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

[Venkman]

EQ2 predated WoW.

Ok, so by just three weeks or so, but still

Also, LoTRO was seen as competition at the time. Not a very strong one, but there it is.

[MahrinSkel]

EQ2 got released right into the teeth of WoW, and it probably would have done a lot better if WoW had slipped another 6 months.  LotRO was *hoped* to be competitive, but had the exact same problem as AC2: Lots of people came into the beta, didn't really like it, and left.  There was plenty of interest, it just didn't deliver.  It's still possible that AoC could go the same route, but remember that the majority of posting about *any* game right after it comes out is always "This sucks", those that don't think it sucks are too busy playing.  So widespread bitching is not neccessarily a sign of potential failure.  As we saw with AC2/LotRO, the death knell for a game is not always screams of outrage, but silence, because nobody cares enough to bitch.

--Dave

[lamaros]

Lets just ignore GW, LotRO, DDO, EQ2, Lineage, Tabula Rasa, et cetera if they don't fit into our original argument eh Mahrin?

If WoW slipped another 6 months it really wouldn't make much of a difference.

Much of WoW's sustained success in the western markets may simply have been that there was no really competitive alternative released until AoC.

There still isn't any competitive alternative. This is because of what WoW is and what the other games aren't, not because of when any of them were released.

[MahrinSkel]

Lets just ignore GW, LotRO, DDO, EQ2, Lineage, Tabula Rasa, et cetera if they don't fit into our original argument eh Mahrin?

DDO, like LotRO but without even the initial interest.  Tabula Rasa, don't get me started.  GW, a totally different business model, and the exception that proves the rule (GW is the shining star that is keeping NCSoft America from being closed).  And what game does it have more in common with, WoW, or AoC?  As for Lineage (I assume you mean L2)....  keke la, no, don't think so.

Let the numbers come in.  I see nothing that would give good grounds to an assumption it's going to implode.  Beat WoW on numbers, no, not that either.  But it could take over the market growth for a while.

--Dave

[lamaros]

Actually I meant Vanguard (which is still ", no" heh), dunno how I messed that up.

On what grounds are you saying AoC is more like WoW than the rest? This is the bit that I think you missing. AoC being "reasonably competitive" to WoW where the others were not. I don't see justification for it.

[Slayerik]

There still isn't any competitive alternative. This is because of what WoW is and what the other games aren't, not because of when any of them were released.

The problem for Wow is a lot of people are seeing it for what it really is now. I'll be the first to say that I was hooked for about a year and a half, but the rep grinds, raid grinds, PVP sport grinds just became too much. Then I see all these guys tht have run Kara a million times...you have to think some of them are figuring it out. So...lets upgrade X piece so I can kill Y boss. Then we all have to upgrade to Y loot so we can kill Z boss. Rinse and repeat ad nauseam. It's awesome what it did for the genre (fresh blood), but people are burning out. They also will take breaks now, especially the ones that had their lvl 60 epics shat on with the BC expansion last time.

Wow isn't going anywhere, but the numbers will fade. It's an MMO afterall.

[Slayerik]

Actually I meant Vanguard (which is still ", no" heh), dunno how I messed that up.

On what grounds are you saying AoC is more like WoW than the rest? This is the bit that I think you missing. AoC being "reasonably compatitive" to WoW where the others were not. I don't see justification for it.

Any of the others sell a million boxes at launch? I know, I know...that doesn't equal subs. But it has to be the biggest launch since....well, fucking Wow.

[pants]

On what grounds are you saying AoC is more like WoW than the rest?

From what I can see, the lack of like WoWness is.

GW:  Different style of game (more mini-instances, group combat etc) vs full world.  Of course, Arenas are moving at least part of wow towards GW.
DDO: Once again, different style of game due to heavy instancing.
EQ2: On launch EQ2 employed a team of midgets to stab you in the cock when you did anything.  They eventually sacked the midgets, but the damage was done.
Lineage: Grind, grind, grind.
Tabula Rasa: Sci-fi vs fantasy
VG: Lets just say the midgets got a new job after being sacked from EQ2.

