In that case than the same goes for ESO .It might have a higher population than SWTOR but not making the money SWTOR does.
Lol ESO has multiple times more players than SWTOR and likely making wayyy more money than SWTOR. We're talking about the biggest MMO in the West.
Why it's not included in this report is because SuperData is very biased towards Activision Blizzard. They are only giving info that they want to give.
In that case than the same goes for ESO .It might have a higher population than SWTOR but not making the money SWTOR does.
Lol ESO has multiple times more players than SWTOR and likely making wayyy more money than SWTOR. We're talking about the biggest MMO in the West.
Why it's not included in this report is because SuperData is very biased towards Activision Blizzard. They are only giving info that they want to give.
Can you link the numbers please and source of your numbers.
Superdata say on their site that they rely on companies providing data to them, this is not data that is freely available. From what someone earlier posted, they only receive data from 50-odd gaming companies covering 500-odd games.
I would expect that Bethesda / Zenimax simply hasn't provided superdata with data about ESO and so it isn't on the list.
As for how it has actually done, we might be able to get some data on that (retail sales?). I know ESO didn't do that well on PC but I remember seeing retail figures of 3-5million box sales on consoles within a few months of console launch. Considering SW:TOR peaked at launch with 2million box sales, on the surface ESO is a much more successful game. However, the different monetisation strategies might mean that SW:TOR does make more money than ESO.
Also, whilst I agree with most people here that Superdata is crap at categorising and explaining themselves (which makes comparisons pretty much worthless), at least they give us some data! Its more than the games companies themselves give us.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
If I played wow i would have to pay within few hours (a trial), in swtor I could play for free a few hundred hours (f2p) and for tera and B&S its mostly just quality of life reasons that makes you pay for a sub (f2p)
Superdata's chart is not about time played as f2p or p2p. It is about revenue.
I can't comment on Blade and Soul because i have no personal experience with the game but i can tell you that a great deal of people playing TOR and Tera are subscribers. Hence they pay, hence the revenue shown in the chart. In TOR's case this is more apparent since you have to become a subscriber in order to play the expansion.
It's not about revenue. They can't tell the difference between F2P and P2P.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
If I played wow i would have to pay within few hours (a trial), in swtor I could play for free a few hundred hours (f2p) and for tera and B&S its mostly just quality of life reasons that makes you pay for a sub (f2p)
Superdata's chart is not about time played as f2p or p2p. It is about revenue.
I can't comment on Blade and Soul because i have no personal experience with the game but i can tell you that a great deal of people playing TOR and Tera are subscribers. Hence they pay, hence the revenue shown in the chart. In TOR's case this is more apparent since you have to become a subscriber in order to play the expansion.
It's not about revenue. They can't tell the difference between F2P and P2P.
They're just using an outdated method. They're counting any game with a subscription as P2P which would have been a decent way to tell what games were P2P in like 2010, but with the rise of AAA games going F2P virtually all of them have some form of optional subscription.
In that case than the same goes for ESO .It might have a higher population than SWTOR but not making the money SWTOR does.
Lol ESO has multiple times more players than SWTOR and likely making wayyy more money than SWTOR. We're talking about the biggest MMO in the West.
Why it's not included in this report is because SuperData is very biased towards Activision Blizzard. They are only giving info that they want to give.
Can you link the numbers please and source of your numbers.
Don't bother.
After all this is MMORPG where ones wishful thinking is the truth.
In that case than the same goes for ESO .It might have a higher population than SWTOR but not making the money SWTOR does.
Lol ESO has multiple times more players than SWTOR and likely making wayyy more money than SWTOR. We're talking about the biggest MMO in the West.
Why it's not included in this report is because SuperData is very biased towards Activision Blizzard. They are only giving info that they want to give.
Can you link the numbers please and source of your numbers.
Don't bother.
After all this is MMORPG where ones wishful thinking is the truth.
I think it's an intriguing question. Where exactly does someone who's numbers seem to have no basis in reality get those numbers from?
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
The problem with Superdata is there is ZERO consistency to their reporting. As I said before, This chart has SWTOR under P2P. Another chart looking to present F2P games in a good light will have it listed under F2P. For SD, any game with a login screen is classified as an MMO. So they can move any game under any category for any situation under any circumstance that allows them to present what ever particular point they want for that time, even if it contradicts a previous report.
