Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
It's hard to figure what someone is directing at if the first point they make is regarding numbers be bad and the first point I'm making is regarding employee numbers in the post you quoted. Be specific.
The numbers I gathered from people playing MMORPGs was for a singular MMO overtime. If we're talking about the entire MMORPG market it's harder to determine. WoW has had over their lifetime reported to have had 120million total users. WoW reported having 1.2 mil subs as of this year. This is coming from a well beyond its time out of touch MMORPG. The market is there and the need to squeeze more money through BPs doesn't make sense nor does it correlate with a MMORPG atmosphere. Especially with Steven consistently trying to bring about the older MMO generational days. BPs don't align at all.
I feel you really don't understand no mmo reach Peak WoW nor reach a faction of their population. No wonder your numbers are so out there. You are on the high copium.
I'm rooting for AoC as well, ill be happy to be surprised but I'm not going to assume AoC is doing what no other mmorpg can do suddenly getting a faction of their peak and keeping that many subs.
No MMO has tried anything beyond being a half baked WoW clone with a few extra trinkets with numerous bugs and false promises.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=fWvAznIRVLA
You are suggesting AoC willl have more subs than wow at 1/4 sub count at their peak then (and again sustain it past 2-3 months) . do you not understand how wild that is?
I fully believe AoC will have over 1m subs first month, but i know that number falls off after the first month.
New World obtained 1million on their start and that was with a lot of suspicion already regarding that MMO also it was Amazon creating it too. I could see AoC obtaining 2-3million subs if what they promised is kept. Will it be done day one? Not at all but if the game garners respect and is authentic it will reach that point in less than a years time. The market is already there. It's unfortnate how many scam MMOs and half baked ones have been released since WoW became popular.
Honestly i think you are on the copium, though I'm glad you have unmatched faith in how big it will be. Palworld reached 2m subs being a cheap game and was heavy on hype and pokemon nostalgia. And you feel it will be bigger than a game that every single type of player was into.
Then i guess there is no need for you to worry about monetization and whatever i say really doesn't matter. AoC will be way to popular to be worry about money.
That's fine if you do believe that. Palworld like you mentioned garnered 2million from a copy paste game with added mechanics and pets. Look at their previous title and you'll see it's a clone of an okay game they made. If AoC can't pull in a million people day1 I'd question the entire the market. If a game like SWTOR & New World can net that much day1 it shouldn't be a problem. I'd even go as far as to say the hype is far more real for AoC than New World was. At least we have gameplay and soon open Alpha2 for people to be aware of what it is going to offer.
day one and 2-3+ months in is very different. Game successes really shouldnt be off day one for a mmo.
I'm not into spikes. Many MMOs have had their spikes and suddenly die because they failed to keep their audience. Using other MMOs that have retained their core and built their audience didn't have flashy numbers day1. That was built over a period of time and its a better standard to hold for a game to build subs rather than day1 spike numbers. If a game is good it's good and people will play it. The massive peak numbers are just people looking for something good & fresh and they've found neither with previous games.
I play a few modern games.
Baulders Gate 3 is right up there with the game's I am playing most right now (which is a surprise to me).
I haven't played Helldivers - because when I read the terms and conditions and saw the need to link to a Playstation account, I noped out.
Same with a number of other games that seem to be in this conversation - I looked at them and noped out based on similar factors. The existence of a battlepass as you seem to be talking about them is something that would see me lose any and all interest in the game. Such a system is a clear corporate mechanism to keep people that would otherwise leave a game still interested in that game.
As proof, find me a similar system in a game that doesn't require ongoing payment - you won't, because there is no reason for developers to add a system like this other than to get a few more recurring payments out of you than they would otherwise.
It is literally the poster child of the corporate takeover of the games industry - and you are on your knees, with both hands stretched out, begging for more.
Was the same for me with Baulders gate game is just good, and i agree with the helldivers thing though it was gifted to me at launch.
I can understand why people don't want more monetization but for me personally I don't see us living in a perfect world. Sacrifices need to be made, if the game is super popular that is the best case situation since the subs will pay for it and they can add all the content into the game rather than spending time making content to sell. But to me that is copium believing AoC will get there, and the most sure way for me to let down my own expectations. Ill look at things with the good and the bad, and the best situation we can get. Which to me is more monetization without effecting barrier to entry.
I can appreciate the honestly and humor in the post and feeling like the most honest post you have given me lmao.