The sameness between WoW and AoC is IMO lack of midgets, not too much grind, fantasy PvE with a good dose of PvP, full world with some instancing hanging off it. 

What that doesn't explain is LOTro, which has all of those too.  The only explanation I can see is that a lot of AoC's subscribers are people who are bored with WoW, and when LOTRO came out they hadn't got bored with WoW yet.  If Lotro had've launched early this year, I reckon they would have done quite nicely.  Course, how long their subscribers stayed could have been telling, but the same can be said for AoC.  As they say in corny newsposts, time will tell.

[lamaros]

The sameness between WoW and AoC is IMO lack of midgets, not too much grind, fantasy PvE with a good dose of PvP, full world with some instancing hanging off it. 

What that doesn't explain is LOTro, which has all of those too.  The only explanation I can see is that a lot of AoC's subscribers are people who are bored with WoW, and when LOTRO came out they hadn't got bored with WoW yet.  If Lotro had've launched early this year, I reckon they would have done quite nicely.  Course, how long their subscribers stayed could have been telling, but the same can be said for AoC.  As they say in corny newsposts, time will tell.

However this is just box sales now, what I meant is what about AoC indicates that it will be able to rival WoW in a longer term scenario. LotRO may well have done better if it released now, but I don't buy the argument that it would translate to a better comparision against WoW in 1 years time. I also don't buy the argument that AoCs sales now give any indication to how well it will do in the future; which is where the comparison to WoW has to be made.

As people pointed out, WoW has three of the top selling titles now and will assuredly have the top selling title when WotLK comes out later this year. Why should we assume that AoC is going to give it any sort of a run in a years time just because it has done well in this lull?

It is by all reports lots of fun in respects, but it is buggy, incomplete, promising the world (which is a bad sign, because even WoW, MMO giant, doesn't promise half as many astounding things in expansions--which they work on for two years--let alone to be patched in "soon"), confused about it's audience (targeting the PvP crowd is not what we'd see from a WoW rival), and a number of other things. A number of people on these forums have mentioned not playing beyond the first month, and reported similar things happening with their guilds and friends. Are these the signs that make us go "yeah AoC is going gangbusters!"? Or are they signs that say "it had a decent release, but"?

It seems the justification that AoC is a competitor is based on the fact they've sold a few bosses and WoW is in a slow period due to the upcomming expansion. Excuse me if that doesn't strike me as a reasonable justification for thinking AoC will in any way compete.

[ajax34i]

IMO, WoW seems to be switching from a "let's use the end-game grind to keep everyone paying for as long as possible" paradigm to a "let's push another expansion out, players will be interested for maybe 3-4 months then cancel again, and we'll push another expansion in 6 to get them back for another few months."

EVE seems to be doing a "Let's get all these White Wolf people we just acquired involved in sprucing up the lore and make it look like the devs are participating and constantly creating "content" and news, and players will want to check it out."

AoC seems to be in "let's finish coding the game" mode.

And everyone else seems to be in "Meh, keep the servers up, a little free money is better than nothing" mode.

[Margalis]

Compared to WOW Conan has a different feel to the world, different graphic style, mature content, different combat.

LOTRO was pretty much exactly WOW. Why would anyone leave WOW for LOTRO? The only two answers to those questions were "bored of WOW" and "loves Hobbits." On the surface Conan appears to be a different game aimed at a different audience, LOTRO appeared to be a total knockoff.

[UnSub]

CoX went up for the first three months and then did nothing but fall off.

Nope. CoX hit it's peak in terms of subscribers in December 2005, more than a year and a half after the launch of the game. It got a big jump from the release of CoV on Halloween 2005 and it continued to stay above it's June 2004 numbers through most of 2006.



Edit: numbers are from NCsoft's own earning reports

CoH/V's lesson to the industry is that regularly released free content updates will help maintain a high player retention, while an expansion box will kick player numbers up as new people join.