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
If they call LOTR history when it's clearly fiction does any data even matter if you can't get the basic category correct?
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Listing Hearthstone a 1v1 game as a MMO along with MOBA's, which become MMOs if you add a M at the start, MMOBA...
Now your going to call optional subscriptions P2P? So people can't play Tera, Swtor and Blade n' Soul for free, without paying a subscription, oh wait they can.
Once again Superdata is a super joke.
Surprised the OP isn't Nari...
Yes, their categorization sucks, but isn't it a little extreme to call their entire company a "super joke" on that basis alone? I mean you're ignoring the fact that they post some rather useful hard data on gaming, which is often hard to come by.
They don't know wtf a MMO is. Kinda makes any guess work data they have pretty useless.
MOBA's are not MMOs, 5v5 is just multiplayer.
Just putting this out there. Massively Multiplayer Online. MOBAs are massively multiplayer, it's just that those massively multiplayer populations don't play with each other most of the time but they are playing the same game online at the same time.
Except the MMORPG genre's major tenet is sharing the same virtual space with a massive number of players, otherwise it's just a lobby game like an RTS or FPS game.
I don't actually believe this having started my MMORPG days with Everquest but do for the sake of argument : Do MMORPGs themselves the ones recognized as MMOs share the same virtual space with phasing,instances and the ability to port from just anywhere into a dungeon or server shards where when the population gets higher than a 100 in a zone people are shunted to another instance of the same zone like they did in City of Villains/Heroes,EQ2 and SWTOR. Or the ability to play in some space in between like the one that GW2 created to handle the initial explosion of players.
Right now some lobby games have more people waiting in the lobby than some MMORPGs do . Some like WoW make several servers share the same levelling space because they don't have enough people to play together in an area. I think the lines are blurring and the definition does not even apply to MMORPGs that used to embody the definition that was common.
Look at it historically. What other genre had thousands of players in the same zone/space/area? The maximum number was probably 64, especially in FPS games. This is why the genre has Massively in it's acronym.
Zones, phasing, and instancing are part of the larger whole. They don't define the whole game. These limitations are in place for technical difficulties and stability, but overall, there's still hundreds of people going in and out of these "zones" continuously without having to change the map. Take RTS and FPS games for example. You're limited to one map, and depending on the game, it's 32 v 32, 8 v 8, or 1 v 1, then the map changes once the match is over. It's not persistent (which is another tenet of MMORPGS).
GW1 and Skyforge are blurring the lines, but i still consider them lobby games. There is no open-world in these games, only lobby rooms which are closed off from the rest of the world.
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
If they call LOTR history when it's clearly fiction does any data even matter if you can't get the basic category correct?
If i categorize LOTR as history instead of fiction then in which way would this affect it's revenue numbers (assuming you're referring to the movies) ? Would these numbers just disappear and the million of people who watched the films vanish into a parallel universe ?
You're the epitome of how one looses sight of the forest for the trees.
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
If they call LOTR history when it's clearly fiction does any data even matter if you can't get the basic category correct?
If i categorize LOTR as history instead of fiction then in which way would this affect it's revenue numbers (assuming you're referring to the movies) ? Would these numbers just disappear and the million of people who watched the films vanish into a parallel universe ?
You're the epitome of how one looses sight of the forest for the trees.
Excellent post. And this is more like lumping together science and fantasy fiction into a broader category mmorpg -> mmo rather than redefining the narrow category. Some people get so hung upon semantics that they miss the entire point altogether.
The point is revenue, not categories. The categories are written with industry professionals in mind, not niche demographics within the consumer market.
Does is matter if you lump together science fiction and fantasy? The answer is both yes and no. If your business model is to provide good comparison between the revenues for the two genres you would assume that they get their categories right. If all you want to do is make lists it doesn't matter at all.
The blog page that superdata research run is about as relevant as buzzfeed, both are clickbait.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Because they lose all credibility when they can't even get the basics right. If I went to a library to find a copy of LOTR and found out it was in the erotica section I'd leave.
Because being in the wrong section definitely changes the book's content, right? Gosh, what a bastion of rational thought and logic this place is -- even their own analogies prove them wrong.
