Throughout this thread there is alot of discussion about the definition of fail. I think it may have been in the wrong context when i wrote the OP.
Anyways what i was trying to say when asking the question was:
From your experiences with TERA do you see this game's player base diminishing after the initial 6 months?
IMO it is considered a fail as a developer if they cannot hold a consistent playerbase for longer than 6 months, based off their intial flood of sub's.
a lot of people picked up tera on tuesday without having pre ordered or played the beta becaus they needed something to hold them over until guild wars 2, and these two mmorpg's are the closest in terms of combat system.
i doubt it will have an uptick in subs at the 6 month mark if gw2 is out by then. not that gw2 is perfect, but the other issues with the genre are more readily addressed in that game than they are in tera.
OmaliMMO Business CorrespondentMemberUncommonPosts: 1,177
Originally posted by Slyther_Zero
haha, i know nothing will ever get to the pinnacle of WoW's subscription base.
I meant fail in a broad definition as in the game will lose alot of its player base after 6 months and become f2p. I know LOTRO felt a similar fate, no? Hopefully that clear things up.
Lord of the Rings Online didn't go free to play because it was "failing," it was going strong and Turbine saw their success with Dungeons and Dragons Online free to play and figured doing the same with LOTRO would only boost profits. They were right.
on the two servers i play on (pvp, pve) dps queue's are 4+ hours
Lancer FTW, this problem will go away soon coz they fixing warrior as tanks so they probabaly let them que as tanks after the fix.
you do know that gw2 has the same active dodging/aiming combat system as tera right? not exactly the same, but similiar enough.
No not even close, first of all GW2 is a target based game period, aside from some aoe its TARGET BASED. Second GW2 dodge isn't as useful as Tera, you use it ever now and than to get out of big hits but with its CD its not used like it is in Tera. So GW2 is pretty much tab targetting with an added doge skill ever now and than thats yet.
the grind kicks in when you attept to enchant anything beyond +6. since the koreans say you need at a MINIMUM +8 on every piece to do the harder content at 60 and that it costs them 300-500 million gold to do this - a staggering amount that can be even higher for some individuals because the enchanting system is purely RANDOM (sure you got +8, but got no +bam dmg stats. DO OVER) is where the grind is going to set in and feel VERY korean due to the nature of that grind. you will feel like you are in aion all over just with a different combat system.
Its the same in every mmorpgs, in Tera you grind dungeon for money and equip to enchant your gear. In WoW you grind raid for your gears. In rift you grind raid. Its how all PvE content in end game EVERY game is, grind. If there is nothing to grind the game has no end game PvE your done with lvling your done with the game. Also they even took out the chance for -1 when enchanting which mean you don't have to depend on dumb luck to reach +12, just work hard enough and you get there. Also they even added way to lock in stats you want to keep so you don't loss it when you reroll.
haha, i know nothing will ever get to the pinnacle of WoW's subscription base.
I meant fail in a broad definition as in the game will lose alot of its player base after 6 months and become f2p. I know LOTRO felt a similar fate, no? Hopefully that clear things up.
Lord of the Rings Online didn't go free to play because it was "failing," it was going strong and Turbine saw their success with Dungeons and Dragons Online free to play and figured doing the same with LOTRO would only boost profits. They were right.
This guy is pretty clueless about what happened in LOTRO. LOTRO actually showed growth its first two years. Then it started to drop off, but at the same time DDO's f2p was a big success.
When LOTRO went f2p it had over 200k subs.
Funny thing is, TERA will probably never be above 200k Western subs except maybe the first month. Doesnt say anything about the quality of the game necessarily, it just has a small target audience. Actiony, shallow but pretty eastern MMORPG is not going to attract a large player base. So less than 200k subs wouldnt be a fail for TERA (unless they for some reason expected more)
As the title says, what do you think the future holds for TERA. Will this game end up like RIFT for example, getting a decent amount of praise and still failing to hold up amongst the likes of WoW etc.
Or does this game have a bright future, if so why?
I'm asking as im hestitant to dive into it just like i did for RIFT after coming from WoW and finding the novelty wear thin after a few months of play...
The problem here is you expect something to "hold up" to WoW. Rift is a fairly solid game in its own right.
