Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
Based on some discussions I've had recently with people that were in a position to know these things back in the day, the NA/EU population of EQ2 was higher than the NA/EU population of L2.
I've said it a few times - the way Ashes is shaping up, it needs a solid marketing push in Korea.
That said, the numbers in the above chart are not accurate. There were at least 7 MMO's that broke 1 million subscribers before 2008 on that list - but the chart only shows 4.
The AA peak is for the Trion West(NA/EU) Release only, and yes EQ2 had a higher population than L2(Official Servers) in NA/EU for the majority of time.
As for the baseless accusation of lack of accuracy in the chart numbers for the MMORPGs present in it because of the absence of other MMORPG you didn't even mentioned by name in the already overcrowded chart, i will not even bother.
Aren't we all sinners?
I'm not sure why you are adding the "official server" qualifier.
If we are talking about the success of a game for it's developer or publicher, unofficial servers very much do not count.
As to Archeage, the games NA/EU peak was very short. If we ignore the first 3 months of the game being live (actually a good idea when comparing MMO populations), EQ and EQ2 each beat Archeage - though Archeage probably had a higher revenue (I've never actually talked to anyone about Archages revenue).
It wasn't an accusation, and I was talking about games already on that list. There are three of them that I know broke 1 million active subs that are not listed as being that high.
The reason it wasn't an accusation is the list was made with public info that wasn't always complete, and probably fairly represents that. It was something of a controversy back in the day when the website was active.
An example of the controversy is that an unconfirmed report about SWG gave a specific player count that was online at one time, and MMOG used that number as the total active subscriptions - while at the same time using total units sold figures from Blizzard as their figure for WoW.
This left them in a position where they had a chart that had an unofficial concurrent player count and an official total units sold count, on the same chart labeled active subscriptions. From what I can see, both of those numbers are on the chart you posted.
The qualifier is because of the insane number of private servers that soared into existance around 2006 and onwards and stole tons of players from the Lineage 2 Official servers crippling its numbers.
Would you have numbers regarding the first 3 months of AA population to back up that EQ and EQ2 higher population claim?
The over 1 million number for SWG is used in reference to its number of sold copies, the concurrent number of active players is mostly referenced around the ~300K mark throught its early years.
Make sure to mention the other errors by name like Dofus for example.
As for Lineage 2, EQ and EQ2 which are the most important for the point, please make sure to point out incorrect numbers for those or even provide more accurate charts you believe can help your point,
i didn't claimed the chart to be perfect for all games in any moment.
Aren't we all sinners?
I don't record discussions with friends.
As always, you are free to not believe me. I actually did think you would make the assumption that the million I was talking about would include SWG when I talked about it in my previous post. I was going to address it in that post, but I figured it was getting long enough.
It is not one of the three I was talking about. I think the ket point to take away with the numbers for these games is that L2 without korea *may* not have even made it on to that chart. I'm not at all suggesting you did, I am just making sure others have the above information.
I only mentioned the over 1 million SWG number because you mentioned its numbers inconsistency in the chart.
Lineage 2 did indeed go over the 200K mark across NA/EU around ~2005 to make it into the chart.
But as always, your are free to make your assumptions.
Aren't we all sinners?
If it did indeed get over 200k NA/EU, it was by a small amount.
I will say that if Ashes maintains a population of 200k, the game will likely survive just fine. It may not ever make Stevens investment back, but it should stay live for a while.
The problem there is the *maintain* part of that.
Again, this is why I have said a few times now that Intrepid need a marketing push in Korea.
ever since seeing you make up what intrepid's design pillars are (specifically related to corruption), I never do.
the whole "we know intrepid did not intend corruption to be a deterrent - they told us" or whatever. then you said you got that from the forums.
sad times
Who told you that?
You are getting me mixed up with someone else.
Yep. And that would be awesome. I think we agree.
I suspect this game will probably grow past launch as well,maybe a small downturn but if Intrepid keeps it up I think everyone including Steven will be surprised.
It's funny to me because the Mage combat video was way better then people realized.
Crowfall bombed and probably not many played it but the combat was surprisingly good,visually basic but highly addicting. Group pvp sucked me in for months even though the rest of the game was pretty bad. Soon as I saw the spell mechanics in AoC and seeing spells with combo/slash mechanics. Let's just say I was stoked.
Basically only Intrepid can mess this up but as long as it launches it should be super successful.
The thing about Crowfall is they sold 70k+ copies of the game. While some of that's inflated by Kickstarter and people buying multiple copies, it still illustrates how this type of game can achieve relatively high sales numbers even with abysmal marketing.
As long as ashes has content loops that facilitates making positive relationships and uses those to onboard players into the meat and potatoes of the game, the sky is the limit. There just isn't anything like ashes out there.
