Whatever happened to...those MMOs?

[Dog Pants]

What WoW does: everything everyone else did but better.

Apart from Eve, which is The Other MMO.

[Imperatore]

Well my venture into the world of Mac failed as I couldn't bring myself to part with 2.5k on a laptop. Sooo I'm going to get a PC again soon, nothing too fancy, spend about a k, i930 and a DDR5 ATI of some sort, prebuilt as I CBA with all the hassle.
Then I'll definately be MMO'ing again, EVE is still active but only training, and I will definately be playing SWTOR.

[friznit]

Eve's a bit in the doldrums atm after CCP made a couple of major faux pas. Tyrannis, the latest content patch, didn't bring a great deal apart from a horribly fiddly and not very lucrative method of sucking goo out of planets called "Planetary Interaction". Unfortunately the patch also brought horrendous lag to fleet battles making them almost unplayable and a terrible attempt to revamp the sovreignty mechanics which has all but stalled any strategic warfare. On top of that one of the lead devs was quoted as saying "the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features", in response to a call by players to "fix all the goddamn bugs". So lots of people have got a bit pissed off by it.

[Imperatore]

None of that would effect me but I can understand how it effects other more experienced players. My character is currently at 10m SP, trained missile skills massive but probably too advanced in relation to my cruiser.
Also, I have no idea if I was right to use effect rather than affect.

[Thompy]

On top of that one of the lead devs was quoted as saying "the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features"

Ugh, nothing irks me more than unpolished games, and I can't recall hearing any player say otherwise. Someone did say something interesting though along the lines of "polish doesn't sell games", which is true I guess. You add new features and advertise it you'll get new players, but you can't advertise polish. As long as the influx of new players outweighs those quitting in digust some companies will carry on with that philosophy.

Also, I have no idea if I was right to use effect rather than affect.

You should have written affects, but you could have written "None of that would have an effect on me".

Generally speaking, affect is a verb and refers to the action on a person or object. Effect is a noun refering to the result of the action.

Hope that helps

[FatherJack]

one of the lead devs was quoted as saying "the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features", in response to a call by players to "fix all the goddamn bugs". So lots of people have got a bit pissed off by it.

I can see why, that's effectively saying "We're more interested in attracting new/returning customers than supporting the current players, who will still keep paying despite the bugs. lol."

There's a lot of talk in DDO and LoTRO about the merits and downsides of the F2P model. Apart from the inrush of idiots, it's generally seen by veteran players as a good thing. A more populated virtual world is a more fun one, with a better economy and back in the real world they seem to believe the extra cash will fund further development.

Getting people hooked on what are two very well-made, content rich games certainly has profit potential and the way they've structured what you get for free falls just on the right side of the player thinking they're getting a good bargain, with a few anomalies.

I'll probably end up spending a few quid here and there on them, but I wouldn't buy another sub on top of my Warcraft one. I'm just pleased that the time of the draconian policies are gone. Everquest famously made it difficult to unsubscribe and FFXI made no promise not to delete your characters if you did.

[Joose]

"the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features"

You know, I would point that person at WoW. "Polish" is probably WoW's biggest selling point, not fancy new features.

[Imperatore]

Generally speaking, affect is a verb and refers to the action on a person or object. Effect is a noun refering to the result of the action.

Hope that helps

Why yes, yes it did, thanks.

[FatherJack]

You know, I would point that person at WoW. "Polish" is probably WoW's biggest selling point, not fancy new features.

I think it's a bit of both with WoW, though in truth the fancy new features have come only after the enhancements, tweaks and solidification of the standard gameplay. Of late though, they've pushed new content out quicker than anyone could have forseen, perhaps owing to perceived competition from the F2P games.

Still, that shoring up of core gameplay has ensured the baseline of players keep either playing or coming back to what's a reliable bedrock experience, granting the developers funds to (much, it must be said) later create entirely new content.

Both games have been around for similar amounts of time and have both at times (in my view) been guilty of pandering to their most well-established players, but it seems the WoW team have listened more out of the pair.

WoW's success was almost guaranteed, with many Bliz fanboys jumping from Diablo, but Eve has long had vociferous proponents from many quarters, though sadly the call most frequently heard from them was "but mind the bugs".

As a beta player of WoW, I can confirm that initially it was a dog's arse of bugginess, though strangely none so game breaking as some of those that still persist in other games. They knew it would be big and had a massive wad of cash to make sure they overdid it with both beta and launch server provision, but still demand rather surprised them.

Basically Bliz have the cash to polish their game, keep customers happy and still make enough money to keep their stockholders happy - though I suspect they could make more if they concentrated purely on attracting new customers.. CCP I'd guess from that dev's comment don't have that luxury, and if their positions were reversed, we'd hear the same story from WoW devs.