Is Legion the best MMO on the market?

[Luckx]

Its not most profitable MMO on the market. But simply one of many most profitable ones.

And nor MMOS nor Mobas arent most profitable stuff on video gaming market, most profitable video games are video games franchises they are not much different from each other than expansion packs to MMO.

List of best-selling video game franchises:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ame_franchises

[MoanaLisa]

People really need to stop using profits as a measure of fun or enjoyment they have with the game.

Perhaps. The fact remains that the game is still enormously popular while still requiring a real-money monthly payment (for most players). That speaks to something when there are a lot of free alternatives out there.

But you're right: fun/enjoyment is a subjective thing. Profits/revenue might not be the best indicator but it has meaning nonetheless.

[xanzul]

Just asking if Legion is the best MMO on the market currently?

In other words, is there another MMO more successful than Legion?

It is mind boggling that the mods let you shitpost like this near 24/7.

[Luko]

Perhaps. The fact remains that the game is still enormously popular while still requiring a real-money monthly payment (for most players). That speaks to something when there are a lot of free alternatives out there.

But you're right: fun/enjoyment is a subjective thing. Profits/revenue might not be the best indicator but it has meaning nonetheless.

Final Fantasy XIV does this without the generic push of being World of Warcraft, which we all know is considered a death sentence in the eyes of most wow players. It doesn't have the sheer numbers or income of WoW, but it's highly successful. Super impressed with how well it's held its own over the years. Stormblood has been an amazing expansion so far as well.

[Queen of Hamsters]

For me personally; Yes.
From a market standpoint; I guess so? At least for sub-based MMORPG's?
For everyone for a fact; Of course not.

Politically correct is my name!

That being said, I know people whom never enjoyed MMORPGs, that are loving the hell out of FFXIV. I couldn't get into it though. I want my alts, my many different races and classes and transmogs and so on.

[SirCowdog]

Perhaps. The fact remains that the game is still enormously popular while still requiring a real-money monthly payment (for most players). That speaks to something when there are a lot of free alternatives out there.

But you're right: fun/enjoyment is a subjective thing. Profits/revenue might not be the best indicator but it has meaning nonetheless.

I mostly agree. I just get tired of people attempting to counter a criticism of some part of the game with the non-sequitur of "WoW is making more money than ever!".

EXAMPLE: "Why isn't class balance better?" Response: "Shut up! WoW is making more money than ever! Blizzard must know what they're doing!"

It's as though people think that the game making more profit somehow justifies every decision Blizzard makes. And it really REALLY doesn't. As I mentioned before, many mobile-phone games make GOBS of profit, but do so through predatory, anti-consumer business models, without even having the benefit of being good games in the first place.

Blizzard stopped reporting subs because it wasn't a good measure of how well the game is doing. IMHO, subs were a better measure for players than raw profits. I recognize that profits are generally all we have to go on these days, but those reports are being used more wrongly than sub numbers ever were.

[Seramore]

Why are you getting into semantics? Of course Legion is an expansion. I thought it was obvious when I say Legion, that means WoW Legion.

OT:. I can't see any other MMO coming close to Legion in terms of popularity, quality, and revenue.

He's getting into semantics because the question doesn't make sense when you say "Is Legion the best MMO on the market?"

WoW has consistently been the best MMO on the market since 2004. The only real competitor is FF14 which is great, but I doubt it's getting as much money as WoW.

[G3istly]

In terms of enjoyment I'd highly rate FF14. Log in nearly every day and always have something to do. Plus I like the whole being able to be everything on one character, the story, raids, music and other stuff.

ESO well it's good for what it is but could never grasp my attention personally. Although I do go back now and again because friends play it on PS4 and I do enjoy playing pretty much any game with my friends.

Final Fantasy XIV definitely does a lot of things better than World of Warcraft, there's no denying that, but it also does a lot of things wrong and if it weren't for the names, I'd not think it to be a Final Fantasy game at all.

Elder Scrolls Online, on the other hand, has no redeemable qualities. I gave it an honest try and it actually managed to disappoint me more than Skyrim and that's saying a lot.

[Eleccybubb]

Final Fantasy XIV definitely does a lot of things better than World of Warcraft, there's no denying that, but it also does a lot of things wrong and if it weren't for the names, I'd not think it to be a Final Fantasy game at all.