For my clarity, if 70k is high, what do you consider 'low' sales numbers?
Just to clarify, Crowfall’s failure wasn’t a marketing problem. It failed from the bottom up (just being a poor game with some terrible gameplay decisions) and from the top down (bad financial management, poor leadership, and short term thinking).
High is relative based on the game. For a full loot, must have a guild, plagued by lag, no pve, cartoon art style, 0 marketing, Kickstarter game I'd say 100k sales with a 50% retention rate (dependent on shop purchases and monthly subs) is sustainable.
The thing about Crowfall is while sales numbers were high enough to keep the game going, the retention rate was probably in the single digits.
I can't tell you the number of people who posted on reddit, fansites, discord, etc who all said they were unaware the game "launched". Was Crowfall a game that was generally average to mediocre in every way possible, yes. But if people aren't playing they aren't paying.
I'd say that my concern for Ashes is the same given the other similar games that probably will release before it, and how relatively quickly a bigger more experienced studio can add/pivot the features we value in Ashes given their historical experience with those features.
They had something there but yeah there was definitely bigger problems. The core players playing it from closed beta even left. I personally think they were too invested in the Large scale.
It was definitely a problem for sure. One of many.
I think you're underestimating how long it takes to add large systems to a game. Using New World as an example, it took them 2 years to add the leveling and questing system to the game. This also came at a cost, they didn't add any end-game systems.
Intrepid isn't a small indie studio. They have well over 100 employees and that doesn't count the 20-30 people they'll hire to do all the necessary things (like customer service) needed for a launched title. As I've said in this thread: as long as the money doesn't run out and the content is designed in such a way that new players can find their place in the world, ashes will be massive.
The worst part about that is the large scale was terrible. If DAoC has a better siege system than your brand-new game-supposedly designed around siege play-you're doing something wrong.
And there's the fundamental disagreement. I don't think I can say 'you are wrong' because even then I'm only calling on my own experience. Even Dygz, the person probably most qualified to speak on the matter, would still probably not be able to say 'you are wrong' about the development timeline in a way that would sway you.
But I don't really have anything to go on except the experience of myself and people I talk to who do these things.
I do have a question though. If ArcheAge 2 were to have most of what Ashes does and actually release in 2024/25, would there be any reason to play Ashes specifically other than 'guaranteed no P2W'? (note I am absolutely not saying 'AA2 will blow Ashes out of the water and no one will play Ashes', moreso saying that it would be a cointoss for many people, they'd go wherever their guild went).
Easy comparison.
1 game was sub only
The others are p2w.
2 different cultures in gaming.
I'm basing my opinions on watching MMOs develop since 2006, specifically starting with Vanguard. Engine advances, better project pipelines, general experience, etc. all make these games quicker/slower to develop. The example of New World makes sense (to me) as Amazon is a AAA company with the ability to hire folks with the necessary skill set to make the game in as efficient a manner as possible. While it's not a direct 1 to 1 comparison, you'd think Lumberyard and the studio, in general, weren't so incompetent that development was massively handicapped.
As far as AA2, if the games have the exact same features (classes, world building, pve, etc) you'll see people switch between games as lulls in content releases occur. There will obviously always be the diehards for each game, but a new raid, class, or social change will act as a catalyst that causes the migration of players between both games.
I love talking about MMOs in general, I'm sure everyone on this forum feels the same. I try to base my opinion on some semblance of concrete information, but so much of it is proprietary that all we can really do is speculate.
Ahhh, there's the gap.
Having seen most of New World's development, I definitely don't factor it.
But I think you've clarified where the disconnect is really precisely as a result, so I thank you.
So tell me about New World and why you feel the way you do. I'd love to hear your perspective on it.
Well first, a lot of context.
If you're already familiar, great, just let me know.
If you don't want to watch it, that's also fine, but it's hard to explain why I'm not convinced of 'AAA level competence' without the ability to reference a lot of the obvious design decision errors listed here, so it may be better not to spend time on the conversation.
EDIT: Also, I'm not sure this is worth either of our time either way, but if you come out of watching that entire video (somehow) with the same perspective as before, that Amazon was doing ok and New World is a game that can be used as a reference for average MMO development, let me know.
Especially not for MMOs. They have a horrible track record for MMO releases.
I think I did some form of Early Access.
I think I also only played/tested, like, 4 hours total.
Crowfall released on July 6, 2021. It was taken offline on November 22, 2022.
I think we're all hoping Ashes will stay around longer than that.
Keep in mind, they are the same creators as Shadowbane. Play to Crush. Which also didn't last very long.
The game they released that's been ongoing for more than 15 years is... Wizard101.