wonder why the suprise it coming sooner or later all kor game in NA alwais is a fail and dont last long it alwais going to happen alwais.
That's quite the selective memory. It's like every mmorpg produced in the west is a stellar success and the korean ones aren't? The latest game to nose dive in subscriptions was SW:TOR, and that had a huge backing, both financial and from a major developer. If you take a look a bit at the past, you'll see similar disheartening results from other western mmorpgs as well.
On the other hand, lets name one western mmorpg that does well in Korea, or asia in general.
I could have sworn World of Warcraft was huge in Asia. Is it not? believe it or not WoW is a western MMORPG. I am not a big fan of it but you cannot argue with the crazy subscriptions and money that game has made.
Just comes to show that a game cannot thrive on innovative combat alone.
My exact same thoughts.
And my very personal thought: When mmo developers do the exact same game over and over and only change 1 or 2 things to claim its the new breed (in this case good action combat and outstanding graphics) its not enough to justify a subscription.
Just comes to show that a game cannot thrive on innovative combat alone.
My exact same thoughts.
And my very personal thought: When mmo developers do the exact same game over and over and only change 1 or 2 things to claim its the new breed (in this case good action combat and outstanding graphics) its not enough to justify a subscription.
cant wait for F2P in North America to log back in
Pretty much agree with Yamota and Rojo. I actually made a very lengthy post going into detail in what you said. It deals with several aspects, but specifically the justification of a subscription when you only add one new or relatively new addition to the MMO table. I'll make it as a separate post. Note that this is taken from another post I made today in another thread.
I have no problems either paying for a monthly subscription as well. Hell when it comes to RPGs and MMORPGs I would say 9 out of 10 times I try to get the Collector’s Edition (whichever is the higher priced one if there are different versions) just because. So money definitely isn’t an issue for me. And yeah most F2P games do use the P2W method or start off with vanity items but usually end up branching over to the P2W method.
There is one major problem though.
The majority of folks out there, in today’s market, wouldn’t agree with us. Or if they did pay for a monthly subscription it would be for a couple of months at best. Why? Because of the reasons I gave above as well as my post on the typical basic “Ingredients” I’ve posted a couple of times already. While we may break down the $15.00 a month as “Hey I spend more money at the movies” or “Hey it’s only a couple of quarters a day.” Guess what? That just won’t fly with the majority of the folks out there.
It just isn’t worth it to them for the long term and some just don’t even bother with it.
It would be like me saying to the entire BG community to sign up to SWTOR because $15.00 a month is pittance. The problem is like I said before, with the extreme saturation we have in the current market, just having one major new addition or “relatively” new addition to the MMO table just isn’t enough to separate yourself from the pack when the rest of the game is a near exact copy of previous games. This is something that has affected the majority of these theme park based MMORPGs post 2005; whether Western or Eastern developers.
One comment that really stood out was when you said that “there are plenty of monthly subscription games that are still very strong.” How so?
The P2P model comes in 2 brackets:
A. $4.00 - $10.99
This price bracket is practically dead. There are about 50 games that are, or used to be in this bracket range, but the last game to release using this price model was late 2010. I think Wakfu is the only game post 2011 that has a $6.00 monthly subscription fee, but that is optional I think.
B. $12.95 - $14.99
There are 30 games listed under this price range. However, 6 have shut down. So that brings the total down to 24. About half a dozen games before 2005 are still going strong such as EVE, FFXI, WOW to mention a few. Let us look at the games released from 2005 till now that still use the P2P business model.
A Tale in the Desert 2006
Warhammer Online 2008
DarkFall 2009
FFXIV 2010
Rift 2011
Xyson 2011
TERA 2011
I did not place Vanguard because it was stated they are going F2P this summer. DarkFall is going to cut its initial client cost as well as reduce its monthly subscription from $14.99 to an undetermined amount. Warhammer Online had at release (combined NA and EU servers) a total of a little over 80 servers. There are now 1 NA server and 1 EU server. I am not sure how this constitutes as "Going Strong Still" at all. Transitioning from a P2P model to F2P does cost money and I am not sure if E.A. wants to “waste" money in doing that, at least not yet. DarkFall also only has 1 NA and 1 EU server.
If you look at the last 3 years, there are only 5 games that still use the P2P model. With over 600 MMORPGs out there, that constitutes less than 1%... of the total market. There were many more games that used to use the P2P model, I think over 60 games (not all at the same time of course) which now have been cut by two-thirds.