Elder Scrolls Online, on the other hand, has no redeemable qualities. I gave it an honest try and it actually managed to disappoint me more than Skyrim and that's saying a lot.

100% agreed. No game is perfect. To expect perfection from any game is silly at best imo.

There is the odd 10/10 game for me but it's very rare I award it. I think in total 13 games if I recall that I would give a solid 10/10.

[deadman1]

No, World of WarCraft is the MMO. Legion is an expansion to said MMO. But the game itself is still World of WarCraft. You cannot play Legion without WoW, but you can play WoW without Legion.

I'd argue that you cannot currently play WoW without legion. The mechanics pvp, talents etc are all in place regardless of if you own the expansion or not.

[Deleted]

World of Warcraft: Legion is the current iteration of the game. Even if you don't buy the expansion which grants access to the Legion content, you are still playing Legion.

No, you are not - if you DONT buy LEGION you are playing wod....

[Jtbrig7390]

No, you are not - if you DONT buy LEGION you are playing wod....

You are factually wrong about this.

7.0-.7.3 is Legion......Doesn't matter if u buy the box or not. You still are playing Legion, Even the log in screen tells you so.

Ontopic: No, IMO Runescape and FFXIV are far better MMO's.

As for $$$$ then yes WoW is likely top dog in that.

[Eleccybubb]

No, you are not - if you DONT buy LEGION you are playing wod....

Kind of. Any systems changes that take place usually take place with the pre expansion patch. We got the talent revamp in 5.0 before MoP went live for example.

So you are playing WoD but with any changes to classes, talents, racials, abilities and whatnot coming from Legion systems.

- - - Updated - - -

You are factually wrong about this.

7.0-.7.3 is Legion......Doesn't matter if u buy the box or not. You still are playing Legion, Even the log in screen tells you so.

As I just said I'd call it WoD with Legion systems. The patch would be a Legion patch not debating that but if you are stuck at 100 you would still be stuck in WoD content such as areas, raids, the garrison, dungeons and whatnot.

[Jtbrig7390]

As I just said I'd call it WoD with Legion systems. The patch would be a Legion patch not debating that but if you are stuck at 100 you would still be stuck in WoD content such as areas, raids, the garrison, dungeons and whatnot.

The game is still called World Of Warcraft: Legion. Doesn't matter if u are level 100 stuck in WOD content. Its still World of Warcraft Legion, You are playing Legion.

You could just own the base game and you are still playing Legion.

[Eleccybubb]

The game is still called World Of Warcraft: Legion. Doesn't matter if u are level 100 stuck in WOD content. Its still World of Warcraft Legion, You are playing Legion.

You could just own the base game and you are still playing Legion.

Meh I think it's a bit of both.

The current expansion is Legion I wasn't denying that. As I said any systems changes such as classes and abilities are Legion end. But 1-60 is still Vanilla kind of.

I'd say you are playing Vanilla on a Legion patch but you haven't bought access to the expansion itself is the best way of putting it.

You aren't wrong btw. Current game is Legion just giving my 2 cents of what I believe it is. Which I think it's a bit of both depending on how much of the game you own.

[MoanaLisa]

EXAMPLE: "Why isn't class balance better?" Response: "Shut up! WoW is making more money than ever! Blizzard must know what they're doing!"

Well, no one has ever accused a game forum of being an island of cultured conversation and logical thought. Expecting everyone to have smart and logical replies is just going to lead to endless disappointment.

My theory on Blizzard and subs reporting is a bit more complicated than most but breaks down to this:

1. Tokens degraded the importance of subs as revenue. Still measurable but the revenue side for tokens is in selling gold.
2. Most people play for a while and then leave. And that's OK. With an old game that's understandable and is perfectly natural for an older game.
3. Lots of choices for games leads to players playing more games. Most now return to see new stuff and then move on. They've quit before but clearly they come back again and again when expansions drop...
4. ...leading to box sales being a more important revenue driver than before.
5. Blizzard makes it easy to come-and-go with catch-up mechanisms and making it very easy to both leave and come back. They don't mind if you take a few months off. They know and understand it happens and have factored it into their forecasts.
6. The company no longer relies on WoW to be their major revenue driver. It's still important but much less important than it was years ago.