And WoW, which just kept going up and up, kills any notion of player interest falling off a few months after launch. Evenutally it will show a bell curve in player numbers, but not for a good while yet.

AoC has had a good launch, relatively speaking. The question is if they can capitalise on that launch - really, all the people saying content is lacking post-20 just want to see post-20 content added in order to keep playing - to drive the game forward successfully. And perhaps launching in Asia will also see player numbers jump.

If we want to vaguely compare like with like, the question is: Do you think AoC will attract about 2 million US players and about 3 million European players? I'd say no, but even if it attracts a quarter of those 5 million that WoW did, it's still going to have done very well for itself.

[sam, an eggplant]

LOTRO was pretty much exactly WOW. Why would anyone leave WOW for LOTRO? The only two answers to those questions were "bored of WOW" and "loves Hobbits."

Pretty much, although LOTRO was more focused on telling a story, with fantastic single-player instances atmospheric zones. Hobbiton is just awesome. Turbine got so many things right with LOTRO; it had a great release and was quite well polished, but for some reason it just didn't click with people. I know it didn't for me... and I don't know why. It lacks that certain je ne sais quoi.

The only major design decision I strongly disagree with was giving prizes for killing ten gazillion rats. That kind of behavior shouldn't be encouraged.

[Lakov_Sanite]

I believe AOC was a million boxes 'shipped' not sold, big difference there.

and yes there have been numerous alternatives to wow these past what, 3 years since it's been out? problem is no one is putting in the time or money it takes for them to be viable alternatives.  I'd love to see a game give wow a run for its money, I'd have loved aoc to spend another 6 months in the oven to tweak and make sure it was content complete. 

Developers need to realize the days of pushing something out the door half-finished are over, oh sure you will make money but you'll be forgettable.

 In terms of not only money but critical acclaim as artists and designers they have to ask themselves, do i want to make a good/profitable game that will fade into obscurity? or do i want to make the best game i can?

it's as if so many companies and designers see a blizzard flag high up on everest and decide it's impossible so they purposefully set their sights lower. frankly it's just disappointing to me when in interviews people ask "so will you game be the next wow killer?" and they respond with things like "well that would be very hard but we just wanna make the best game we can"  it's of course gussied up but it's defeatist. Just say "fuck yeah we're going to crush wow, 10mil subscribers for WAR in two years"   but no one wants to even come close to such statements because they themselves dont believe them.

[Falconeer]

I am confident in saying that the biggest hurdle for AoC are the system requirements.
I am sure many quit because it didn't run at all on their rigs or it crawled on at 5 frame per seconds making the experience unbearable and fatiguing.

AoC is the first game everyone will resub to as soon as they upgrade their computers for any reason, and I raise on my September comback surge based on:

1) Everyone agrees that the combat is fun and the game is fun. They want to try it again on their performing machine.
2) Everyone agrees that the world and the visuals are awesome. They want to try it again on their performing new machine.
3) Summer is over, it's time to get back in your room to study/work/play. WotLK and WAR are a few months away, boredom ensues, AoC box is there on their shelf and it only needs a few clicks to resub and see if it got any better.

What will people notice then:

a) Performance are probably improved all across the boards. Client crashing might be solved by then. Not to mention again the upgraded rigs.
b) Copious amount of content has been added. People try it again and go like: "oh wow, no more grind at all, cool!"
c) PvP starting to roll. PvP content, levels, gear, sieging. Bunch of stuff familiar to WoWers and definitely an addition to what is the the game now.
d) So many things fixed and polished it will be stunningly noticeable. Not everything will be working (please), but enough stuff to make it immediately apparent.
e) If there were WoW burnouts in May-June, there will be double the amount in September. Only choice available = AoC (with the buzz being "hey, it improved so much in the last two months!)

For the above mentioned reasons, I wouldn't be surprised if they launch a "Comeback campaign" in September, giving 7 days free access to everyone who canceled by admitting it was in a crappy state before but "Now it's got vitamins! Look for yourself!"

