|
|
On October 24 2013 03:49 Arrinao wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 00:50 Umpteen wrote:
feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... Show nested quote +History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship. Nice graph. Now let's look at it together, shall we? From 2004 to 2006 I can see the biggest drop was Everquest with 350 000 loss, followed up by EQ 2, UO and Dark Ages Of Camelot with each one around say 125.000. Now correct me if I'm wrong but as much I'm trying to look at it and counting them all together, I'm not able to squeeze more than (heavily rounded up) one million. And that is of course assuming they ALL went to WoW, which they most likely didn't as there is a steady rise of EVE online: Tranquility in that era. Even if I add Lineage and Lineage 2 numbers, which someone else mentioned and which are missing from your graph, I can only add at most 500.000. Now take a look at this: url=http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/128323/Seven_Years_Of_World_Of_Warcraft.php. Where did those additional 3.500.000 people come from?  Show nested quote +And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... Has "history" changed it's mind yet?
Its unbelievable how much useless infos you throw around. Yes WoW was maybe the first mmo that got casuals interested.
But thats not important here, srsly..
You know what is important, that blizzard has the way higher reach for casuals, i never saw a riot add in the tv, now lets wait and see what blizzard does with HOTS.
Maybe Mr. T comes back and wants us to play HOTS with the night elf mohawk like in wow? Do you really think all the potential players play lol or dota2? And do you really think all these players are happy with the games? Sry bro, but blizzard will once again make it happen.
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
Someone still feeds that troll?
|
On October 24 2013 03:49 Arrinao wrote:
Has "history" changed it's mind yet?
Nope. I did just win a private bet with myself though.
Perhaps if we took this one step at a time:
1. People have been pointing to WoW as an example of a game that took an existing, popular genre, did it right, and dominated the market, causing the majority of existing subscribers to jump ship.
2. You disagree, and insist WoW merely took the genre mainstream.
We should take a moment here to note that 1) doesn't make any statements about total WoW subscriptions, or where the bulk of those subscriptions came from. It merely states that WoW cannibalised a large proportion of the existing market.
So, either:
a) You didn't appreciate that where WoW obtained the bulk of its subscribers is irrelevant when assessing how it impacted existing titles in the genre.
or
b) You assumed based on anecdotal evidence that WoW's success was entirely down to market growth, and that it did not strip subscribers from other games in significant numbers. As the graphs I linked show, this was a factual error, and statement 1) stands.
or
c) You were employing strawman tactics to avoid admitting error. Whether or not this was the case earlier, you are certainly doing it now by trying to redefine the argument to be about where WoW got most of its numbers, rather than what WoW did to existing MMORPG subscribers.
Just to be perfectly clear, the original claim made by others, challenged by you, and supported by the graph I posted was this:
"WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)
and you are now trying to pretend it was this:
"The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false)
The upshot is: even if there had been no bigger market for WoW to tap, it would still have trounced existing titles.
Therefore, WoW is 'prior art' for the claim that a game can come along and revolutionise a popular genre.
FYI, I just made another private bet with myself.
|
On October 24 2013 05:16 lolfail9001 wrote:
Someone still feeds that troll?
He is not trolling. From what I read, his points are valid and reasonable, albeit I don't agree with all of them. I think its other way around, all you guys do is repeat over and over "ignorant troll", misinterpret his arguments and make funny remarks on his little mistakes. Just the fact that most of you are denying d3 was failure makes me think you are in denial and hate the fact that one guy is speaking the truth. (From financial standpoint d3 is not succesful either, yes it did sell copies and made lots of money, but they ruined a powerful franchise, future sales of d4 is not a gonna be as big as it could've been. If d3 was successful it could've pushed franchise even further).
On-topic. I'm really sceptical about this new Moba from Blizzard. WoW was good because they perfected something that others couldn't/wouldn't do. I don't see how you can perfect Moba, therefore I see no reason people jumping onto new moba. For blizzard's trademark heroes? nah, no one is emotionally attached to them. Better server performace/latency? Every game has it now. LoL and Dota 2 basically cover everything player needs from moba. I don't see hots succeding anyhow.
|
On October 24 2013 16:46 Umpteen wrote:"WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)"The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false)
Ok you made me feel stupid. I fail to see how these are two different points.
