AoC isn't as Niche as everyone thinks

So here's my take...

WoW Hardcore, Extraction Shooters, Survival, Classic WoW. We are definitely seeing a trend in what gamers want. Theme Park/Railroad content games are going the way of Guitar Hero.

Blizzard saw so much success with Classic and Hardcore they made them official.

Survival games,some if not most have come with hardcore rule sets,( dropping all gear, open PVP) Ark being one of the biggest had both of these. Now even Blizzard is jumping in although I suspect it will be a watered down for everyone experience.

Extraction shooters stemming from Tarkov's success(very hardcore style game) have started popping up everywhere.

If I know one thing it's when companies and investors start putting their money in to it you know the numbers are there in some fashion and they like what they see.

All I hear from everyone, Including Asmongold and other streamers is this is a niche game and it's not for everyone. Don While I don't disagree I think the degree of which they are implying is over stated, to the point that they think it might not be a very big game at all.

While it certainly won't be COD, I also think it's potential could be much higher then New World saw at its peak. Which would be considered a massive success.

I Understand that people don't want to get their hopes up and there's a lot of cynical people and deservedly so but if I am going to be real about it, the more I see the better it gets. It's like going from a narcissistic relationship to a healthy one, sometimes it just seems too good to be true but that's more about your past relationship then your current one. Just like that I think it's only fair we treat AoC and the devs with their fair shake. They have done nothing but be completely upfront and honest and currently in my eyes have the most integrity I have seen in a while and I have been around for a while.(I played UO and EQ1 a lot)

There is a lot to look forward to and don't let your past disappoints ruin your experience. Judge it on its own merits. Don't buy into the cynical majority and copy past the copium quotes. I might be disappointed, that's definitely a possibility but I am also ok with that. At least as far as I can tell they are putting their best foot forward and for now that's enough.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Raven016

Will you buy Alpha 2 access?

Azherae

Fiddlez wrote: »

So here's my take...

WoW Hardcore, Extraction Shooters, Survival, Classic WoW. We are definitely seeing a trend in what gamers want. Theme Park/Railroad content games are going the way of Guitar Hero.

Blizzard saw so much success with Classic and Hardcore they made them official.

Survival games,some if not most have come with hardcore rule sets,( dropping all gear, open PVP) Ark being one of the biggest had both of these. Now even Blizzard is jumping in although I suspect it will be a watered down for everyone experience.

Extraction shooters stemming from Tarkov's success(very hardcore style game) have started popping up everywhere.

If I know one thing it's when companies and investors start putting their money in to it you know the numbers are there in some fashion and they like what they see.

All I hear from everyone, Including Asmongold and other streamers is this is a niche game and it's not for everyone. Don While I don't disagree I think the degree of which they are implying is over stated, to the point that they think it might not be a very big game at all.

While it certainly won't be COD, I also think it's potential could be much higher then New World saw at its peak. Which would be considered a massive success.

I Understand that people don't want to get their hopes up and there's a lot of cynical people and deservedly so but if I am going to be real about it, the more I see the better it gets. It's like going from a narcissistic relationship to a healthy one, sometimes it just seems too good to be true but that's more about your past relationship then your current one. Just like that I think it's only fair we treat AoC and the devs with their fair shake. They have done nothing but be completely upfront and honest and currently in my eyes have the most integrity I have seen in a while and I have been around for a while.(I played UO and EQ1 a lot)

There is a lot to look forward to and don't let your past disappoints ruin your experience. Judge it on its own merits. Don't buy into the cynical majority and copy past the copium quotes. I might be disappointed, that's definitely a possibility but I am also ok with that. At least as far as I can tell they are putting their best foot forward and for now that's enough.

I don't think any of the things mentioned are the reasons why AoC would be considered Niche.

We already actually have multiple games that are relatively like AoC and those games aren't 'niche' if we count 25k actives as 'not niche'.

AoC's problem (if there even is one) is that it has little appeal to the type of player that cares about some of its selling points because it has conflicting selling points. That is what is making it 'niche'. It combines three different approaches to appeal, all of which conflict with each other, and intends to make a perfect balance of them.

Keyword being 'perfect' because people have no reason to accept anything less than that.

idk, I'm here because AoC theoretically on the macro-level claims a bunch of stuff that I like, and then keeps making decision changes that make me not want to play their specific implementation.

If I find myself waiting for 'another game with all the same core principles but done better', then it's that theoretical game that I, in my bias, would view as 'not niche' whereas AoC would be.

Ayeveegaming1

I am staying positive for sure. Its understandable that people are negative being the wait we have had. i feel a good vibe from steven and believe he wants the best. i have other games to play that i have not even touched lol.

Dygz

I'd say that WoW Hardcore is pretty niche.
I expect Ashes to be about as "niche" as EvE Online, ArcheAge and Lineage II.

KingDDD

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Mag7spy

KingDDD wrote: »

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Where did you see a beta will last 6 months o.O.

Ludullu

Afaik WoW hardcore is fairly niche. But even if it's not - it's a "session"-based game. You make a character and you play it till you die. Then you reset and repeat. It's an enclosed system with a predetermined failstate.