Tera is a basic themepark MMO with action combat. Thats either good or bad depending on what you are looking for. Oh and I guess I cant leave out the political system for endgame that TERA has. Others will try to hype stuff like "well TERA has BAMS" that you can grind if you want. Blah blah all they are is elites. It still boils down to a 100% themepark MMO with action combat. If you are interested in it then I say dive right in. The combat is a blast imo. Just be warned the quest system doesnt try to hide anything like say GW2 tries to hide it. Its still go to ? and kill or collect what it says and go turn in.
I would say TERAs future is fine. The combat alone is diffrent enough from other MMO's to keep the PvP interesting and watching some KTERA instances I would say the instances are going to be interesting enough.
BTW I do not own TERA. I have to be alittle pickier in my games and I decided D3 over TERA. If I had the money I would probably give TERA a fair shake (I was in betas). Its feels like a solid enough game to at least try it if you havent.
on the two servers i play on (pvp, pve) dps queue's are 4+ hours
Lancer FTW, this problem will go away soon coz they fixing warrior as tanks so they probabaly let them que as tanks after the fix.
you do know that gw2 has the same active dodging/aiming combat system as tera right? not exactly the same, but similiar enough.
No not even close, first of all GW2 is a target based game period, aside from some aoe its TARGET BASED. Second GW2 dodge isn't as useful as Tera, you use it ever now and than to get out of big hits but with its CD its not used like it is in Tera. So GW2 is pretty much tab targetting with an added doge skill ever now and than thats yet.
the grind kicks in when you attept to enchant anything beyond +6. since the koreans say you need at a MINIMUM +8 on every piece to do the harder content at 60 and that it costs them 300-500 million gold to do this - a staggering amount that can be even higher for some individuals because the enchanting system is purely RANDOM (sure you got +8, but got no +bam dmg stats. DO OVER) is where the grind is going to set in and feel VERY korean due to the nature of that grind. you will feel like you are in aion all over just with a different combat system.
Its the same in every mmorpgs, in Tera you grind dungeon for money and equip to enchant your gear. In WoW you grind raid for your gears. In rift you grind raid. Its how all PvE content in end game EVERY game is, grind. If there is nothing to grind the game has no end game PvE your done with lvling your done with the game. Also they even took out the chance for -1 when enchanting which mean you don't have to depend on dumb luck to reach +12, just work hard enough and you get there. Also they even added way to lock in stats you want to keep so you don't loss it when you reroll.
no it's not the same in every mmorpg. it's similiar to korean mmorpgs but not all mmorpgs.
imagine you are in world of warcraft. imagine you just spent 8 hours of play getting enough gold or farming the right gear to diesnchant to get the mats for a nice enchant for your 2h sword because you are, after all, a melee class that does not use mana.
now imagine you do the enchant and instead of getting the +melee stats you were looking for, the game gave you +mana
that is the slot machine that is enchanting in tera, and it's not in 'every mmorpgs' as you said.
if that randomness was removed entirely ie. ACTUALLY WESTERNIZED then the enchanting grind would be alright. but you cant grind those dungeons until you have the gear since you need to destroy a gold item for anything beyond +6 i believe.
Lord of the Rings Online didn't go free to play because it was "failing," it was going strong and Turbine saw their success with Dungeons and Dragons Online free to play and figured doing the same with LOTRO would only boost profits. They were right.
This guy is pretty clueless about what happened in LOTRO. LOTRO actually showed growth its first two years. Then it started to drop off, but at the same time DDO's f2p was a big success.
When LOTRO went f2p it had over 200k subs.
Funny thing is, TERA will probably never be above 200k Western subs except maybe the first month. Doesnt say anything about the quality of the game necessarily, it just has a small target audience. Actiony, shallow but pretty eastern MMORPG is not going to attract a large player base. So less than 200k subs wouldnt be a fail for TERA (unless they for some reason expected more)
well wait a minute. He's not clueless. I'd hold off using that card. Espeically because most of what he says is actually true.
Not sure what "going strong" means but he's exactly right as far as what Turbine did. I had a long conversation with Geoffrey Steefel at one of the Pax Prime events and that's exactly what happened.
LOTRO was doing well enough. Remember most games, other than wow, tend to ahve dips and surges depending on the new content brought it. But it was doing well. Then they saw DDO and what happened with the f2p model. They then decided to take the plunge knowing full well that there was a possbibility that they could lose people. However, since they didn't see a huge loss of people playing ddo they thought the same wouldhold true with lotro.
Most games that I can think that are sub based tend to have surges and dips with population. It seems that the f2p games tend to have pretty steady populations but then again there is a small amount of people paying more money than average.