The only game going strong using the P2P model that was released 2005 till present is RIFT. That’s it. There are over a dozen P2P games but the rest were released prior to 2005 and have been able to create a legacy behind them as well as several expansions (something that you rarely see happen to games post 2005). EVE Online is probably one of two games I can think of that was able to not only able to maintain a stable community, but they were able to grow as well throughout the years. There are reasons behind this which I won’t go into again.
So I do agree with you in that I would rather have a P2P MMORPG, but how? How is that even possible in today’s extremely saturated market when these developers refuse to take any risk at all and continue to churn out “near” copies of their ancestors with maybe adding one new or “relatively” new feature? How can they justify that and tack on the $15.00 price tag without most of us having that been-there-done-that feeling like that article I linked up there in my previous post from MMOSite? While the P2P business model doesn’t need 12 million or 6 million or even 3 million subscribers to make a profit, they do need a considerable amount of folks to stay for the long haul, not have a mass exodus in less than 3 months.
I see many folks (especially in other forums like MMORPG.com) that still believe that the P2P model is going strong. And every time I ask them… give me proof… show me evidence that this is true. I take not 3, but 30 steps back and look at the entire MMORPG landscape and I just don’t see that with everything I have said in these recent posts, as well as my some of lengthy posts in the past dealing with this topic.
Note: It doesn’t mean that we cannot enjoy these games, of course we can. I am not expecting these games to last like the games from the Golden Era. But at the same time, I get frustrated when these games continually have a mass exodus in less than 3 months and sometimes within a month. I’m usually lenient when it comes to MMORPGs, but not when it comes to the MMO part. When 90% of the time it feels like a single player game because everyone else has left (regardless of the reasons or pitiful excuses), that is usually when I get frustrated and just pack up and go. This is something that has plagued most P2P games post 2005.
The only game going strong using the P2P model that was released 2005 till present is RIFT.
Rift isnt exactly going strong, its gone from 58 NA servers down to essentially 8 in less than 18 months. 18 months out, LOTRO was doing better than Rift and probably had more subs
But its not the model thats the issue, its the game quality. LOTRO was the last game that was about the journey and not the destination. Probably not coincidentally, it was the last game that saw an increase in subs over the first year or two. Every other AAA game that tried to charge a sub was a mess, with the exception of Rift which has different reasons for being a failure.
Too many games try to copy a formula (WoW) without understanding what made WoW big in the first place. HINT: it wasnt raiding, or dungeon repetition, or 'welfare epics.' It was a game oozing with soul and character, with a memorable world with memorable inhabitants, much like EQ before it. Even with WoWs fast leveling speed compared to EQ, it still took the average person a couple months to get their first lvl 60. WoW hit a good balance with leveling speed where you still had a journey and got attached to your character without being a heavy grind. Rift (and SWTOR) managed to make the journey takes less time, yet seem much grindier.
Its not the model, its the game quality. From what Ive played with BETA GW2 gets some of it right, the game world certainly has far more soul than Telara or SWTOR, Im guessing the leveling will be too fast, but maybe they will find ways to extend the journey past the level cap, thats what a couple of the gw1 expansions did.
Too many games try to copy a formula (WoW) without understanding what made WoW big in the first place. HINT: it wasnt raiding, or dungeon repetition, or 'welfare epics.' It was a game oozing with soul and character, with a memorable world with memorable inhabitants, much like EQ before it. Even with WoWs fast leveling speed compared to EQ, it still took the average person a couple months to get their first lvl 60. WoW hit a good balance with leveling speed where you still had a journey and got attached to your character without being a heavy grind. Rift (and SWTOR) managed to make the journey takes less time, yet seem much grindier.
Let's be real. There are common sense reasons why WoW thrived so much. The first reason is the IP. Warcraft was quite popular around this time, especially after Warcraft 3. The second reason is the way they designed the game. They took good ideas from their predessors and built upon it. On top of that, the game wasn't heavy on system requirements. The third reason, is good timing. People were looking for something new.
Thus the game pretty much grew from there. Most games will be memorable especially if you play it long enough. I remember stuff from games before WoW such as Ultima Online or Ragnarok Online. What's occuring now is people in general seem to be tired of the same ol' stuff just rehashed with a different skin.