WoW classic just plays on nostalgia for the majority of vets and any new players join it because "people are there". But afaik classic also doesn't have millions upon millions of people. And Blizz continues to fuck it up, so it'll die out too.

Extract shooters are the same as WoW HC, but even more compact.

In other words, AoC will just be different from those things. Your failures will mount instead of resetting. Your enemies will keep getting stronger while you keep losing. Availability of things seems to decrease with almost every update we get. And the game will still push people to socialize way more, while those 3 examples are quite soloable.

Those are the things that will keep Ashes niche. I'm sure it'll attract over a million subs at launch. Just as NW and LA did. But I HIGHLY doubt it'll keep 80% of those. Hell, I fucking hope it keeps 20%. I think they could live with 20 for at least a while and might then prove to others that the game is worth playing.

KingDDD

Mag7spy wrote: »

KingDDD wrote: »

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Where did you see a beta will last 6 months o.O.

It's based on the cost of the beta pack and the revenue generated in that amount of time. Beta 1 lasting any longer than that and Intrepid will hemorrhage money real fast to the point where they'll be forced to launch.

Mag7spy

KingDDD wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

KingDDD wrote: »

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Where did you see a beta will last 6 months o.O.

It's based on the cost of the beta pack and the revenue generated in that amount of time. Beta 1 lasting any longer than that and Intrepid will hemorrhage money real fast to the point where they'll be forced to launch.

So there is no confirmed date or length of beta? That is mainly what I'm checking because i don't see a beta lasting for half a year let alone months..

Beta 2 would be marketing and most likely no more than a week. Beta 1 at most would be like a few weeks i could see, maybe a month if you are lucky but i don't see it last more than 2 weeks if all major testing in alpha was done successfully.

Dygz

KingDDD wrote: »

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Uh. No.
Because WoW includes people who play MMORPGs on PvE-Only and RP servers, while Ashes will not.
Ashes will probably also not include a significant number of players who play MMORPGs on PvP-Optional servers.

KingDDD

Dygz wrote: »

KingDDD wrote: »

Ashes is as niche of a game as wow was in 2004. Provided it doesn't run horribly and the end game loop exists for a variety of play styles/play times, it'll see well over a million subs. The question is can they sustain development long enough to get to the point where the before mentioned criterias are hit; alpha 2 will only be a year, beta 1 6 months, and beta 2/open beta being 3 months or less.

Uh. No.
Because WoW includes people who play MMORPGs on PvE-Only and RP servers, while Ashes will not.
Ashes will probably also not include a significant number of players who play MMORPGs on PvP-Optional servers.

Pve servers in wow always have been a significantly smaller population in wow then pvp servers. If you look at trends over time there's been a mass exodus from pve servers.

https://wowwiki-archive.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline_of_the_creation_of_US_realms

Link above shows a history of servers added. I'm at work but at a quick glance 2005 saw a significantly larger number of pvp servers added compared to pve.

Spif

AoC is going to be as "niche" as any of the AAA MMOs that have appeared in the last 20+ years. Which is like others have said: a million+ subs to start. Retention is going to be the big unknown. It's going to have a harder time with the "contraction phase" than the mega-server MMOs. A megaserver MMO feels alive with just 20k people in the whole game.

ESO had a serious problem with loss of users before it went no-sub and then turned things around with Tamriel Unlimited. Had people been server locked with a tiny population, (New World was a good example of this) it would have been a lot worse.

I think there are a lot of use cases for beta that will not be relevant for AoC. Many companies use betas for stress and volume testing. AoC is going to have a high enough Alpha-2 population to do all that IMO.

As a marketing tool, Betas are great for all companies that have a good product. But they have to be kept relatively short, especially if there are content caps (Level 35, etc) to keep people from getting bored, or feeling like they've "done everything". A week or two tops for each beta.

Ludullu

KingDDD wrote: »

Link above shows a history of servers added. I'm at work but at a quick glance 2005 saw a significantly larger number of pvp servers added compared to pve.

Seems pretty close to me. Would be interesting to see the rest of history.

edit: read what it said at the start. these seem to be all the server, with a few missing. So it seems that it's quite equal.

edit to the edit of the edit: after a super surface-lvl search, the "pvp" servers seem to be INSANELY one-sided too. So in effect they're just pve servers. Maybe there's like a dozen or two of balanced pvp server in the entirety of WoW across all versions, but that's barely enough to keep the lights on for Ashes in terms of pure subs.

And considering that there're no factions in AoC, the things would be even worse, cause there'd be no one to save you from the big bad guild, while in WoW that guild might just be in your faction.

Mag7spy

Faction based pvp is the worse. Though people say AoC is niche that view point can change depending on its success. If the game is good, systems are good, combat is good all around they could be one of the top mmorpgs easily. They aren't even trying to hype the game up and it has tons of traction, their marketing skills when they are aiming for release will get the game in front of all mmorpg audiences (depending on new competition) . Than at that point it is just up to the game holding up.