Problem with the whole f2p model is that the entire game becomes commoditized and you start seeing the proverbial hand out wherever and whenver they can.
I don't know if the same will happen with tera but I certainly hope not. But we'll see.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Lord of the Rings Online didn't go free to play because it was "failing," it was going strong and Turbine saw their success with Dungeons and Dragons Online free to play and figured doing the same with LOTRO would only boost profits. They were right.
This guy is pretty clueless about what happened in LOTRO. LOTRO actually showed growth its first two years. Then it started to drop off, but at the same time DDO's f2p was a big success.
When LOTRO went f2p it had over 200k subs.
Funny thing is, TERA will probably never be above 200k Western subs except maybe the first month. Doesnt say anything about the quality of the game necessarily, it just has a small target audience. Actiony, shallow but pretty eastern MMORPG is not going to attract a large player base. So less than 200k subs wouldnt be a fail for TERA (unless they for some reason expected more)
well wait a minute. He's not clueless. I'd hold off using that card. Espeically because most of what he says is actually true.
Not sure what "going strong" means but he's exactly right as far as what Turbine did. I had a long conversation with Geoffrey Steefel at one of the Pax Prime events and that's exactly what happened.
LOTRO was doing well enough. Remember most games, other than wow, tend to ahve dips and surges depending on the new content brought it. But it was doing well. Then they saw DDO and what happened with the f2p model. They then decided to take the plunge knowing full well that there was a possbibility that they could lose people. However, since they didn't see a huge loss of people playing ddo they thought the same wouldhold true with lotro.
Most games that I can think that are sub based tend to have surges and dips with population. It seems that the f2p games tend to have pretty steady populations but then again there is a small amount of people paying more money than average.
Problem with the whole f2p model is that the entire game becomes commoditized and you start seeing the proverbial hand out wherever and whenver they can.
I don't know if the same will happen with tera but I certainly hope not. But we'll see.
My post was directed towards the previous poster that said that LOTRO lost subs its first 6 months and was a failure, using f2p as a sign failure. Which is not remotely what happened.
DDO went f2p because it failed. STO went f2p because it failed. LOTRO,EQ, and EQ2 went f2p for different reasons.
Lastly Tera is up against the clock in a tough and tight economy. More than ever before most gamers out there actually have to budget their gaming dollars, they have to think about what they can afford, and make some hard choices. Tera is launching up against some amazing releases this year, and many gamers are giving it a pass in favor of more popular in case of GW2 or Diablo3, or more unique as in the case of TSW.
except that gw2 is a one time buy to play so no sub fee to get in the way.
Diablo 3 isn't an mmo. And again, no sub fee.
TSW is a completely different type of game than Tera or many other games out there as it relies upoin lore and a meta game to move it along.
They really aren't in competition as there are different audiences who are the main audience for each one with some overlap.
As far as "failing in korea" a good part of that was not having anything to do at lvl 50 cap. Tera launhes here with a lvl 60 cap as well as an expansion. Whether or not the "diplomatic" end game is enough to hold people remains to be seen.
I think you missed the point. People ARE having to pick and choose. You cant assume people will pick TERA over another game just because its an action combat MMO. So long as it has a box fee it competes against every other game out there with a box fee regardless of what genra it is. If I can only afford 1 game I still have to pick between D3 and TERA for example. What type of game factors into which I pick, but I still have to pick. Its not like people ONLY play one type of game. If they do then its easy but I would feel safe in assuming people play more than just one type of game.
It's a solid game. It's quite fun and the combat is engaging and very dynamic. The quests are your average grind-fest, but they're generally very easy and you level up quite fast. The fun part isn't doing these quests per-see, but getting new skills and trying them out. By the time you've worked out your new skills you've got another 2 levels and then you get a few more to play with. It's a bit slow up till 15-20, but then it gets more interesting. The dungeons (i've run 2 so far) are a blast and since people aren't generally used to the whole "move around and use the dodge button to survive" yet, they become quite the challenge even early on.
Many complain about the "animation lockdown", but once you try the game you realize it's part of how combat works, and it works quite well. It's part of the strategy to use your skills at the right time. You can break the animation/spell by using your dodge ability (don't know if every class has it tho, only tried warrior so far), thus wasting the rest of that spell and the MP you used on it, but you might avoid a big hit at that cost.
I don't see this game being set up to fail. I haven't done enough PvP to have an opinion yet, but the combat alone, and the dungeons, are well worth the investment for me.
