^ I fail to get the point even if that were all true. If they sell a million copies at $50, where is the downside to this approach? It didn't cost even close to $50 million to make or maintain as GW1 proved.

This is the same case for AoC. We as gamers probably like to think it was a flop, but the initial box sales did good enough to ensure it was profitable enough for them to be able to land another --even bigger-- project. While you're right that WoW is an anomaly, we can see that even DAoC and UO continue to be profitable or they wouldn't be there, and thus even AoC is still making money and getting pretty regular & fancy expansions. I'm sure they were hoping for it to be a much bigger success, but it paid the bills apparently and then some.


ArenaNet has a pretty devoted bunch of followers from GW1, and on top they will gain a whole lot more people for GW2. Their entirely free MMO concept --which they're taking a lot further this time then they did in GW1-- will almost assure them 1 million or more copies sold, you can pretty much bet the farm on that. Considering you can still play GW1 for free today, I am certain that GW2 will be very profitable and have considerable longevity too.


I'm not sure I'll like the PvP as much as in DAoC, but then I didn't like the PvP in DAoC as much as I liked the PvP in pre-Ren UO. Very likely most of that feeling is simply nostalgia, however --say what you will-- the siege PvP in GW2 looks very similar to DAoC's and looks quite entertaining. I've watched a couple more siege videos from GW2 and I have to say they seem to have gotten sieges right, probably even improving on DAoC from the looks of it. (Not just improved GFX and more fluid game-play, but some good ideas for improving some of the issues in keep siege PvP.)

Until I play it I am of course skeptical that I could enjoy it on a longer-term basis, but judging by GW1s success overall, obviously there will also be quite a few people who will stay long term with GW2. And much more so then GW1, there will be "DAoC type" of players drawn to it as well, because obviously GW2 is much more of a real MMO then GW1, and the PvP is open world, siege, etc. it has all the good parts.

There most certainly is a market for PvP-centric games when they're done right, as DAoC proved at a time when few others were willing to touch PvP with a 10 foot pole, and most just wanted to make EQ clones with at most PK servers and/or PvP switches. The fact that a 10 year old MMO has lost it's luster over time is simply inevitable, and has IMO nothing to do with it being a PvP-centric game.

I do want to also say though that, contrary to how it might sound, I still agree with much of what you say just not the general idea that PvP games are doomed from the start and have no market.

 

-----signature-----

When a $50 box is purchased the game company gets about $18 not $50.


As an example of profits, WarHammer cost about $100 million (as per MJ) and sold about 800 thousand boxes bringing in about $15 million from initial box sales. Because of game problems many of the 800,000 did not keep a sub past the first free month that came with the box and many more players did not make it through the first quarter. Because of the cost to develop WH and because of large expenditures to produce expansions and the cost of finishing development/repair of WH, and because of the rapid decline in the player base, WH may not have yet broken even. While I expect WH to be profitable, with its shrunken subscriber list it is completely possible that it is not yet profitable.





DAoC was not a PvP centric game at the beginning. Most players did not have level 50s for quite some time. DAoC was a PvE game with good RvR for players to have additional fun. While it is true that the RvR in the game attracted some players that were PvP centric, the vast majority of early players were PvE centric.


Also, (WoW has proven) the vast majority of MMO players in general are PvE centric. That does not mean they only PvE, it just means that PvE is important enough that a game without good PvE will not keep them.


Over the years DAoC has shifted to cater to the PvP centric player and DAoC today shows us how large the PvP centric player base is. It is not very large. I agree with any who say that a pure PvP RPGMMO will not do well. For a RPG MMO to do well it needs good PvE. From my understanding GW2 does have a PvE game.


It will be interesting to see how things pan out with GW2. <grabs popcorn and watches the show>

 

-----signature-----

since these boards are going away I will miss you VN! if you are interested in keeping up with former or current DAoC'ers who plan on playing on the same Guild Wars 2 server in the near future (first beta weekend event end of April ) there are several different places you can do that. Here a few I know of, add others you find so maybe they can get coordinated.

Guild Wars 2 Guru DAoC Players in GW2 thread

Vennum just started a DAoC/GW2 Facebook group

Freddy's House Guild Wars 2 thread is also full of DAoCers making plans.

Hope to see a lot of old friends and Dark Ages of Camelot fans in Guild Wars 2. Best wishes on your date with IGN for the merger.



P.S. Guild Wars 2 does have great, beautiful & challenging PvE just in case you were wondering

 

-----signature-----

We'll be playing Guild Wars 2 (link in sig) too, I'll have to check in with Freddys and try to get on the same server. Would be fun.

 

-----signature-----

I think a pure PVP MMO could do well, but it would need to have a clearly established pecking order based on player skill. Let the reason people continue to play be to improve, and chase their online heroes. When PVP comes down to a numbers game or has a low skill cap so the crybabies don't get owned, people lose interest.

 

-----signature-----