That million boxes sold, or is going to anyway cause it doesn't matter how many are bitching, lots are still playing and loving it. My guild lost 4 members of its 40+ lot since the beginning and our server is packed. Good bunches are sticking together having FUN, bugs can't really kill the good parts of it yet. Good bunches are brilliantly surviving the bug monster and live every day as a new step toward what was to be expected since launch. Yesterday night we went hunting in the border kingdom, after spamming a few taunts in the general chat. Minutes later it was packed with 5 different guilds for a massive massive 5-way PvP mayhem. Best fun I had in a long time, and it wasn't for XP, pvp points, or anything else. Just euphoric, crazy, pvp fun bringing back to life, and enhancing, the Tarren Mill days before honour points were even in.

Bottom line: In September AoC will be tremendously better than it is now, and you'll have half a million (the other half will still be playing) hungry for MMO Fantasy Diku with a PvP slant only one click away from getting back into it. With no other choice than trying it or suck it up reading WAR and WotLK previews.
And finally, Age of Conan won't just have a comeback in subscription, whereas every other game failed, because of good timing. But because it is so much better than those games.


P.S: roughly 1 million boxes sold, roughly another million friend trial pass around. I can only say they've been so wise to save that for later. When they'll be confident in unlocking the friend passes, another million will have a fresh look at it. Bingoes.

[Lightstalker]

Just to pull a number out of my ass, but...

Anything much above an 8% yield on the friend passes would surprise me.  We're still talking in the neighborhood of 80k new impressions, but that assumes the friend passes won't be used (and certainly not preferentially used) by folks who had previously purchased the retail box in the first place. 

[Falconeer]

t that assumes the friend passes won't be used (and certainly not preferentially used) by folks who had previously purchased the retail box in the first place. 

That is easily countered reactivating canceled subscriptions for 7 days. No point in giving the chance to quitters to waste the friend trial passes for themselves, so give 'em the free limited re-activation. On the other hand, and at the same time, activate friend passes. Lots of friends trying it again and fresh together finding all the above mentioned things.

[Phred]

[ I think I remember WoW AHs having some issues at launch, hell they weren't even connected between the towns.

WoW ah's were connected together in beta so it's unlikely any server launched with them still not connected. They were already connected in open beta when I played.

What "connected"? There was IF, Ogr and Ratchet. And those aren't connected to each other (Ratchet just allows both sides to post). All of the AH outpost like SW and Darn came much later.

Holy crap! I forgot that. You're right, there was no AH in Stormwind, Darnassus or the  2 Horde cities either. I guess it was the complaint of them not being connected that confused me, or just failing memory.

[slog]

I am confident in saying that the biggest hurdle for AoC are the system requirements.
I am sure many quit because it didn't run at all on their rigs or it crawled on at 5 frame per seconds making the experience unbearable and fatiguing.

AoC is the first game everyone will resub to as soon as they upgrade their computers for any reason

You only get one shot to make a fist impression.   Will a small percentage come back?  sure.  But at most 20% will even give it a second glance.

[Dren]

I am confident in saying that the biggest hurdle for AoC are the system requirements.
I am sure many quit because it didn't run at all on their rigs or it crawled on at 5 frame per seconds making the experience unbearable and fatiguing.

AoC is the first game everyone will resub to as soon as they upgrade their computers for any reason

You only get one shot to make a fist impression.   Will a small percentage come back?  sure.  But at most 20% will even give it a second glance.

I picked the box up at a Best Buy I was at while on vacation last week.  I reread the requirements and suggested specs and put it right back down.  Not for me right now I guess.  I'm not risking getting frustrated just by the poor performance, etc.  I got burnt by SB doing that and I so wanted to love that game.

It will be a long while before I have a rig that will run this and nothing else is pushing me to do that.  By the time I get a new computer, there will be a lot of other things out.  Maybe I'll check it out a year from now when they start offering free trials or something.

