[AoC] Age of conan set to fail more

[Majestic_Clown]

http://www.edge-online.com/news/age-...415k-customers

AoC currently sits on 415,000 customers right now from the 1.2 million game sales retails.

Dramatic drops!!!

[KvdM]

So how much do they ask per month? (probably €10-15)

415 000 x €10 = € 4 150 000 per month

Wouldn't call it a failure yet, especially since mosts mmo's don't even have that many subscribers:

http://www.mmogchart.com/charts/

[Temor]

So how much do they ask per month? (probably €10-15)

415 000 x €10 = € 4 150 000 per month

Wouldn't call it a failure yet, especially since mosts mmo's don't even have that many subscribers:

http://www.mmogchart.com/charts/

Failure is relative. 415,000 subscribers to WoW's over 10,000,000 subscribers means that Age of Conan failed in my opinion which I'm VERY extremely happy about. This further identifies what I've been saying on a lot of message boards about new games that come out. The more different they make the game from WoW, the more likely it will not do as good. Most people have a lot of different ideas about how their perfect MMORPG should work. My view is WoW is just about perfect as far as game play. There's only a few bugs here and there that are irritating but as far as the game play, WoW has it put together very well.

I preordered a couple $5 copies of Warhammer Online to check it out, but I'm guessing that it won't do as well as AoC.

[Dominian]

First to the OP AoC sold 800k copies but sent out 1.2 mill so they lost 50% of theyr customers..

So how much do they ask per month? (probably €10-15)

415 000 x €10 = € 4 150 000 per month

Wouldn't call it a failure yet, especially since mosts mmo's don't even have that many subscribers:

http://www.mmogchart.com/charts/

Failure is relative. 415,000 subscribers to WoW's over 10,000,000 subscribers means that Age of Conan failed in my opinion which I'm VERY extremely happy about. This further identifies what I've been saying on a lot of message boards about new games that come out. The more different they make the game from WoW, the more likely it will not do as good. Most people have a lot of different ideas about how their perfect MMORPG should work. My view is WoW is just about perfect as far as game play. There's only a few bugs here and there that are irritating but as far as the game play, WoW has it put together very well.

I preordered a couple $5 copies of Warhammer Online to check it out, but I'm guessing that it won't do as well as AoC.

How can you be happy that it failed? You do realise that IF warhammer fail Blizzard have NO pressure at all at them for WOTLK? 400k a failure? WoW didnt have much more players from release and they had about 0 competition at that time.

AoC failed because of a having a crappy game of release and personally im not the type who enjoy that kind of gameplay, and people expected a new wow even thought Funcom tried to state that it wouldnt be like wow. I actually want to thank Funcom for not taking the easy road and just thinking about the money like Blizzard seems to do at times.

Like you said AoC took to much focus away from the gameplay but had a WORLD different player base.. WoW gives me the feeling that 9/10 do not have any clue how to play at all but i might just be unlucky. Easy welfare epics to satisfy customers.

And thats exactly the reason why wow have gone big is because you can get gear without actually have ANY clue at all, hell wtf you can get gear by afking wich most seems to do anyway.

[JezPeRR]

I bought the game on the release date, and stopped playing it after giving it a 14 day tryout (not playtime)
could not get used to the interface, to many loading screens and grafic glitches.. so i rerolled WoW again.

thx, but no thx.

[robbotats]

My view is WoW is just about perfect as far as game play. There's only a few bugs here and there that are irritating but as far as the game play, WoW has it put together very well.

WORLD of warcraft. There hasnt been world pvp in this game since pre TBC and even then, you really had to go looking for it.

Grinding honor in BG's just so you can compete in arena is not just about perfect gameplay. Sitting in Shattarah waiting for BG and arena Q's to pop is not fun. This doesnt seem to be the world of warcraft that I read about in the lore.

For people who like PvE, no one will beat WoW, i wont argue that, but which companies are working on PvE MMORPG's?