On the other hand, if the game were at that point, it may also be valid to let the game die a dignified death.
"Everything is subject to change" is a disclaimer used during the monthly streams to prevent players assuming that the released game will look and feel like in that stream.
Design concepts related to the game also make sense to be adjusted but "game pillars" not.
I don't know about P2W. Monster coins can be balanced to become P2W as they are already in the store.
No matter how battlepasses are used in other games, in AoC we have the frequent updates promised and the word used for them was "DLC". Changing the name and calling them "battlepasse" does not mean they can now charge money for them. That would be a trick which they explicitly said they will not do it.
It would betray the initial supporters.
That is not necessary to be a Battle pass. Anything a Battle pass brings can be a game update in the form of the DLCs which were promised to be free.
It is also not your job to fight and convince people to accept changes to the declared way of monetization: monthly subscription and cosmetics in a store.
Your argument that BP brings more money is not a reason for us to accept them.
You have to say that you like them for another reason than feeling developers money gatherer.
And so far I see DLCs are the way to bring changes into the game and BPs just another word for them.
You seem to not understand the difference between store market place and Dlc / updates/ expansions. And thinking store related updates should be free lol?
You dont need to accept them u are a tiny faction of the people that will be playing the game. Plenty of people will have no issues even more so with the fact its not p2w. You complaining wouldn't even be a drop in the ocean.
And 200k for a good mmo is a fairly low estimate I'd assume. So, as I've been saying, as long as the game is good - we don't need a BP.
I think I forgot to ask this. Do you expect Embers to not exist then? And if you do think they'll still exist, then do you expect the BP to be on top of a direct purchase shop for cosmetics?
Cause if you think that the BP will be the only way to get cosmetics with irl money - to me that sounds like Intrepid would've kinda lied that we'll be able to purchase cosmetics with them.
If we are going with this thing where its only a battle pass, it isn't a lie since u can spend embers on increasing the battle pass levels and getting cosmetics / stuff that way. Though obviously there will be items of the day and such to buy.
This is the god damn reason we're in the shithole of a corporate industry. Everyone is fucking ok with getting fucked over. And not only that, but everyone believes the direct lies that "all of this is for the good of the consuumer!"
Such a damn shame.
Not about how you feel I'm just stating its not a lie as you can buy them.
Like I said, people are getting fucked over and are welcoming it.
Its a mechanic for whales mainly you are reading too much into it though. Just stating you can buy levels which would mean you can boost to get what you want. It wouldn't be a lie.
End of the day battle pass saves you money so no one is really getting f'd over (unless you whale). Also its impossible to get f'd over there is 0 p2w and you can get in game gear with different looks. Its all exaggeration since it has 0 impact on gameplay.
BPs go directly against exploiting whales. They simply trick poor people into thinking that BPs are worth the effort and the money.
Honestly, I would pay 25 a moth, NP. When I play an MMO that i sub too, I hardly play anything else, so I get alot of value for my money. If I want a break, I can break the sub, and sub when i come back. I know the devs get paid, they make new content, and people cant buy themselves ahead of me. A free game with no sub, you hsave to sell progress, and that is game over. I use way more than 25% a month on games in general, so 25 for a sub, great news. 15, which is what they are aiming for, is more than fair, IMO.
Your math only takes dev salaries into account. The inbound revenue for the product needs to offset the expense of the entire company including a healthy margin for future growth. I can only guess at the other categorical expenses (core IT, HR, legal, admin, finance, leasing, etc), but I’d bet $75-100M is closer to the mark. Take a 20-25% margin on top of that, then calculate the targeted player population necessary.
Most likely they won’t actually be profitable for a few years. MMOs are a long bet with plenty of highly probable pitfalls to sink the entire product.
I'd say my calculations are on the lower side of potential revenue, but even that low estimate already clears salaries. Btw, that's for 200 employees at average salary, rather than a lower number at median salaries.
https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/internet/streaming-stats/
99% of all U.S. households pay for at least one or more streaming services.
I don't understand the compulsion to say "This other company is abusing me. I expect, no DEMAND the next now abuse me as well."
What value would be added to Intrepid if the added a BP?
What value would be added to Ashes if they added a BP?
What value would be added to the customers if they added a BP?
If they add anything that gives XP to your characters or any kind of in game item other them cosmetics that seems like P2W.