Let me give some advice for the ex-wow players who have doubts about getting into TERA.....dont do it, tera makes you actually step out of the poison or fire in a battle or you will die.
Since most wow players are not used to stepping out of the fire under your feet, they will fail.
So no, TERA isnt any good if you are a wow-player.
On a more serious note:
Tera is kinda grindy but for me the combat kinda makes up for that......if you dont move out of harms way in TERA you will be punished for it.
It's a solid game. It's quite fun and the combat is engaging and very dynamic. The quests are your average grind-fest, but they're generally very easy and you level up quite fast. The fun part isn't doing these quests per-see, but getting new skills and trying them out. By the time you've worked out your new skills you've got another 2 levels and then you get a few more to play with. It's a bit slow up till 15-20, but then it gets more interesting. The dungeons (i've run 2 so far) are a blast and since people aren't generally used to the whole "move around and use the dodge button to survive" yet, they become quite the challenge even early on.
Many complain about the "animation lockdown", but once you try the game you realize it's part of how combat works, and it works quite well. It's part of the strategy to use your skills at the right time. You can break the animation/spell by using your dodge ability (don't know if every class has it tho, only tried warrior so far), thus wasting the rest of that spell and the MP you used on it, but you might avoid a big hit at that cost.
I don't see this game being set up to fail. I haven't done enough PvP to have an opinion yet, but the combat alone, and the dungeons, are well worth the investment for me.
The animation lock did annoy me... Besides that I was rather surprised, the game was a lot better than I thought it would be.
But it might still fail, I have heard very little about it on other places than this site. Being a good game is not enough to succeed, people must notice it as well.
Its a smaller company, they spent considerably less money making this game than other AAA releases ect.
The games been out for a while in korea. Im not suggesting this game is a blockbuster in korea but they made money off their home market even before bringing here and having people hate on it for not being like wow ect.
So i think already the game didnt fail. I think they made their money back developing it. Hard for a game to fail (shut down) when they can be profitable. I know, i know, fail means less subs than wow or whatever.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
It's a solid game. It's quite fun and the combat is engaging and very dynamic. The quests are your average grind-fest, but they're generally very easy and you level up quite fast. The fun part isn't doing these quests per-see, but getting new skills and trying them out. By the time you've worked out your new skills you've got another 2 levels and then you get a few more to play with. It's a bit slow up till 15-20, but then it gets more interesting. The dungeons (i've run 2 so far) are a blast and since people aren't generally used to the whole "move around and use the dodge button to survive" yet, they become quite the challenge even early on.
Many complain about the "animation lockdown", but once you try the game you realize it's part of how combat works, and it works quite well. It's part of the strategy to use your skills at the right time. You can break the animation/spell by using your dodge ability (don't know if every class has it tho, only tried warrior so far), thus wasting the rest of that spell and the MP you used on it, but you might avoid a big hit at that cost.
I don't see this game being set up to fail. I haven't done enough PvP to have an opinion yet, but the combat alone, and the dungeons, are well worth the investment for me.
The animation lock did annoy me... Besides that I was rather surprised, the game was a lot better than I thought it would be.
But it might still fail, I have heard very little about it on other places than this site. Being a good game is not enough to succeed, people must notice it as well.
Yeah that sums up me feeling as well after a few hours: "Hey this is alot better then i expected".
As the title says, what do you think the future holds for TERA. Will this game end up like RIFT for example, getting a decent amount of praise and still failing to hold up amongst the likes of WoW etc.
Or does this game have a bright future, if so why?
I'm asking as im hestitant to dive into it just like i did for RIFT after coming from WoW and finding the novelty wear thin after a few months of play...
I say don't be hesitatnt to dive into an mmo with the fear it might ''Fail''.. Play it becuase you think it might be fun for you!!..
I just can't see why does some persons think not having a hugh sub number signals failure.. Damn
I say from the number of sub a game has, that it turns a profit its all good for that game.. When the game stop turning a profit then thats different...
RIFT wasn't expensive to make and maybe isn't as costly to run as per WoW, so the subs RIFT has currently is more than enough to make it stay profitable and open..
Tera has been out for almost year and a half (korea), so if they haven't been turning a profit thats there fault... Sub number will be hard to guess with tera, but don't let that stop you from experience the game because you think it might fail.