Do you mean that its WoW's merit for being a good game thus having pulled all those subscribes from different games rather than it just being another MMORPG game that happened to be at the right place at the right time?
Please help the lesser gifted.
|
On October 24 2013 17:29 NukeD wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 16:46 Umpteen wrote:On October 24 2013 03:49 Arrinao wrote:
Has "history" changed it's mind yet? "WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)"The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false) Ok you made me feel stupid. I fail to see how these are two different points. Do you mean that its WoW's merit for being a good game thus having pulled all those subscribes from different games rather than it just being another MMORPG game that happened to be at the right place at the right time? Please help the lesser gifted.
The first one is:
Most people who subscribed to an mmo before wow came out switched to wow.
The second one is:
Most people who subscribed to wow had subscribed to another mmo before wow.
So the first one would mean that most mmos were dead after wow came out as all those people switched to wow, however it is only talking about those people, it does leave the option for people who never played an mmo and then started with wow.
The second one means that most people who play wow played another mmo before that, meaning that wow got very few people, if at all, into mmos.
|
On October 24 2013 17:29 NukeD wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 16:46 Umpteen wrote:On October 24 2013 03:49 Arrinao wrote:
Has "history" changed it's mind yet? "WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)"The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false) Ok you made me feel stupid. I fail to see how these are two different points.
WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPG's subscribers but the majoriy of Wow's subscibers are not those that got pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs, thus "The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" is false.
|
On October 24 2013 00:50 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship.
Now, instead of trying to play, game, win this debate, it is obvious that you are both right when you say WoW pulled away a lot of subscribers, but he is also right when talking about WoW playerbase was mostly composed of non MMORPGs veterans (CS,D2, WC3 for instance on the first months, if you played at release, you would know this), and later on, to people who never played online games before. The problem comes when you are trying to say that the financial success of WOW was because it pulled subscribers from other MMORPGs (which compared to wow numbers later on, was a niche market) instead of mainstreaming the genre.
|
On October 24 2013 18:05 NicksonReyes wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 17:29 NukeD wrote:On October 24 2013 16:46 Umpteen wrote:On October 24 2013 03:49 Arrinao wrote:
Has "history" changed it's mind yet? "WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)"The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false) Ok you made me feel stupid. I fail to see how these are two different points. WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPG's subscribers but the majoriy of Wow's subscibers are not those that got pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs, thus "The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" is false.
Ah yes, thank you. I somehow failed to interpret properly the "majority of WoW's subscribers" part of sentence.
|
On October 24 2013 18:11 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 00:50 Umpteen wrote:feel some kind of difference between mainstream EQ and mainstream WoW. Holy crap Wow even got it's own SouthPark themed episode. And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... History disagrees with you. In the first year of WoW's release, EQ numbers dropped by three fifths, and by a further fifth over the next few years. You can see the same shape to the graphs of Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online, and indeed to the graphs of almost all MMORPGs that pre-dated WoW. Also note that prior to WoW all these games were increasing their subscription numbers, pulling in new players, growing the scene. Then WoW came out, did the genre 'properly', and the overwhelming majority of subscribers jumped ship. Now, instead of trying to play, game, win this debate, it is obvious that you are both right when you say WoW pulled away a lot of subscribers, but he is also right when talking about WoW playerbase was mostly composed of non MMORPGs veterans (CS,D2, WC3 for instance on the first months, if you played at release, you would know this), and later on, to people who never played online games before. The problem comes when you are trying to say that the financial success of WOW was because it pulled subscribers from other MMORPGs (which compared to wow numbers later on, was a niche market) instead of mainstreaming the genre.
In the case of Heroes of the Storm, does it matter? Whether it captures the existing market or expands the market, or does both, it will still be a massive success.
|
In the case of Heroes of the Storm, does it matter? Whether it captures the existing market or expands the market, or does both, it will still be a massive success.