Also rift is doing fine. They keep a constant stream of content along with patches, so quite a lot of people stuck around. Hell, even I resub every now and then when I hear something new coming out. Tera ran into issues due to lack of content in some areas and incomplete features.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed: And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" ~Lord George Gordon Byron
wonder why the suprise it coming sooner or later all kor game in NA alwais is a fail and dont last long it alwais going to happen alwais.
That's quite the selective memory. It's like every mmorpg produced in the west is a stellar success and the korean ones aren't? The latest game to nose dive in subscriptions was SW:TOR, and that had a huge backing, both financial and from a major developer. If you take a look a bit at the past, you'll see similar disheartening results from other western mmorpgs as well.
On the other hand, lets name one western mmorpg that does well in Korea, or asia in general.
I could have sworn World of Warcraft was huge in Asia. Is it not? believe it or not WoW is a western MMORPG. I am not a big fan of it but you cannot argue with the crazy subscriptions and money that game has made.
By huge you mean half of WoW's sub was chinese gold farmer than yes i guess you could call it a sucess.
It's interesting cause the game came out around the same time as Tera last year.
Tera failed because it launched incompleted not once (in Korea) but TWICE (in the West too).
TERA servers obviously hold a lot more people than Rifts and I wouldn't say TERA has failed in NA, it seems to have failed in EU due to frogsters utter incomptence but NA is doing well, today I witnessed the largest GvG i've seen since BETA on Basilisk Crag(about 30v40 right after the Nexus, Divine vs Reckless and Revolt) and today VoT finally did it, they set up multiple 100-200 person zergs and had enough people to actually complete the entire Nexus across all three zones, they are the first server to do so.
Sure NA has some dead servers but Dragonfalls PvE playerbase is going strong, Celestial Hills has a strong RP foundation and three of the four PvP servers are highly active.
TERA servers obviously hold a lot more people than Rifts
.... why?
Until you prove otherwise we have to assume they have almost the same capacity. Otherwise when Tera had 37 servers up how many players do you think were playing it? milions?
The 28th June K-Tera will merge the servers from 13 to 4 because they have few players left not because they had a technological breakthrough and are now able to have servers 3 times bigger.
Jp-Tera has three servers but only one is barely alive. They will soon server merge too into 1 single server.
Eu Tera imho will follow soon after that. By the end of the year i bet there will be at most 6 servers (2eng.2fre.2ger) but probably even fewer. Maybe they will just make 4 servers (2eng and 2 ger)
TERA servers obviously hold a lot more people than Rifts
.... why?
Until you prove otherwise we have to assume they have almost the same capacity. Otherwise when Tera had 37 servers up how many players do you think were playing it? milions?
Yes, millions were playing TERA, have you not seen the statistics enough times? Just as many people were playing TERA as TOR and TOR has like 70+ servers(okay nevermind, TOR has more than 200 servers...jesus how little can those servers hold?).
Rifts game world is absolutely tiny in comparison to TERAs and it also doesn't have channels.
Apparently on TERA OBT in Korea they reached a peak concurrent user number of 165,000, that's an average of 4459 users per server.
None of them get past mid-low usage at any time and some are permalow no matter what. If EME and Frogster still have any brains in their heads they will merge servers by the end of the summer before QoA part 2 update.
Let this be a lesson to all MMORPG devs and publishers who release the Same Old u know what in a different wrapper.
And a lesson to all the cheesy anime, oversized weapon, Asian MMORPG that try to release to the west....we dont want your same old same old cheesy games.
This has nothing to do with US Tera. Your speculations are incorrect.
Actually it does, US tera content comes from translated Kr Tera content, KR tera goes bellyup, the Us one will be soon to follow due to lack of updates.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Rift allows people to transfer servers for free once a week. 8 of the NA servers are ghost towns because the population bled enough that guilds started mass transferring to be able to replace the ones that left, and the chain reaction of transfers leave dead servers. EU servers are in worse shape, due to the language barriers. Most of the EU servers are dead.
Rift's sub numbers are probably somewhere around 200k - 250k, which isnt bad but they have been going the wrong way since the game launched (with one two month period in early 2012 of slight growth due to swtor failure) and if Storm Legion doesnt beat MoP and GW2 to release it might be too late for Rift to ever be a major force (but it will never be in danger of shutting down either)
Just comes to show that a game cannot thrive on innovative combat alone.
The combat in Tera is far from inovative...since 3 or more mmorpg's before Tera already done the same combat system. I got bored from Tera in the first hour and never touched it again....it lacks alot of stuff and is a generic mmo hidden behind their "inovative combat system"
the game is dying no matter how much the fanboys deny it
in KR blade and soul beta + diablo 3 was pretty much the coup de grace
Who the fuck denied it was dying in Korea?