Tera isn't bad or great (just right in the middle) and isn't the second coming of MMO. Its main selling or marketing point was that its an action mmo, and that i feel it does well, all the other stuff is standard game..
WoW didn't re-invent mmo, all it did was built on past success, change past mistake and in doing so, so happend to appeal to wider audience (not to mention blizzard fans).
Also the trend in mmo Now-A-days is this... Try to ''burnt out'' oneself to reach end game before the 30days is up, then if you don't like end-game you either make alt or maybe start to complain that there is nothing to do @ end-game... Or the option alot choose is to quit and maybe return in 2-6 months... But its in this period most dev's panic and wonder if those will return and what can they do to make them return faster..
What amazes me in all of this, is if a new mmo is launching and it does nothing to move the genre forward, persons start claiming its destined to fail and will go FTP in 3months...
ALL in ALL, try the game if you think you will like it, not because your trying to predict the future and think it will fail in "X" time..
A large community for me is a big plus in my books.Gives you a sense of immersion walking through towns with life rather than hearing frog's in the background.. Also helps build a economy as well, which in this case might be useful for the politcal aspects, no?
From all the feedback i've read in my thread I will give TERA a trial once one is released and go from there. With D3 around the corner and money being another concern i'll be holding off untill i test it for myself.
Enchanting in the NA version is much easier. When people get +9 enchant on a weapon its a global broadcast to the whole server announcing that so and so much did +9 on such and such weapon. I have seen multiple announcements like that.
I heard the korean version died because of bots. Thats what I heard at least.
Don't wait for a trial that may or may not come if you plan to join a pvp server.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
Still, 5 dungeons ain´t that impressive, AoC had twice that and is still considered a game with little content.
They will have to add more dungeons as soon as they can if they want the players to stay, dungeons are not the only reason player stay but it is one of the reasons at least.
TERA IMO is a classic example of a game where most of the money goes actualy on development and not on the hype.
In the future i think it will manage to keep a stable and standar playerbase and fanbase.We will see if those are enough to keep the subscription and the updates going.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
Still, 5 dungeons ain´t that impressive, AoC had twice that and is still considered a game with little content.
They will have to add more dungeons as soon as they can if they want the players to stay, dungeons are not the only reason player stay but it is one of the reasons at least.
Thought it was going to have 15 dungeons starting out? Theres a list on IGN.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
Still, 5 dungeons ain´t that impressive, AoC had twice that and is still considered a game with little content.
They will have to add more dungeons as soon as they can if they want the players to stay, dungeons are not the only reason player stay but it is one of the reasons at least.
Thought it was going to have 15 dungeons starting out? Theres a list on IGN.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
Still, 5 dungeons ain´t that impressive, AoC had twice that and is still considered a game with little content.
They will have to add more dungeons as soon as they can if they want the players to stay, dungeons are not the only reason player stay but it is one of the reasons at least.
Thought it was going to have 15 dungeons starting out? Theres a list on IGN.
Another point to remember though is quality of quantity. A good dungeon with replay value and is fun to run is something i would rather playthrough compared to a bunch of average run of the mill dungeons that arn't memorable.
Agreed, I would rather have one dungeon of epic propertions and looked fantastic (I've never taken as many screenshots as I did in Tera Beta) then five dungeons that were meh. You hit the nail on the head when you talked about it bing memorable. You want a game that will be talked about for ages. The ONLY thing I don't like about Tera is the subscription. I have a hard time justifing it. It is a given why a developer would go that way of a buisness model, but why we, as consumers let fly, boggels my mind. Anyway, that is a different topic for a different forum. I liked Tera and it was a gorgeous game with an inovative combat system.
Lastly Tera is up against the clock in a tough and tight economy. More than ever before most gamers out there actually have to budget their gaming dollars, they have to think about what they can afford, and make some hard choices. Tera is launching up against some amazing releases this year, and many gamers are giving it a pass in favor of more popular in case of GW2 or Diablo3, or more unique as in the case of TSW.
except that gw2 is a one time buy to play so no sub fee to get in the way.
Diablo 3 isn't an mmo. And again, no sub fee.
TSW is a completely different type of game than Tera or many other games out there as it relies upoin lore and a meta game to move it along.
They really aren't in competition as there are different audiences who are the main audience for each one with some overlap.
As far as "failing in korea" a good part of that was not having anything to do at lvl 50 cap. Tera launhes here with a lvl 60 cap as well as an expansion. Whether or not the "diplomatic" end game is enough to hold people remains to be seen.