Agreed, the game would have to suck really hard in order to be a commercial failure for Blizzard. Hearthstone is proof that everything Blizzard touches turns to gold. Even D3, which is considered a pretty bad game, is a major success commercially.
|
On October 24 2013 16:46 Umpteen wrote:Nope. I did just win a private bet with myself though. Perhaps if we took this one step at a time: 1. People have been pointing to WoW as an example of a game that took an existing, popular genre, did it right, and dominated the market, causing the majority of existing subscribers to jump ship. 2. You disagree, and insist WoW merely took the genre mainstream. We should take a moment here to note that 1) doesn't make any statements about total WoW subscriptions, or where the bulk of those subscriptions came from. It merely states that WoW cannibalised a large proportion of the existing market. So, either: a) You didn't appreciate that where WoW obtained the bulk of its subscribers is irrelevant when assessing how it impacted existing titles in the genre. or b) You assumed based on anecdotal evidence that WoW's success was entirely down to market growth, and that it did not strip subscribers from other games in significant numbers. As the graphs I linked show, this was a factual error, and statement 1) stands. or c) You were employing strawman tactics to avoid admitting error. Whether or not this was the case earlier, you are certainly doing it now by trying to redefine the argument to be about where WoW got most of its numbers, rather than what WoW did to existing MMORPG subscribers. Just to be perfectly clear, the original claim made by others, challenged by you, and supported by the graph I posted was this: "WoW pulled in the majority of pre-existing MMORPGs' subscribers" (true)and you are now trying to pretend it was this: "The majority of WoW's subscribers were pulled from pre-existing MMORPGs" (false)The upshot is: even if there had been no bigger market for WoW to tap, it would still have trounced existing titles. Therefore, WoW is 'prior art' for the claim that a game can come along and revolutionise a popular genre. FYI, I just made another private bet with myself.
There is a misinterpretation in your post, which however might have been created by me though as I'm not a native English speaker 
1.) I don't really see myself with this sentence And that's because it reached far and wide outside of the MMO genre borders and grabbed people who never touched an MMO before, not because it stole all the audiences from other MMO's for god sake... ,
which was quoted by you in your original post, actually challenging or even outright denying the fact that WoW pulled in the majority of subscribers, but merely making it irrelevant. If I accidentaly did, I apologize. But it's really not that I disagree with that as you wrote. My point all the time was like this:
The success of WoW's scale was primarily caused by reaching out to casuals who formed the overwhelming majority of it's subscriptions. It may had pull in majority of subscribers of other MMO's, but that only played a minor role in it's success
Which the numbers, provided in my last post, prove to be correct.
And going way back to my original point: at least here in EU (actually I stand corrected here as in my previous posts I forgot to factor in the fact that the broadband mainstreamization probably happened much sooner in America, and America was always bigger gaming market), it coincided with the internet revolution so more non-MMO'ers could be involved.
So to sum it up: none of your three assumptions on my point are correct. The correct assumption would be D.) that I simply didn't care about it at all. It might have happened, but who gives a damn? WoW would be still be big for the reasons described above.
And jumping back to topic, success this way is no longer possible. There was the original MOBA scene, represented by DotA alone. Riot stepped in and expanded the bubble. Now Blizzard steps into this expanded bubble. Can it expands the bubble even more? Possibly. Can it expand it to be twice as big, luring ALL of the newcomers to itself (to be actually able to challenge LoL)? Nigh on impossible. But as the two guys above me said, that's probably not the point. For covering up for WoW subscription loss a perfectly feasible and sufficient is to just stand out of the crowd of other MOBA's. It will be a massive success anyway.
Btw.
Show nested quote +On October 24 2013 18:11 Godwrath wrote:
Now, instead of trying to play, game, win this debate, it is obvious that you are both right when you say WoW pulled away a lot of subscribers, but he is also right when talking about WoW playerbase was mostly composed of non MMORPGs veterans (CS,D2, WC3 for instance on the first months, if you played at release, you would know this), and later on, to people who never played online games before. The problem comes when you are trying to say that the financial success of WOW was because it pulled subscribers from other MMORPGs (which compared to wow numbers later on, was a niche market) instead of mainstreaming the genre.