The upshot is that Blizzard's overall revenue no longer depends solely on how well WoW is doing and in truth, the finance types in Irvine probably care less about subscriptions than people who hang out on forums. Activision as a whole has consolidated most measurement for success in a title across their product line as something measurable for all titles, subscription or otherwise: MAU. Activision/Blizzard is now up to nearly 400 million monthly active users across all their titles. That's a measurement that says something to ATVI stockholders that's a lot more useful than whatever the MAU number is for WoW alone which one can imagine is relatively a very small percentage.

Taken together, the obviously cyclic nature of how their subscription model works doesn't lend itself to anything except pointless criticism about the perfectly normal idea that there are still a lot of people who like to drop in on the game now and then, especially when an expansion drops, but will move on after a while. Blizzard thinks that's OK given the game's age. I think it's OK too and think that people that operate from the idea that the game is failing because people aren't subscribed for twelve months a year sound ridiculous when they write something that starts with that assumption. Expansions are nice but the game is what it is and no amount of fiddling around with classes has made this into some entirely new game. It's an old game, an expensive game and has been for a long time now.

Blizzard continues to look for a formula that will hold player's interest longer but it's hard to design a game 18 months to two years in advance. Markets change and what looks like a good idea today may look like an effing terrible idea by late 2018 or 2019. That's another reason why MAU measurement is more informative for them. It tells them how well the players who are there are engaging with the game and very likely what they're spending their time doing. That's going to likely lead to a better design framework than plugging for subscriptions. Blizzard is perfectly aware down to the nth degree what percentage of player stays all the time, how many stay for one month, how many for three, etc. They budget accordingly and the game is still a daily free trip to the bank for them.

It's a one-of-a-kind success story, whether you love or hate the game, and will remain so for a very long time mostly on the back of the people who play a few months a year and buy all the expansions. There's no reason whatsoever to publish metrics that mislead people into thinking the game is failing when it's more successful than any other game in its class or genre and when it's such a small percentage of the overall corporate measurement.

/rant

[DesoPL]

Why this Activision fan boy is still there?

Anyway... Legion best MMO in market? I didin't know, that Legion is seperate game, not an expac to allready existed MMO, thanks for fixing my error! But to be serious, hope MMO's will soon die because all they do, is trying copy paste from WoW, and most of them are failure. Look what happend to Age of Conan etc.

The point is... The more MMO's appear, the more i feel disgusted by that. The only MMO i truely enjoyed was Firefall, but due to mistakes of devs with making deal with Chinese corporation The9, game is dead right now. The9 can be easily Asian Activision though.

[SirCowdog]

@Jaylock BTW, this is why I post. Sometimes countering obviously weak garbage sometimes sparks interesting discussions. Thanks for that, in a backhanded kind of way.

Well, no one has ever accused a game forum of being an island of cultured conversation and logical thought. Expecting everyone to have smart and logical replies is just going to lead to endless disappointment.

Fishing is all about patience, I guess. Every once in awhile you do get a good argument out of the deal, even if it's not one of agreement. My time in the flying debate has taught me that, at least.

My theory on Blizzard and subs reporting is a bit more complicated than most but breaks down to this:

1. Tokens degraded the importance of subs as revenue. Still measurable but the revenue side for tokens is in selling gold.
2. Most people play for a while and then leave. And that's OK. With an old game that's understandable and is perfectly natural for an older game.
3. Lots of choices for games leads to players playing more games. Most now return to see new stuff and then move on. They've quit before but clearly they come back again and again when expansions drop...
4. ...leading to box sales being a more important revenue driver than before.
5. Blizzard makes it easy to come-and-go with catch-up mechanisms and making it very easy to both leave and come back. They don't mind if you take a few months off. They know and understand it happens and have factored it into their forecasts.
6. The company no longer relies on WoW to be their major revenue driver. It's still important but much less important than it was years ago.

The upshot is that Blizzard's overall revenue no longer depends solely on how well WoW is doing and in truth, the finance types in Irvine probably care less about subscriptions than people who hang out on forums. Activision as a whole has consolidated most measurement for success in a title across their product line as something measurable for all titles, subscription or otherwise: MAU. Activision/Blizzard is now up to nearly 400 million monthly active users across all their titles. That's a measurement that says something to ATVI stockholders that's a lot more useful than whatever the MAU number is for WoW alone which one can imagine is relatively a very small percentage.