I think you missed the point. People ARE having to pick and choose. You cant assume people will pick TERA over another game just because its an action combat MMO. So long as it has a box fee it competes against every other game out there with a box fee regardless of what genra it is. If I can only afford 1 game I still have to pick between D3 and TERA for example. What type of game factors into which I pick, but I still have to pick. Its not like people ONLY play one type of game. If they do then its easy but I would feel safe in assuming people play more than just one type of game.
Ok, then as per the sentence I highlighted, then people will play more than one type of game as they always have.
People have always had to pick and choose what they spend their money on. Tera is different from all those games that are listed therefore it's pretty clear that if one had to pick and choose they would be picking from different games.
Also, you can't assume that people aren't picking tera for its combat. Heck, I did. If i didn't have to pick and choose (which I don't) then I'd pick up Tera (which I did) Guild Wars 2 and Diablo 3.
If I had to pick and choose I'd take Tera over both those other titles as I preferred it.
As it stands since they are all different games and I "play different games" then I will be playing both Tera and Guild Wars 2 (casually).
For the most part I could care less about Diablo 3.
@Omali: gotcha, I thought you were replying to Teakbois.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
As the title says, what do you think the future holds for TERA. Will this game end up like RIFT for example, getting a decent amount of praise and still failing to hold up amongst the likes of WoW etc.
Or does this game have a bright future, if so why?
I'm asking as im hestitant to dive into it just like i did for RIFT after coming from WoW and finding the novelty wear thin after a few months of play...
Game is way better than Rift out the gate. Also this game has way cooler features and mechanics, just saying. It would never fail as bad as rift.
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
Comments
a lot of people picked up tera on tuesday without having pre ordered or played the beta becaus they needed something to hold them over until guild wars 2, and these two mmorpg's are the closest in terms of combat system.
i doubt it will have an uptick in subs at the 6 month mark if gw2 is out by then. not that gw2 is perfect, but the other issues with the genre are more readily addressed in that game than they are in tera.
Lord of the Rings Online didn't go free to play because it was "failing," it was going strong and Turbine saw their success with Dungeons and Dragons Online free to play and figured doing the same with LOTRO would only boost profits. They were right.
Its the same in every mmorpgs, in Tera you grind dungeon for money and equip to enchant your gear. In WoW you grind raid for your gears. In rift you grind raid. Its how all PvE content in end game EVERY game is, grind. If there is nothing to grind the game has no end game PvE your done with lvling your done with the game. Also they even took out the chance for -1 when enchanting which mean you don't have to depend on dumb luck to reach +12, just work hard enough and you get there. Also they even added way to lock in stats you want to keep so you don't loss it when you reroll.
This guy is pretty clueless about what happened in LOTRO. LOTRO actually showed growth its first two years. Then it started to drop off, but at the same time DDO's f2p was a big success.
When LOTRO went f2p it had over 200k subs.
Funny thing is, TERA will probably never be above 200k Western subs except maybe the first month. Doesnt say anything about the quality of the game necessarily, it just has a small target audience. Actiony, shallow but pretty eastern MMORPG is not going to attract a large player base. So less than 200k subs wouldnt be a fail for TERA (unless they for some reason expected more)
The problem here is you expect something to "hold up" to WoW. Rift is a fairly solid game in its own right.
Tera is a basic themepark MMO with action combat. Thats either good or bad depending on what you are looking for. Oh and I guess I cant leave out the political system for endgame that TERA has. Others will try to hype stuff like "well TERA has BAMS" that you can grind if you want. Blah blah all they are is elites. It still boils down to a 100% themepark MMO with action combat. If you are interested in it then I say dive right in. The combat is a blast imo. Just be warned the quest system doesnt try to hide anything like say GW2 tries to hide it. Its still go to ? and kill or collect what it says and go turn in.
I would say TERAs future is fine. The combat alone is diffrent enough from other MMO's to keep the PvP interesting and watching some KTERA instances I would say the instances are going to be interesting enough.