There is a gaping hole in the market for someone to make a decent PvP MMORPG with an emphasis on world pvp.

And yes, as said above, how can anyone be happy that Blizz is the only force in the MMORPG field? With all the millions that these bastards make, not once did they consider aussie servers, too hard aye? well well, look what Myth just did, planted an aussie server in Australia. If Australian wow players get a server on Aussie soil now, you have no one else to thank but Myth because we have been QQ'ing to a brick wall for years with no luck.

[Tizer]

I think WAR will do a lot better than AOC. After playing AOC for a few weeks and WAR for a few hours, i know where my money is.

[Yamio]

And thats exactly the reason why wow have gone big is because you can get gear without actually have ANY clue at all, hell wtf you can get gear by afking wich most seems to do anyway.

/agree

Playing to the lowest common denominator (meaning a larger fan base) is the ultimate goal. Other games can try to reinvent the wheel that Blizzard has perfected and I think it'll be years before anyone will actually do it. With WoW, you don't have to be good, or smart, or have fantastic skills to have fun and get good gear, which is all most people want anyway. Blizzard figured that out a long time ago with Diablo 2.

I also agree that with the failure of AOC (and from what listening to the prognosticators say, WO will fail as well), Blizzard has no real incentive to make WOTLK the best it could possibly be. I think it'll be good, but I'm not sure about it being great. How can something get better if there isn't the forceful push of real competition?

[KvdM]

Failure is relative. 415,000 subscribers to WoW's over 10,000,000 subscribers means that Age of Conan failed in my opinion which I'm VERY extremely happy about.

The numbers just don't backup that opinion. There's plenty of mmo's around that have far less players and are thriving. 415 000 Subscribers equals about 3% of the market and that's not bad for a game that just been released, considering there are games that have been around for much longer have a much smaller player base.

http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart7.html

The game maybe didn't live up to your expectations, but that doesn't make it a failure.

This further identifies what I've been saying on a lot of message boards about new games that come out. The more different they make the game from WoW, the more likely it will not do as good. Most people have a lot of different ideas about how their perfect MMORPG should work.

It's actually the other way around. The more you make a game the same as another game, the more people will feel that you're just copy of that other game. The market is currently already saturated with fantasy MMO games:

http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart8.html

With more being announced and about same number being canceled every month (quite often even before the game has been released). It's actually the mmo's that try to do something completely different that have the most chance of succeeding. This is because they create their own niche market and don't have to compete with all the other mmo's that are all trying to do the same thing.

My view is WoW is just about perfect as far as game play. There's only a few bugs here and there that are irritating but as far as the game play, WoW has it put together very well.

As a game developer, I've looked at thousands of different game mechanics, played/tested hundreds of different games to find out what does and doesn't work, to see and feel what the strong and weak points of those games are. In my experience most games have several features that they are doing better then their competition. WoW certainly has a higher number of good features then most other mmo's, but that doesn't make it perfect. It has its share of gameplay failures too.

[Overflo]

Unfortunately when it comes to the gaming market to, i've noticed that many people will play a game entirely out of spite of a games competition. I have friends who felt at certain points 'betrayed' by blizzard and turned to a new MMO in order to exact their revenge. The problem is most of them disliked the gameplay of AoC compared to WoW, but once again many people were expecting AoC to translate into WoW with more blood/pvp!

Personally i Agree that different is going to be the key but I don't believe different will work to its max potential for some time, as many people are now very comfortable with WoW. It has dominated the market with its game, and like it or not, people have become engulfed in its gameplay to the point of nearly having an automatic distaste for any games not designed like it.

If there is one thing i can note about blizzard, its that they make their games in a fashion where you will distaste any other game of the genre if its not like the blizzard version. Starcraft/warcraft did that to me with strategy games and Diablo II made me hate all other rpg's that didn't have its fast pace/control.

They definetly are good at what they do, i do hope for some competition to role in sometime soon, but i can't see it lasting unfortunately.