Rift is one of the more commendable MMOs on the market but still takes a backseat to WoW for a reason. I actually agree that the sub model won't die as long as players deem a game good enough to play.Rift on the other hand is a great example of a sub game with a working model. They aren't anywhere as big as WoW but, with far less financial resources they put out tons of quality new content on a frequent basis, engage and communicate with their community, and actually make customers feel like their money is worth it.
Even if wow was to die(which it won't), the subscription model will survive as long as companies provide value to the customer for their sub fee.(and that is value as the customer sees it, not as the company sees it)
Last edited by Letmesleep; 2012-10-05 at 02:43 AM.
There are a number of reasons people stick with WoW that has nothing to do with it being the better game, time invested is one of them which is as strong as addiction simply due to the feeling of loss if you where to quit and leave it behind.
Found it : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
---------- Post added 2012-10-04 at 11:22 PM ----------
I think it's fair SW is a failure when fan boys went on for months saying it's a wow killer. The jokes on them
SWTOR to me is the most fun MMO and I will continue to subscribe to it.
Also, WoW has had a lot more time to grow their player base and create customer loyalty that new games starting with a subscription model simply cannot match. If you were to compare Rift in their first year to WoW in their first year, the numbers would favor Rift. But even that isn't an apples to apples comparison because the size of the MMO market has grown immensely since then, much of that is because of WoW.
as someone who thought the Kotor multiplayer would be awesome, I really enjoyed swtor - honestly the questing is miles a head of anything - the sith inq story is fantastic, you get a real sense of connection with your toon - the end game is weaker but its not shit - the raids are fun, some are challenging, Its just the usually wow fanatics that ruined the game, developers cant make anything vaguely like an mmo or the wow nut jobs come out and try to destroy it, they cant fathom playing more than one game - sad really
It was a failure in the sense of what the vocal playerbase wanted it to be, especially on these forums. They wanted it to destroy World of Warcraft. It hardly made a dent in the thick elementium plating of it.
Next on the list of playerbase failures : Guild Wars 2.
Bacon is the thing pigs give you when you're good.
The GPU was utterly starved since SWTOR was so CPU intensive. My two cores were at constantly 95%+ and could not keep up. I could play single-player content, sure. But I am a big PvP player, and the moment I tried to play a Warzone (or god forbid Ilum), it was painful. My GPU usage would drop to below 30% while my poor little E7500 hacked and wheezed due to the greater player density.
I really enjoyed the game, but I could not justify paying $15/month for a game I could only enjoy single-player content. And as a college student struggling to pay rent, I was in no position to build myself a new computer. Food took priority.
Fast forward roughly 9 months; I've graduated college, I saved enough to build myself a new gaming machine with an i5-3570K that I overclocked. Low and behold, the game runs super-smooth, and GPU usage is at a constant 99%.
Regardless of if BioWare optimized the game since I played it; what was a fact of life when the game was released: any machine that did not have a solid i5/i7 CPU inside was going to face significant bottleneck issues in player dense areas. Many felt marginalized in terms of content, being relegated to the playing single-player quest content, which was not enough for many to justify $15/month.
Waste not, want not.
I was 1 of those with a many 1000's of forum posts, living the hype from day 1 (And by that, I mean the 1st rumors from 2005!!)
CE Ordered 4 mins after pre-orders were available (Dam ordering system failure, or it would have been less =P)
Played TOR for 5-6 months, getting multiple characters to 50
Raided, PvP'd, Crafted, Quested, Loved the Story
Malgus now stills lonely in front of me
Sub cancelled a long time ago due to, nothing of real substance to the game. Yes it's fun, while your leveling, and yes can be fun if you've got a few friends to do stuff with at 50, but without a real "hamster wheel" hook, I just felt a bit bored.
So, yeah, I'd say TOR is a failure (From my perspective) Did it make EA "some" money? Probably. Did it make what they wanted? Not a chance. Is it a good game for a month or 2 of play? Dam straight it is! Is it a sustainable MMO.......now there's the $200 million question =)
Bioware shows you teasers of whats in their game. They can't let your experience it. You know what, lets try to compare it to something else.
You have 2 sorts of amusement parks, or for the sake of the argument, lets assume their are.
- The one where you pay an access fee at the entrance and have unlimited access to all rides as many times as you want.
- The one where you can get inside for free and have to pay every time you decide to take a ride.
The second amusement park is probably more interesting for the parents who are their to supervise their kids but in the end they'll have to start denieing their kids access to certain rides because it is becomming to costly!
While the first one has a hard time to decide wich ride he should take now probably, he payed the entrance fee and knows their come no extra cost asside from the "food vendor".
I like to use the comparison above when we are talking about a sub/f2p(cash shop) model, it speaks for itself. "You decide what you want to pay for", that is truelly a statement I can respect but you abuse it at the same time. TOR doesn't have that sort of f2p model. You'll be able to unlock vanity with it, not content. Subbed players still get priority on content.
" Is it fair to consider SW:TOR a failure? "
/thread 10 chars