Please dont make EQ2 a game like WOW, and here is why..

[Goodwill]

I do think that this article have some realy good points to why SOE should take a brake, in making EQ2 as easy and casual as WOW... (like they are doing now faster that a horse can run) --- from: http://www.grimwell.com/?action=fullnews&id=262 <font color="#ff0000"> </font><span class="genmed"><font color="#ff0000"><b>So what does all this have to do with World of Warcraft’s phenomenal success pulling a 180 degree turn soon?</b></font>My theory is based on WoW being categorized as a “New School `Casual Friendly` Slayer.” <font color="#ff3300">Those games suffer from longevity issues, and World of Warcraft is no exception</font>. I consider those games little more compelling in the long term than Diablo II. World of Warcraft’s excellent sales figures do not impact this, because when Diablo II was released, I’m certain it flew off the shelf just as quickly. Like World of Warcraft, the number of people playing Diablo II could have been counted in the hundreds of thousands. How many do you think are playing it now?</span> <div></div>

[Fial]

<P><EM><STRONG>Old School “Online Oriented” Slayers</STRONG></EM></P> <P><EM>...What puts them above and beyond an offline monster slaying game is an emphasis on socializing, often through forced or heavily encouraged grouping. In general, these games really focus on their being online, where the other categories may put the world or game first.</EM>  ...</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think this is hitting the nail on the head. EQ2's grouping focus - although 'people' dislike it and comment often that it's user unfriendly - has the biggest potential of making it a long term success.<BR>For people that like the social aspect of mmorpgs, it's hard to leave 'friends' behind. People who hate the social aspect of mmorpgs stay away from the game, so you're much less likely to meet them in your groups, so a community is created</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>BTW.. Diablo 2 shipped an initial 2 million copies and had 600k reorders in the same year - so maybe 2.6mio sold copies in the initial year. There are still people playing it and the 1.10 patch brought a good deal of players back to it prior to WoW release (and I never got into that BNet mentality of doing <EM>exactly</EM> the same map over and over and over again just to get that special little item). <BR>But it's free, non-subscription - you install your old copy with the newest patch and can play. No need to register and pay a monthly fee. <BR>The world hasn't changed, you're still lvl 99 and so is the rest. That's the big difference to 'real' mmorpgs, where everyone progresses and you fall back if you don't play.</DIV>

[Miele]

<P>Diablo 2 still has players, nothing to do with the average mmorpg player, but they still have a certain amount. The game sold 2.700.000 copies plus about 1.000.000 copies for the expansion and so far I think it's still unbeated as the top game for number of copies sold. I played it for about 1 year until I moved to EQ1 and never looked back, but it was a good game and deserved the success it had. Mechanics were much more complex that I could imagine on a first glance, that kept it interesting for a good while.</P> <P>WoW will retain players if they push out content and things to do such as extra levels etc fairly quickly, otherwise they'll suffer from a dramatic decrease in player subscriptions, as it's a tad too easy to get levels, much more easy than in EQ2, that alone says a lot. A RL friend of mine is level 40 with nothing more than 2-3 days of /played, very casual player and is still eating content at an alarming rate. He likes PvP and just looks forward to it, hope that will be enough for him.</P> <P>I tried the game myself, but I couldn't stand 80 minutes of queue to login and 30+ minutes of queue again if I happened to go LD halfway through the night. That alone was a big no-no. The game is easy to grasp, funny and PvP adds something for the fans of it (not me really), but I questioned its longevity even before I questioned EQ2 longevity. </P> <P>I bet it will have players in 2 years from now, but I sincerely doubt that more than 1/3rd of ts actual playerbase will still be there, unless Blizzard does something magical to the game.</P> <P>I hope EQ2 will try to keep its identity and focus a bit more on longevity and depth of content, so far they are doing decently well (game is a tad too easy, but that's my opinion).</P>

[Thormiel]

<blockquote><hr>Miele wrote:<P>Diablo 2 still has players, nothing to do with the average mmorpg player, but they still have a certain amount. The game sold 2.700.000 copies plus about 1.000.000 copies for the expansion and so far I think it's still unbeated as the top game for number of copies sold. </P><hr></blockquote>I'm not sure but The Sims might give Diablo 2's sales figures a run for its money :p

[Miele]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Thormiel wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Miele wrote:<BR> <P>Diablo 2 still has players, nothing to do with the average mmorpg player, but they still have a certain amount. The game sold 2.700.000 copies plus about 1.000.000 copies for the expansion and so far I think it's still unbeated as the top game for number of copies sold. </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I'm not sure but The Sims might give Diablo 2's sales figures a run for its money :p<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Touché :p</P> <P>You are probably right, totally forgot about the Sims <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<DIV>Not wanting to take sides this time.....but can someone really blame SOE to copy from a game that has more than double the amount of subscribers they have?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We might be interested mainly in long-term playability (dreaming about a full decade probably) but I am afraid Sony's shareholders think different. They dont care HOW Sony makes money, just IF.</DIV>