BTW I do not own TERA. I have to be alittle pickier in my games and I decided D3 over TERA. If I had the money I would probably give TERA a fair shake (I was in betas). Its feels like a solid enough game to at least try it if you havent.
no it's not the same in every mmorpg. it's similiar to korean mmorpgs but not all mmorpgs.
imagine you are in world of warcraft. imagine you just spent 8 hours of play getting enough gold or farming the right gear to diesnchant to get the mats for a nice enchant for your 2h sword because you are, after all, a melee class that does not use mana.
now imagine you do the enchant and instead of getting the +melee stats you were looking for, the game gave you +mana
that is the slot machine that is enchanting in tera, and it's not in 'every mmorpgs' as you said.
if that randomness was removed entirely ie. ACTUALLY WESTERNIZED then the enchanting grind would be alright. but you cant grind those dungeons until you have the gear since you need to destroy a gold item for anything beyond +6 i believe.
well wait a minute. He's not clueless. I'd hold off using that card. Espeically because most of what he says is actually true.
Not sure what "going strong" means but he's exactly right as far as what Turbine did. I had a long conversation with Geoffrey Steefel at one of the Pax Prime events and that's exactly what happened.
LOTRO was doing well enough. Remember most games, other than wow, tend to ahve dips and surges depending on the new content brought it. But it was doing well. Then they saw DDO and what happened with the f2p model. They then decided to take the plunge knowing full well that there was a possbibility that they could lose people. However, since they didn't see a huge loss of people playing ddo they thought the same wouldhold true with lotro.
Most games that I can think that are sub based tend to have surges and dips with population. It seems that the f2p games tend to have pretty steady populations but then again there is a small amount of people paying more money than average.
Problem with the whole f2p model is that the entire game becomes commoditized and you start seeing the proverbial hand out wherever and whenver they can.
I don't know if the same will happen with tera but I certainly hope not. But we'll see.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
My post was directed towards the previous poster that said that LOTRO lost subs its first 6 months and was a failure, using f2p as a sign failure. Which is not remotely what happened.
DDO went f2p because it failed. STO went f2p because it failed. LOTRO,EQ, and EQ2 went f2p for different reasons.
I think you missed the point. People ARE having to pick and choose. You cant assume people will pick TERA over another game just because its an action combat MMO. So long as it has a box fee it competes against every other game out there with a box fee regardless of what genra it is. If I can only afford 1 game I still have to pick between D3 and TERA for example. What type of game factors into which I pick, but I still have to pick. Its not like people ONLY play one type of game. If they do then its easy but I would feel safe in assuming people play more than just one type of game.
It's a solid game. It's quite fun and the combat is engaging and very dynamic. The quests are your average grind-fest, but they're generally very easy and you level up quite fast. The fun part isn't doing these quests per-see, but getting new skills and trying them out. By the time you've worked out your new skills you've got another 2 levels and then you get a few more to play with. It's a bit slow up till 15-20, but then it gets more interesting. The dungeons (i've run 2 so far) are a blast and since people aren't generally used to the whole "move around and use the dodge button to survive" yet, they become quite the challenge even early on.
Many complain about the "animation lockdown", but once you try the game you realize it's part of how combat works, and it works quite well. It's part of the strategy to use your skills at the right time. You can break the animation/spell by using your dodge ability (don't know if every class has it tho, only tried warrior so far), thus wasting the rest of that spell and the MP you used on it, but you might avoid a big hit at that cost.
I don't see this game being set up to fail. I haven't done enough PvP to have an opinion yet, but the combat alone, and the dungeons, are well worth the investment for me.
Let me give some advice for the ex-wow players who have doubts about getting into TERA.....dont do it, tera makes you actually step out of the poison or fire in a battle or you will die.
Since most wow players are not used to stepping out of the fire under your feet, they will fail.
So no, TERA isnt any good if you are a wow-player.
On a more serious note:
Tera is kinda grindy but for me the combat kinda makes up for that......if you dont move out of harms way in TERA you will be punished for it.
The animation lock did annoy me... Besides that I was rather surprised, the game was a lot better than I thought it would be.
But it might still fail, I have heard very little about it on other places than this site. Being a good game is not enough to succeed, people must notice it as well.
That's not completely true. Financially wise Tera did pretty bad in Korea. They didn't make as much money as they thought and some big managers left the company. Tera in Korea was borderline fail and barely managed to stay alive after serveral server merges because basically the game was incomplete at launch and had very weak endgame (only 2 dungeons and no gvg). People capped in few weeks and just unsubscribed after the first month.
In NA Tera launched with 5 dungeons, the rifts and gvg. But no battlegrounds.
Yeah that sums up me feeling as well after a few hours: "Hey this is alot better then i expected".
I say don't be hesitatnt to dive into an mmo with the fear it might ''Fail''.. Play it becuase you think it might be fun for you!!..
