Comments on: Sequels for MMORPGs = Death

By: bob

bob — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:53:27 +0000

too bad eve online is a shitty game before and after the update

By: MasterCynic

MasterCynic — Thu, 08 May 2008 08:38:31 +0000

I’m with Terqelton on this one.

The source says: “Almost all of the data I use comes from actual sources, although often those sources are insiders who only give the information on the condition of anonymity. ”

Without naming the sources it amounts to the same thing as saying you’ve found a solution to a paradox in mathematics without ever submitting your equations for verification to other scientists. Even though I’m willing to give that guy the benefit of doubt, the fact is without indicating your source your numbers have little value as proof.

By: maui

maui — Wed, 07 May 2008 10:19:42 +0000

all that those graphs show is that when WoW came out, every mmo took a huge dip.

imho

By: Terqelton

Terqelton — Thu, 01 May 2008 21:02:33 +0000

I don’t know where the numbers for that website came from, but I am suspicious of them. Anyone that won’t cite sources is immediately suspect, imho.

I also know that various companies count subscriptions differently. I suspect that these graphs are meaningless.

By: Kanthalos

Kanthalos — Thu, 01 May 2008 20:19:38 +0000

I don’t buy it for one minute that a sequel can’t be successful. I’ll taking two of your examples, Asheron’s Call 2 and EverQuest 2. Both of those games were basically garbage when they were first released, which skews the data from the get-go. No one can predict or guess as to how popular they would or could have been had they been quality products when they were first released.

As for the bit about the same game with updated graphics? Look at the combat differences alone in those two games, and you’ll realize that there are FAR more changes than just the graphics.

As for the games being on their way out? If that were true, Asheron’s Call and EverQuest would not be running right now, but they both are.

I can’t speak for EverQuest2, but the biggest problem (in my opinion) was not that it was too similar to AC, but that it was too DIFFERENT (not to mention incredibly buggy.) Very few players (that I knew) switched to AC2, but it had nothing to do with starting over. It had to do with the quality of the product (or lack thereof.)

I think your topic is generally an interesting one, but I think you went at it from the wrong perspective. Because you’re dealing with games that were poorly executed upon release (at least AC2 and EQ2) and everyone knows that release is everything with an MMO. Once we get a quality product that is a sequel, we will have much more relevant data to work with. Until then, it’s all speculation. I think this would have been a much more interesting read if it would have focused on the potential for a successful sequel more than the failings of previous ones.

As for Lineage 2, it’s difficult to say because it’s geared more toward the asian market, so we can’t know exactly how they percieved it.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:28:13 +0000

@Openedge1
Well, also Guild Wars in general is a completely different situation. The game isn’t like EQ2 or WoW in that you have spent literally days just reaching the highest levels. Nor do you have to subscribe to the game. I think with Guold Wars 2 we will probably see a trend similar to that of Diablo > Diablo 2, as opposed to Everquest > Everquest 2… Just an observation anyways.

By: Openedge1

Openedge1 — Thu, 01 May 2008 16:46:55 +0000

This will be interesting to watch when Guild Wars 2 comes out…because they will get to take “some” stuff with them…but, not their levels or their characters…

i.e: They start over..but, with notoriety? something along that line

Also…VOIG’s data is sometimes suspect, as they seemed to follow trends…for example LOTRO and their 4 million characters debacle turned into 800k scrips on VOIG’s site…which was later proven incorrect…
Maybe check mmogchart.com

Thanks

By: Graktar

Graktar — Thu, 01 May 2008 16:20:35 +0000

Just one little nitpicky correction – Dark Age of Camelot has completely revamped their game several times through the use of expansions through the use of new graphics engines, etc., in order to keep the game current and avoid making sequels. EVE is not the first to do this, and as Dark Age of Camelot can attest, it’s no more viable in the long run than making a sequel. All MMOs enter convalescence eventually, and EVE will be no different, sequels or not.

By: Crazykinux

Crazykinux — Thu, 01 May 2008 13:22:52 +0000

Correct me if I’m wrong Mike, but I think that the point you’re trying to convey, and the numbers tend to show that, is that the introduction of a sequel not only doesn’t help an MMO, but tends to push it towards a slow death.

Yes, EQ2 still has subscribers, and all (except AC2) have revenue coming in (though we don’t know if they’re actually making money), but ALL are in decline. None of them are growing their client base.

Usually, that is not a good sign in business.

If you’re a public company, with share holders, you’re usually in deep trouble if, quarter after quarter, your numbers are down, your revenues are down, and you’re not showing growth.

So I tend to agree with Mike. An MMO#2 is generally a very bad idea. Better to stick to the current game and improve upon it. As said, CCP did just that, and have been doing it since the Castor expansion. Look at their numbers. Now that’s success!

CK
CrazyKinux’s Musing

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 01 May 2008 06:52:03 +0000

Charts are from http://mmogdata.voig.com