[Falconeer]

I am confident in saying that the biggest hurdle for AoC are the system requirements.
I am sure many quit because it didn't run at all on their rigs or it crawled on at 5 frame per seconds making the experience unbearable and fatiguing.

AoC is the first game everyone will resub to as soon as they upgrade their computers for any reason

You only get one shot to make a fist (  ) impression. 

First impressions have been more than positive. Most of the quitters did it (after a while) because of the bad performances, supposed lack of mid level quests and poor socializing tools. Everyone had a blast for the first 3 days, and that is the first impression they will think back when the time will come.

[grunk]

This was as expected in terms of shipped boxes. And also that the announcement hit this week especially after most people, even the super-slow levelers are reaching their 50's and finding lack of content.

Huh. I wonder how well it would go, if 50 was the cap and then you started raiding. Then a month later, they raised it to 60, then more raids. etc. Hell with that, let's start the raiding sooner. You're capped at 30 at launch! Then raid for a month, then capped at 40, then more raiding, etc etc. (Of course, someone joining a year into the game would just see a huge level treadmill and miss all the raiding in-between.)

I agree. they should have made the cap at 50 and then started some kind of end game. what hurts the game is the lack of quests todo from 50-80.

[Falconeer]

Lots of quests from 60 to 80. What game are you people playing?

[Slayerik]

This was as expected in terms of shipped boxes. And also that the announcement hit this week especially after most people, even the super-slow levelers are reaching their 50's and finding lack of content.

Huh. I wonder how well it would go, if 50 was the cap and then you started raiding. Then a month later, they raised it to 60, then more raids. etc. Hell with that, let's start the raiding sooner. You're capped at 30 at launch! Then raid for a month, then capped at 40, then more raiding, etc etc. (Of course, someone joining a year into the game would just see a huge level treadmill and miss all the raiding in-between.)

I agree. they should have made the cap at 50 and then started some kind of end game. what hurts the game is the lack of quests todo from 50-80.

Yeah I've hit the level 52 Cannibal Cave grind...


Grunk man, WTF happened to "AOC pwns so hardc0re yo, Wow lol eat it - Aoc rulez!!!'  ?

[Threash]

Theres a few things that are going to keep bringing people back to AoC.  First off the gameplay really ruins other games for you, autoattack feels incredibly lame now when i try playing wow and i don't think i could put up with that kind of game for long anymore.  Second one of the features of their new power point system is earning points for trivial things like being subscribed and being in a guild, i guarantee you lots of people are going to keep their sub active just for this reason alone, 15 bucks a month isn't really a problem for most people.  Think of it this way, if you  were getting arena or honor points in wow by default every week just for keeping your sub active would you cancel or just keep paying it just to have a way to catch up gearwise when you do return?

[Numtini]

I really liked the whole AOC combat thing. It was definitely the strong point. I wondered if it was going to bother me to go back to other games, but I don't miss it in EQ2 or COX which are the two main games I'm playing. I'm pretty much active doing some kind of intelligent action the minute combat starts.

[Lakov_Sanite]

*facepalm* AoC combat is not different from wows because of the lack of auto attack. Auto attack is just background white nose to the fact you are still just hitting the same buttons and doing your 'special' moves. Play a vaster in both games and combat is very very similar.

Now, what makes aoc better is that it's more interactive than wow or many other games, in that you are paying attention when you use those special attacks and having to counter the enemies guard. This has nothing to do with auto-attack being on or off because you're still mashing the same amount of specials.

I do think it's a shame though that this combat system is basically for melee only though, casters don't really need to pay as much attention as spells have no base directional for enemies to guard/block against. Maybe if there were some type of elemental guard system but i digress.

Aoc > wow combat with the caveats that this counts mostly for melee and that it is not auto-attack or lack thereof that is making it feel more fun and exciting.

[Draegan]

This is my opinion only.