If they call LOTR history when it's clearly fiction does any data even matter if you can't get the basic category correct?
If i categorize LOTR as history instead of fiction then in which way would this affect it's revenue numbers (assuming you're referring to the movies) ? Would these numbers just disappear and the million of people who watched the films vanish into a parallel universe ?
You're the epitome of how one looses sight of the forest for the trees.
Excellent post. And this is more like lumping together science and fantasy fiction into a broader category mmorpg -> mmo rather than redefining the narrow category. Some people get so hung upon semantics that they miss the entire point altogether.
The point is revenue, not categories. The categories are written with industry professionals in mind, not niche demographics within the consumer market.
Does is matter if you lump together science fiction and fantasy? The answer is both yes and no. If your business model is to provide good comparison between the revenues for the two genres you would assume that they get their categories right. If all you want to do is make lists it doesn't matter at all.
The blog page that superdata research run is about as relevant as buzzfeed, both are clickbait.
It depends on several factors. If you're making decisions about novel or serial novel fiction compared to episodic periodicals then it might not matter.
We're also assuming in this conversation that this is the entirety of the data. This is the entirety of the data available to the public for free. Typically this sort of market research has a very detailed analysis and breakdown for the expensive paid version.
Dismissing this as clickbait is shortsighted at best. They don't their money on advert clicks. They make their money by selling reports to industry professionals. It's an advertisement for the full product report.
I refer it as clickbait because gaming sites use it for article headlines all the time, catchy headline, a list, lots of clicks.
If we go by superdata categories the king of MMO is LoL
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
In the Venn diagram of massively multiplayer online games LoL is king. That's a hard pill for some of us mmorpg fans to swallow. Our circle is little, but proud dammit! :chuffed:
The harder pill for people to swallow is that WoW still has a huge player base. Sure, its nowhere near what it once was but its still the king and not in danger of losing its throne any time soon.
In the Venn diagram of massively multiplayer online games LoL is king. That's a hard pill for some of us mmorpg fans to swallow. Our circle is little, but proud dammit! :chuffed:
The harder pill for people to swallow is that WoW still has a huge player base. Sure, its nowhere near what it once was but its still the king and not in danger of losing its throne any time soon.
I bet OW will surpass WoW in number of players ... wait .. didn't it already with 7M+ sold?
Comments
Why it's not included in this report is because SuperData is very biased towards Activision Blizzard. They are only giving info that they want to give.
I would expect that Bethesda / Zenimax simply hasn't provided superdata with data about ESO and so it isn't on the list.
As for how it has actually done, we might be able to get some data on that (retail sales?). I know ESO didn't do that well on PC but I remember seeing retail figures of 3-5million box sales on consoles within a few months of console launch. Considering SW:TOR peaked at launch with 2million box sales, on the surface ESO is a much more successful game. However, the different monetisation strategies might mean that SW:TOR does make more money than ESO.
Also, whilst I agree with most people here that Superdata is crap at categorising and explaining themselves (which makes comparisons pretty much worthless), at least they give us some data! Its more than the games companies themselves give us.
Nothing else is even holding a candle to it though, especially other p2p games. Even ones with cash shops bolted on.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/After all this is MMORPG where ones wishful thinking is the truth.
[mod edit]
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I give up
For SD, any game with a login screen is classified as an MMO. So they can move any game under any category for any situation under any circumstance that allows them to present what ever particular point they want for that time, even if it contradicts a previous report.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Zones, phasing, and instancing are part of the larger whole. They don't define the whole game. These limitations are in place for technical difficulties and stability, but overall, there's still hundreds of people going in and out of these "zones" continuously without having to change the map. Take RTS and FPS games for example. You're limited to one map, and depending on the game, it's 32 v 32, 8 v 8, or 1 v 1, then the map changes once the match is over. It's not persistent (which is another tenet of MMORPGS).
GW1 and Skyforge are blurring the lines, but i still consider them lobby games. There is no open-world in these games, only lobby rooms which are closed off from the rest of the world.
You're the epitome of how one looses sight of the forest for the trees.
The blog page that superdata research run is about as relevant as buzzfeed, both are clickbait.
If we go by superdata categories the king of MMO is LoL
Heck, even this site classified OW as a MMO. So clearly massively multiplayer is no longer necessary, at least for some.