[Fial]

<P>They can't copy WoW's "success". It's like BMW trying to build a better Mercedes.<BR>They can take certain parts and implement them in EQ2 (offline sales =), like they always did with competition, so if you look at the list of features a game offers, the EQ2 player can say "oh, but we have that, too".</P> <P>Initial sales figures are just a small part of the rentability of an MMORG with subscriptions. I think I spent over 1000$ over the years playing EQ1 in expansions and subscriptions (and developed some brand loyalty, giving EQ2 a try over WoW or CoH). <BR>That means it'd take 20 box sales to get close to the financial success of 1 long term-subscriber over several years.</P> <DIV>Edit: not to mention, that comparing initial sales figures between the 2 is completely unfair, since EQ2 cut itself off from the 'we want PvP' crowd by not offering that option. And I think their decision was right, seeing the EQ1 PvP history. </DIV> <DIV>Big wazoo at the beginning and everyone all over those servers, but very small retention figures. Most people - no matter how nice it sounds on paper - hate PvP or will start to hate it if they are involved a bit longer.</DIV> <DIV>I've seen entire guilds move from PvP to PvE servers after WoW beta and I doubt that live will be that much different. Too much griefing is just fun for the griefers, not for the 'average casual player' that just wants to relax in a game.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Fialas on <span class=date_text>04-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:44 PM</span>

[Tradeskill_Addict]

<DIV>I was not talking about box sales but that finacially SOE might need <FONT color=#99ff00>500.000 subcribers for the first 2 years</FONT> after launch more badly than <FONT color=#99ff00>1.000.000 subcribers after the first 2 years.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#99ff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>EQL just had DAoC and UO as  competition and could afford to experiment as everyone was watching them doing things for the first time - but EQ2 faces a very different market. And if the current subscriptions are way behind the expectations the devs will be forced to do everything they can to raise them asap - even if that means copying piece after piece from WoW  - which seems to be the more innovative game atm.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Personally I will stick with EQ2 for a long time and  I really dont care if *my* game becomes similar to some other game i am not even playing.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Tradeskill_Addict on <span class=date_text>04-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:56 AM</span>

[Fial]

<P>EQ2 already has at least as much if not more active subscribers than EQ1 at it's peak time (if the sales figures are correct - who knows).</P> <P>If they really planned for 500k subscribers - and I doubt they did after launching several MMORPGs in the last few years- it's time to revise their budget plans now. </P> <P>No pun intended, but for a 'big blue' game, WoW sold extremely mediocre. Diablo 2 sold 2 million copies in the first year. I only see them coming up with the "we didn't count with that success" argument when they try to excuse their lacking server performance.</P>

[Anice]

<font size="4">LIVE IN GAME CONTENT, not just Quests even a forthnightly event that is run or automated for a period of time... can that be done if so IMHO it would make the game much more fun.... </font><div></div>

[Styk]

I don't understand how WoW is "such a success" when they only show total units show not active accounts..... I want to see how many active accounts they have like how SoE lists there success.... I bet the inflated number wont be as big then but yeah... If you think eq2 is easy now wait til they balance out healer types/ rework tank defense and tell me then if its easy... <div></div>

[LadyEternity]

<P>While I can see people's hesitation to believe in something new, I personally think WoW is going to be doing well for a very very longtime. Especially sense the quality of their content additions is very high rate. And no, I am not a WoW fangirl, and I do not currently play it. But I -have- played it. And I did enjoy it. I just am a glutton for punishment (as my husband thinks), and believe in the notion of EQ2 and the lore, and am here to cheer SOE on as they turn this game around.</P> <P>WoW has some important things to the success of a game:</P> <P>1: Fun Factor: This game has humor, amusing art, funny emotes, and quests that will litterally make you laugh out loud.</P> <P>2: Accessability: All walks of people of all playstyles can access and have fun with atleast 90% of all the total content in the base game.</P> <P>3: Loot: They have the rewards down nicely. Loot drops are varied in more then just stats. You can find neato wowzer stuffers for your 'toon' reguardless of if you are a grouper, a soloer, a small grouper, a duo. The loot tables are huge...including rare drops for all mobs. And the equipment looks varied and neat <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>4: Atmosphere: The dungeons, the towns, the landscape. Everywhere you go...the entire game smacks of atmosphere. Step into the undead ridden shadows of Duskwood and your skin will crawl. The enviorments are really immersive and neat.</P> <P>And now they will be putting in Battle Grounds which will add even more to the 'end' for alot of people (not me..but still).</P> <P>All WoW lacks is Housing really. And I am sure that will come too.</P> <P>While WoW does not apeal to everyone, the game is undeniably well made. And I think that there is and will be enough there to hold many many many many people enthralled for a good longtime to come.</P> <P>Lady Eternity</P>