Both AOC and LOTRO were hurt from lack of quests in the high end.  The difference to me was I quite LOTRO because the game was boring if I wasn't engaged in the story.  In AOC I didn't mind grinding because playing the game is fun.

[Falconeer]

You are wrong again Lakov.

Autoattack makes for a less direct and visceral combat feeling. "Why is my char swinging a sword if I am not doing anything?"
Knowing that every single swing of your weapon comes from your fingers is what makes autoattack obsolete and the AoC way pure win.

So yes, the difference between the WoW and Conan combat systems starts with the lack, or presence, of autoattack. From there, it branches more and more... and that's why DDO wasn't even close to AoC combat.

[Nija]

Position has great importance in AoC melee. Some swings are obviously single target swings. Others are multiple target swings. You can mess with positioning to make the best use of these. You don't have to concentrate on positioning, but those who do will have more success than those who do not.

This is the kind of thing that all games need.

[Slayerik]

It may seem like a simple thing, but having to react to the directional blocking of your opponent makes it far more interactive. If you use the wrong combos it can be the difference between life and death. In Wow it really doesn't matter, circle strafe bunny hop and watch the autoattacks between cooldowns.

With my conquerer the other day I finished two mobs off at the same time with a combo, and he did a double head lope.

I was just like "DAMMMMMMMMN !! " That kicked ass! - I can't remember any experiences in Wow combat that even compare. Maybe a huge crit or something, but no.


Also, in PVP positioning matters. Use your body to block escape routes of your opponents. Help your melee guys by trapping your opponents.

[photek]

Position has great importance in AoC melee. Some swings are obviously single target swings. Others are multiple target swings. You can mess with positioning to make the best use of these. You don't have to concentrate on positioning, but those who do will have more success than those who do not.

This is the kind of thing that all games need.

Agreed. Also that spells and heals are AoE and cone based makes it great and allows for very deep strategical gaming and placement. From all combat (PvE and PvP) I've done I just think this system is and should be a new standard.

[Venkman]

Play a vaster in both games and combat is very very similar.

I only ever play casters, and jumped from a Fire Mage in WoW to try the various Mage and Priest types in AoC. There is some similarity, certainly more so than between a melee in AoC and one in WoW. However, the action is much faster in AoC, the results less predictable (for good or bad), you need to pay attention to that blocking thing and that everything you do is an AoE, and the abilities are spread very different between classes.

It's not better or worse in my opinion. I love the Mage in WoW. Very much feels in game what the two CGI movies depict them as, and is straight in line with how Mages are depicted in Lore. I don't know anything about AoC lore save a few books I've read, but the way these classes are designed (not how they'll eventually turn out, since who knows..., I'm intrigued to read more.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Play a vaster in both games and combat is very very similar.

I only ever play casters, and jumped from a Fire Mage in WoW to try the various Mage and Priest types in AoC. There is some similarity, certainly more so than between a melee in AoC and one in WoW. However, the action is much faster in AoC, the results less predictable (for good or bad), you need to pay attention to that blocking thing and that everything you do is an AoE, and the abilities are spread very different between classes.

It's not better or worse in my opinion. I love the Mage in WoW. Very much feels in game what the two CGI movies depict them as, and is straight in line with how Mages are depicted in Lore. I don't know anything about AoC lore save a few books I've read, but the way these classes are designed (not how they'll eventually turn out, since who knows..., I'm intrigued to read more.

Misspelling ftw but i wholeheartedly agree aoc is superior i just feel that the devil is in the details. I guess this demonstrates how little changes(in the grand scheme of combat systems) can have such a profound affect on the action.

By taking out auto attack and adding an aoe component to all special attacks(for the sake of argument consider all attacks in aoc 'special' attacks) the reaction is palpable.  I really think some people don't realize how subtly different combat in aoc but no one cana rgue the effect is not profound. I for one hope many future games adopt a similar system.

[Margalis]

What's odd is that in MMORPGs this is some sort of novel feature even though it's been the standard in all other video game genres for decades.