I just can't see why does some persons think not having a hugh sub number signals failure.. Damn
I say from the number of sub a game has, that it turns a profit its all good for that game.. When the game stop turning a profit then thats different...
RIFT wasn't expensive to make and maybe isn't as costly to run as per WoW, so the subs RIFT has currently is more than enough to make it stay profitable and open..
Tera has been out for almost year and a half (korea), so if they haven't been turning a profit thats there fault... Sub number will be hard to guess with tera, but don't let that stop you from experience the game because you think it might fail.
Tera isn't bad or great (just right in the middle) and isn't the second coming of MMO. Its main selling or marketing point was that its an action mmo, and that i feel it does well, all the other stuff is standard game..
WoW didn't re-invent mmo, all it did was built on past success, change past mistake and in doing so, so happend to appeal to wider audience (not to mention blizzard fans).
Also the trend in mmo Now-A-days is this... Try to ''burnt out'' oneself to reach end game before the 30days is up, then if you don't like end-game you either make alt or maybe start to complain that there is nothing to do @ end-game... Or the option alot choose is to quit and maybe return in 2-6 months... But its in this period most dev's panic and wonder if those will return and what can they do to make them return faster..
What amazes me in all of this, is if a new mmo is launching and it does nothing to move the genre forward, persons start claiming its destined to fail and will go FTP in 3months...
ALL in ALL, try the game if you think you will like it, not because your trying to predict the future and think it will fail in "X" time..
A large community for me is a big plus in my books.Gives you a sense of immersion walking through towns with life rather than hearing frog's in the background.. Also helps build a economy as well, which in this case might be useful for the politcal aspects, no?
From all the feedback i've read in my thread I will give TERA a trial once one is released and go from there. With D3 around the corner and money being another concern i'll be holding off untill i test it for myself.
Thanks everyone for your thoughts.
Enchanting in the NA version is much easier. When people get +9 enchant on a weapon its a global broadcast to the whole server announcing that so and so much did +9 on such and such weapon. I have seen multiple announcements like that.
I heard the korean version died because of bots. Thats what I heard at least.
Don't wait for a trial that may or may not come if you plan to join a pvp server.
Still, 5 dungeons ain´t that impressive, AoC had twice that and is still considered a game with little content.
They will have to add more dungeons as soon as they can if they want the players to stay, dungeons are not the only reason player stay but it is one of the reasons at least.
TERA IMO is a classic example of a game where most of the money goes actualy on development and not on the hype.
In the future i think it will manage to keep a stable and standar playerbase and fanbase.We will see if those are enough to keep the subscription and the updates going.
Thought it was going to have 15 dungeons starting out? Theres a list on IGN.
http://tera.enmasse.com/game-guide/dungeons
http://community.tera-europe.com/home/news/article/dungeon-overview-and-level-adjustments-for-launch.html
Another point to remember though is quality of quantity. A good dungeon with replay value and is fun to run is something i would rather playthrough compared to a bunch of average run of the mill dungeons that arn't memorable.
Agreed, I would rather have one dungeon of epic propertions and looked fantastic (I've never taken as many screenshots as I did in Tera Beta) then five dungeons that were meh. You hit the nail on the head when you talked about it bing memorable. You want a game that will be talked about for ages. The ONLY thing I don't like about Tera is the subscription. I have a hard time justifing it. It is a given why a developer would go that way of a buisness model, but why we, as consumers let fly, boggels my mind. Anyway, that is a different topic for a different forum. I liked Tera and it was a gorgeous game with an inovative combat system.
Ok, then as per the sentence I highlighted, then people will play more than one type of game as they always have.
People have always had to pick and choose what they spend their money on. Tera is different from all those games that are listed therefore it's pretty clear that if one had to pick and choose they would be picking from different games.
Also, you can't assume that people aren't picking tera for its combat. Heck, I did. If i didn't have to pick and choose (which I don't) then I'd pick up Tera (which I did) Guild Wars 2 and Diablo 3.
If I had to pick and choose I'd take Tera over both those other titles as I preferred it.
As it stands since they are all different games and I "play different games" then I will be playing both Tera and Guild Wars 2 (casually).
For the most part I could care less about Diablo 3.
@Omali: gotcha, I thought you were replying to Teakbois.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Game is way better than Rift out the gate. Also this game has way cooler features and mechanics, just saying. It would never fail as bad as rift.