Thanks for cheering me up. Finally someone with common sense.
|
Hype machine is on for Blizzcon, stop raging people, start getting hyped!
First hero revealed. Malfurion Stormrage.
Badass artwork from official facebook page of HotS.
![[image loading]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/q71/s720x720/1392100_155747554634757_1029890753_n.jpg)
|
I for one am really interested in what Blizzard will have to offer. They had some interesting ideas about mounts and other things on some panel videos I saw awhile ago. I loved DotA and Valve has done a great job recreating that. LoL is fun and Riot has brought some new ideas to the genre but there are a good amount of changes like summoner spells, that I don't enjoy. It will be nice to see Blizzard's take on things.
|
I can't get hyped I've never touched to any of blizzard's game single player mod
|
Dat Blizzard artist really knows his stuff.
|
Well I guess since we'll all be calling our sc2 either lotv or sc2 anyways in the near feature I guess it also being hots is somewhat ok. I just feel like it's super retarded branding to give to of your games the same shortform, though I guess I'll never even try to think of a non-blizzard game when hearing hots now.
I wasn't into rts before starcraft, not into card games before hearthstone, so I guess blizzard may also get me into moba. Though I don't know much lore from any game and other mobas usually tire me after a game.
|
On October 24 2013 20:42 Arrinao wrote:
My point all the time was like this:
The success of WoW's scale was primarily caused by reaching out to casuals who formed the overwhelming majority of it's subscriptions. It may had pull in majority of subscribers of other MMO's, but that only played a minor role in it's success
Which the numbers, provided in my last post, prove to be correct.
Ah, so it's a), then: you fail to appreciate that the number of new players WoW brought in is irrelevant to your argument. Allow me to explain:
And jumping back to topic, success this way is no longer possible. There was the original MOBA scene, represented by DotA alone. Riot stepped in and expanded the bubble. Now Blizzard steps into this expanded bubble. Can it expands the bubble even more? Possibly. Can it expand it to be twice as big, luring ALL of the newcomers to itself (to be actually able to challenge LoL)? Nigh on impossible.
Note the bolded text. Your implication is that Blizzard's game can only challenge LoL if it doubles the size of the scene.
Now, answer me this: If WoW had not grown the MMORPG scene, do the graphs I linked indicate that it would STILL have gained market dominance?
The answer is yes. Even if WoW had brought in zero new players, enough players moved over from other, pre-existing MMORPGs to have made WoW the dominant game.
One more time. Here is your line of reasoning:
1. While rising to dominance, WoW greatly expanded the MMORPG scene
2. Most of WoW's subscribers were new to the genre
3. It's unlikely that a new Blizzard game could greatly expand the MOBA scene
4. Therefore it's unlikely that a new Blizzard MOBA could become dominant
This line of reasoning is flawed because evidence indicates WoW would have become dominant even if it hadn't brought in new players.
Here is the correct line of reasoning:
1. While rising to dominance, WoW greatly expanded the MMORPG scene.
2. Although most WoW subscribers were new to the genre, it also stole the majority of existing MMORPG subscribers.
3. It's unlikely that a new Blizzard game could greatly expand the MOBA scene
4. However, a new Blizzard game could still become dominant if it steals the majority of existing MOBA players just like WoW did in the MMORPG genre.
Now do you understand? Yes, stealing the subscribers of other games WAS only a small part of WoW's total success, but it would still have been enough to make it dominant.
|
I think if this game is a huge sucess it will be the final demise of SC2.
|
On October 24 2013 22:28 NukeD wrote:
I think if this game is a huge sucess it will be the final demise of SC2.
I can only imagine the hell on earth we will be in when every damn esport game is a moba. Truly the day when I start laughing at esports being a sport along with all the old folks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