Taken together, the obviously cyclic nature of how their subscription model works doesn't lend itself to anything except pointless criticism about the perfectly normal idea that there are still a lot of people who like to drop in on the game now and then, especially when an expansion drops, but will move on after a while. Blizzard thinks that's OK given the game's age. I think it's OK too and think that people that operate from the idea that the game is failing because people aren't subscribed for twelve months a year sound ridiculous when they write something that starts with that assumption. Expansions are nice but the game is what it is and no amount of fiddling around with classes has made this into some entirely new game. It's an old game, an expensive game and has been for a long time now.

Blizzard continues to look for a formula that will hold player's interest longer but it's hard to design a game 18 months to two years in advance. Markets change and what looks like a good idea today may look like an effing terrible idea by late 2018 or 2019. That's another reason why MAU measurement is more informative for them. It tells them how well the players who are there are engaging with the game and very likely what they're spending their time doing. That's going to likely lead to a better design framework than plugging for subscriptions. Blizzard is perfectly aware down to the nth degree what percentage of player stays all the time, how many stay for one month, how many for three, etc. They budget accordingly and the game is still a daily free trip to the bank for them.

It's a one-of-a-kind success story, whether you love or hate the game, and will remain so for a very long time mostly on the back of the people who play a few months a year and buy all the expansions. There's no reason whatsoever to publish metrics that mislead people into thinking the game is failing when it's more successful than any other game in its class or genre and when it's such a small percentage of the overall corporate measurement.

/rant

I actually tend to agree with most of that. But keep in mind that I've already said that knowing the number of subs is more valuable to players as a tool for gauging the value of an MMORPG than profits. I completely understand why Blizzard would want people to use MAUs and profit numbers instead of subs, because it makes them look better as a business. But for players it's not particularly useful, leaving us, as a community, to come up with all kinds of weird metrics to determine how well we think WoW is doing.

Mostly it's just that I am a proponent of more consumer-friendly business practices. In my obviously biased opinion, players should have better access to the information they need to make decisions about a product. I'd like it if Videogame companies were a little more transparent, and a little less shady. So when Blizzard does something like ceasing to report subs for WoW, but then a few months later emphasizes the number of active uses in their new product(Overwatch) as a major point of its success, it leaves me with a bad taste. It comes off as blatantly hypocritical.

And mostly I think that sort of behavior out of a company as popular and successful as Blizzard is unnecessary. The quality of their games generally speak for themselves. As a leader in the game development industry, they set an example. It would be nice if they had a little more confidence in that, and were willing to be a little more honest.

Anyway....that's sort of a ramble. I'm glad acti-blizz is making truckloads of money. It means we're more likely to continue seeing their games. I just wish players would stop using those truckloads as justification for everything. Determine if a part of the game is good based on its actual merits, not how much stock is up in the previous quarter.

[Onikaroshi]

Why this Activision fan boy is still there?

Anyway... Legion best MMO in market? I didin't know, that Legion is seperate game, not an expac to allready existed MMO, thanks for fixing my error! But to be serious, hope MMO's will soon die because all they do, is trying copy paste from WoW, and most of them are failure. Look what happend to Age of Conan etc.

The point is... The more MMO's appear, the more i feel disgusted by that. The only MMO i truely enjoyed was Firefall, but due to mistakes of devs with making deal with Chinese corporation The9, game is dead right now. The9 can be easily Asian Activision though.

"All I want is games to die that other people enjoy because I don't enjoy them." That's pretty one sided, I hate LoL and mobas in general, but I would never want them to die.

[Servasus]

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning.

World of Warcraft: Legion is the current iteration of the game. Even if you don't buy the expansion which grants access to the Legion content, you are still playing Legion.

The difference isn't even semantics. They're the same thing.

Um what? If you don't purchase Legion you have zero access to most if not all of the Legion content, so no, that's not correct even in the slightest.

Legion =/= An MMO. It is an expansion to World of Warcraft, which as an entire game, yes, in an MMO. Semantics or not, saying that you are still playing Legion while not buying the Legion expansion pack is just flat out not true.