there is more to the genre than question marks and quests.

There is already more to the genre than question marks and quests. It's just not offering everything to everybody, which is perceived as some kind of flaw.

Sure, 'one day' a pure PvP game with FFA PvP will have a solid sub base. It will come in a time when there are a lot more MMO players so niche titles will have a big enough audience to survive. But 'pure' PvP players will always be in a minority of the overall market too, so it's going to require the market to grow to support that audience.

There's a reason why the new gen MMOs make PvP 'a big part' of the game play during media blitzes, but on launch reveal that 'big part' to be only 30%. Hardcore MMOPvPers tend to always talk about the next big thing and bring a lot of initial hype to a MMO, so are attractive to recruit. After launch, it turns out PvE is better at retaining a greater proportion of players over a longer time period. If WoW was ONLY about PvP, instead of a lot of PvE content before grinding out PvE content in order to keep up with the PvP treadmill, it wouldn't have retained the proportion of players that it did.

Why is that? Because players hate to lose. It was an interesting stat about Fury that if a player won three matches, they generally hung around. The problem was that few players stayed long enough to win three matches - this was for a number of reasons, but I feel a lot of it came back to not being able to win soon enough.

I'm still interested to see if AoC's PvP will actually be half as important to the life of the game as the promotion of it made out. In all reality, it probably won't be.

[sinij]

so you're opinion on whats best for PVP overall is somewhat biased.

Helo My name is, my name is slim schild.

Please show us on WoW doll where PvP nerfs touched you.

[Margalis]

Someone should take UnSubs post above and have it gold plated. Exactly right in every detail.

[WindupAtheist]

I just want to state again that Schild becoming the new WUA in the eyes of the PVP+ crowd is the funniest thing that has ever happened.  I hope Sinij spends the next 5 years chasing him around with lame-ass "show me on the doll" flames.

[schild]

Well, it just proves that he's a total selective reader. Now excuse me while I go play MGO.

[Megrim]

And honestly I don't see the need to incorporate pve into a pvp game. I knew one guy from WoW who loved leveling up a new alt to arena with, or do bgs with and he is the minority everyone else I know hated the pve grind <snip>

Sorry for going back a few pages but I've just got back from Dreamhack and I'm catching up on forums.

I hate you so much. Do you know who won the counter-strike?

[IainC]

And honestly I don't see the need to incorporate pve into a pvp game. I knew one guy from WoW who loved leveling up a new alt to arena with, or do bgs with and he is the minority everyone else I know hated the pve grind <snip>

Sorry for going back a few pages but I've just got back from Dreamhack and I'm catching up on forums.

I hate you so much. Do you know who won the counter-strike?

The Polish team I think, the two CS guys we brought along to crew the WAR stand were both Polish. They went to watch the finals and came declaring victory at any rate.

[Megrim]

Cool, ta.

[WindupAtheist]

Well, it just proves that he's a total selective reader. Now excuse me while I go play MGO.

You do not yet truly understand the (retarded) nature of the beast.  It doesn't matter how much ass you beat in various shooters, no more than it mattered how many guys I fought/killed in UO.  (There is consentual PVP in Trammel, after all.)  It isn't that he doesn't read these things, it's that he doesn't care.  You either love the sort of 24/7 azzrape PVP that only mouth-breathers love, or you are a MEOW WOOF LOL CAREBEAR PUSSY.

[Simond]

Sure, 'one day' a pure PvP game with FFA PvP will have a solid sub base. It will come in a time when there are a lot more MMO players so niche titles will have a big enough audience to survive. But 'pure' PvP players will always be in a minority of the overall market too, so it's going to require the market to grow to support that audience.

www.eve-online.com

Sup? 

Also: So, what's Mass Market Again?

While the videogame media tossed around some big numbers at the AoC launch, including a major figure of 700,000 copies, the actual sales numbers were unknown, as Funcom could not/would not report any details beyond what they had shipped to retailers.   A recent press release, however, has given us more details about what happened to these 700,000 copies of the game.



That's right, we have a rather unhappy picture as we near the "one month" point for Age of Conan.