If AA2 was an amazing game, and rots mmorpg came out at the same time, that view point would be different. To me it is a race, the first good mmorpg to come out will have the best chance to define the next age of mmorpgs.

KingDDD

NiKr wrote: »

KingDDD wrote: »

Link above shows a history of servers added. I'm at work but at a quick glance 2005 saw a significantly larger number of pvp servers added compared to pve.

Seems pretty close to me. Would be interesting to see the rest of history.

edit: read what it said at the start. these seem to be all the server, with a few missing. So it seems that it's quite equal.

edit to the edit of the edit: after a super surface-lvl search, the "pvp" servers seem to be INSANELY one-sided too. So in effect they're just pve servers. Maybe there's like a dozen or two of balanced pvp server in the entirety of WoW across all versions, but that's barely enough to keep the lights on for Ashes in terms of pure subs.

And considering that there're no factions in AoC, the things would be even worse, cause there'd be no one to save you from the big bad guild, while in WoW that guild might just be in your faction.

Where's your screenshot come from and is it the total number of servers added, region based, or what?

The faction imbalances happened over time and really kicked off when server transfers became vogue sometime in 2007 or 2008. Only blizzard could tell exact population and player activity per server at specific time periods.

Ayeveegaming1

One of the biggest things that might help retention is the way the world changes and nodes change. With the rise and fall of nodes that contain freeholds and even the change of environment around freeholds as they advance. To me its a fairly new concept. Granted I have only played a few games over the years. So as far as I know its fairly new. It gives the world a changing feel and not a static environment that gets stale. To me this is one of the game changing things that might keep some people here. If the development keeps up good and future releases and expansions keep people exploring and discovering new content, then this will be a blockbuster.

Ludullu

KingDDD wrote: »

Where's your screenshot come from and is it the total number of servers added, region based, or what?

It's just "ctrl+f" on that page.

KingDDD wrote: »

The faction imbalances happened over time and really kicked off when server transfers became vogue sometime in 2007 or 2008. Only blizzard could tell exact population and player activity per server at specific time periods.

In other words it's been the case for over 15 years. So, in theory, 3 gens of gamers are used to seeing non-pvp "pvp" servers.

We can all praise and shout off the rooftops about how our beloved mmos were so damn great 15 years ago, but that won't change the current realities of gaming. Anyone who wants pvp went to mobas and brs and everyone who wanted to play mmos are playing ff14 and wow, which are both as pve as it gets.

Yes, wow might've had great balanced servers back at its start, but back then even Lineage 2 had over a millions subs and was a very nice game. And the genre overall had way more pvp mmos. Times have changed.

KingDDD

NiKr wrote: »

KingDDD wrote: »

Where's your screenshot come from and is it the total number of servers added, region based, or what?

It's just "ctrl+f" on that page.

KingDDD wrote: »

The faction imbalances happened over time and really kicked off when server transfers became vogue sometime in 2007 or 2008. Only blizzard could tell exact population and player activity per server at specific time periods.

In other words it's been the case for over 15 years. So, in theory, 3 gens of gamers are used to seeing non-pvp "pvp" servers.

We can all praise and shout off the rooftops about how our beloved mmos were so damn great 15 years ago, but that won't change the current realities of gaming. Anyone who wants pvp went to mobas and brs and everyone who wanted to play mmos are playing ff14 and wow, which are both as pve as it gets.

Yes, wow might've had great balanced servers back at its start, but back then even Lineage 2 had over a millions subs and was a very nice game. And the genre overall had way more pvp mmos. Times have changed.

Yes so you are looking at the total number of servers added, not the dates for when they were added. I used 2005 as the year to measure from as thats the period of wows largest growth. The fact blizzard choose to implement more pvp servers that year illustrates the popularity of pvp servers over pve. The 15 year comment is irrelevant as the major faction imbalances were mostly from 2008 to 2012, long after world activities and any pvp beyond 3vs3 arena was dead.

All those players that went to mobas BRs arena shooters etc want to play an mmo. There's a reason Intrepid is doing interviews with shroud and summit, and it isn't because they're pretty.

Pvp games are more popular then ever. There hasn't been any type of major pvp mmo in well over a decade +. The feature count, graphics, cycle of astonishment will make ashes insanely popular at launch. How robust those features are and how well the game runs will determine how well they retain those players.

Diamaht

If the gamplay is fun, and open world pvp is fun and does not devolve into a gank fest, like most do, then it may not be niche.

WoW was king because it played better (by far) than any of its competitors. The pvp servers were a lot of fun at first, but the people learned to organize better and the faction system turned them one sided.

Dygz

KingDDD wrote: »

Pve servers in wow always have been a significantly smaller population in wow then pvp servers. If you look at trends over time there's been a mass exodus from pve servers.

https://wowwiki-archive.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline_of_the_creation_of_US_realms

Link above shows a history of servers added. I'm at work but at a quick glance 2005 saw a significantly larger number of pvp servers added compared to pve.

Uh. No.
PvE-Only have traditionally always had the highest populations for both WoW and EQ.

Child Item