* ~40% are still sitting on retailer shelves
* ~30% were bought and returned due to insufficient system reqs
* ~20% were bought and installed but canceled without subscribing
* ~10% were bought and set up a subscription to continue playing

Of the much-hyped 700,000 number, this leaves us with about 70,000 Active Players in the world of Hyboria

[WindupAtheist]

Link to the referenced press release, please.  That blog is way too "AOC SUX BLIZZ ROOLS!" for me to take it at face value.  Not that I find the numbers hard to believe.

[Simond]

No idea, and it is probably all made up. But the AoC boards are on fire about it, so Funcom pretty much have to put out a subscriptions retained press release sooner or later instead of their handwaving "Boxes shipped" stats.

[Nerf]

You don't find obviously made up and rounded numbers hard to believe? You see "30% bought and RETURNED" and think "yeah, that's totally doable"?

Goddamn, you really are insane.

[Simond]

You don't find obviously made up and rounded numbers hard to believe? You see "30% bought and RETURNED" and think "yeah, that's totally doable"?

Goddamn, you really are insane.

and it is probably all made up

Reading comprehension, unfair, etc.

[Numtini]

Obviously fake. Just google, all the press releases end up on google news for pretty much any product including games. The first hit isn't cancels, it's the boob size nerf. Also for that many copies to be returned, the lines at game stores with people screaming about lawsuits on non-returnable software would be around the block. And relaly, it's not really possible to have cancelled a sub at this point, they have no idea who will renew who has cancelled and who won't.

I'm shocked that there hasn't been a press release ith a 600 or 750k number so they can sneak it in as active subs before the first month is done. If that isn't forthcoming in the next 48 hours, I'll take it as a very bad omen for post-launch sales.

It does seem like a lot of people are leaving though. Most, like myself, very reluctantly.

[WindupAtheist]

The return percentage, sure, lawl.  But it flopping and ending up with sub-100k users... not entirely unbelievable.  I mean shit, DDO had a huge license and "new" combat, and look where that ended up.  I do hope this forces them to put out some real numbers.

[sam, an eggplant]

They shipped 700k boxes and reported 500k actual registered accounts to their investors as of june 2nd. Funcom is public so they cannot lie about those numbners. The "press release" numbers don't add up, and there's no such thing as a secret press release anyway, it's a contradiction in terms. Someone is acting with an agenda, and I have no doubt Funcom will respond.

[Bunk]

One of the reasons why I love this site is that some guys (myself not included) can rationally weigh some of this shit out. Someday, and yes I have been saying this for years, there will be a game with solid sub numbers that involves full loot, risk, maybe even a skill based system. Someday devs will figure out that there is more to the genre than question marks and quests.

The perfect description of AC Darktide. It did actually work for a while, until the advent of GEAR, map hacks (the system was great when you didn't know where the enemy guild might be hiding), leveling exploits, bots, duping, etc. etc.

It was not open-pvp that killed Darktide, it was all the crap that gets brought along with it.

[Merusk]

It was not open-pvp that killed Darktide, it was all the crap that gets brought along with it.

Some would argue that all that crap is part and parcel of open-pvp and computer games.  Design for it as a dev, or find your players cheating to do it for themselves and creating a hierarchy of "haves" and "have nots." Then you get to spend more time chasing down the hacks and stopping them than you do developing your game. 

[Slayerik]

It was not open-pvp that killed Darktide, it was all the crap that gets brought along with it.

Some would argue that all that crap is part and parcel of open-pvp and computer games.  Design for it as a dev, or find your players cheating to do it for themselves and creating a hierarchy of "haves" and "have nots." Then you get to spend more time chasing down the hacks and stopping them than you do developing your game. 

That's funny, I thought players cheated in any game they could...PvP or no. Hell, my friend was guild leader of Bloodsworn (one of the top PvE guilds in WoW) that were carpet banned for cheating in AQ40. PvEers will find ways to cheat to max out fastest.

Eve Online basically proves your theory wrong.

[Merusk]

Players WILL cheat in any game, true enough. I was just saying that blaming it on "the stuff that comes with it" could also be called "poor planning."

Eve has cheaters.  Macrominers ahoy.  Everything else is available to the players as an in-game tool, handled server-side, or not a feature.  Why risk, say, a location hack when you can scanprobe someone down.  No need for a wall/ clip hack when there's no walls or collision intereference.  Can't exploit XP when advancement is pure time.