I get sick of the same haters coming in and acting ilke us "fanboys" are dumb, deaf and blind. Go into your favorite games board thanks, sorry we enjoy a game you don't.
Seeing the same pessimists and haters in here for months really starts to piss someone off, that's why I barely come here anymore.
Let this be a lesson to all MMORPG devs and publishers who release the Same Old u know what in a different wrapper.
And a lesson to all the cheesy anime, oversized weapon, Asian MMORPG that try to release to the west....we dont want your same old same old cheesy games.
I think like 90% of the people responding like this, including yourself, don't even read the title or the information posted in the OP.
This is KTERA we are talking about, this post also goes out to the other 10 responses like yours.
Let this be a lesson to all MMORPG devs and publishers who release the Same Old u know what in a different wrapper.
And a lesson to all the cheesy anime, oversized weapon, Asian MMORPG that try to release to the west....we dont want your same old same old cheesy games.
I think like 90% of the people responding like this, including yourself, don't even read the title or the information posted in the OP.
This is KTERA we are talking about, this post also goes out to the other 10 responses like yours.
If KTERA flops it is inevitable that it will drag US tera with it....also a game like Tera has no chance standing up to all the new games comin up in the next few months....its only a generic mmo hidden behind a "inovative combat system" as they call it ...which is not inovative in any way since it has been done in 3-4 games before Tera.
Heh , goes to show you that people are actually waking up and are stopping the jump process. Every time a new MMO releases everyone quits the MMO they were playing that is virtually the same crap as the new one , just to play the new MMO.
Also goes to show you how saturated the MMO world is when it comes to Fantasy RPG.
I'm glad both games are in decline , might actually force devs on creating fun games for the players instead of creating games that just fill their pockets due to item shops.
I feel it is sad when an mmo nosedives in subs, regardless of region. Variety and options are a good thing. I imagine it will also drop in US/EU next due to TSW launch. All the mmo hoppers will go there until the next big thing launches.
Cheers!
MMO Vet since AOL Neverwinter Nights circa 1992. My MMO beat up your MMO. =S
Comments
I could have sworn World of Warcraft was huge in Asia. Is it not? believe it or not WoW is a western MMORPG. I am not a big fan of it but you cannot argue with the crazy subscriptions and money that game has made.
My exact same thoughts.
And my very personal thought: When mmo developers do the exact same game over and over and only change 1 or 2 things to claim its the new breed (in this case good action combat and outstanding graphics) its not enough to justify a subscription.
cant wait for F2P in North America to log back in
I have no problems either paying for a monthly subscription as well. Hell when it comes to RPGs and MMORPGs I would say 9 out of 10 times I try to get the Collector’s Edition (whichever is the higher priced one if there are different versions) just because. So money definitely isn’t an issue for me. And yeah most F2P games do use the P2W method or start off with vanity items but usually end up branching over to the P2W method.
There is one major problem though.
The majority of folks out there, in today’s market, wouldn’t agree with us. Or if they did pay for a monthly subscription it would be for a couple of months at best. Why? Because of the reasons I gave above as well as my post on the typical basic “Ingredients” I’ve posted a couple of times already. While we may break down the $15.00 a month as “Hey I spend more money at the movies” or “Hey it’s only a couple of quarters a day.” Guess what? That just won’t fly with the majority of the folks out there.
It just isn’t worth it to them for the long term and some just don’t even bother with it.
It would be like me saying to the entire BG community to sign up to SWTOR because $15.00 a month is pittance. The problem is like I said before, with the extreme saturation we have in the current market, just having one major new addition or “relatively” new addition to the MMO table just isn’t enough to separate yourself from the pack when the rest of the game is a near exact copy of previous games. This is something that has affected the majority of these theme park based MMORPGs post 2005; whether Western or Eastern developers.
One comment that really stood out was when you said that “there are plenty of monthly subscription games that are still very strong.” How so?
The P2P model comes in 2 brackets:
A. $4.00 - $10.99
This price bracket is practically dead. There are about 50 games that are, or used to be in this bracket range, but the last game to release using this price model was late 2010. I think Wakfu is the only game post 2011 that has a $6.00 monthly subscription fee, but that is optional I think.
B. $12.95 - $14.99
There are 30 games listed under this price range. However, 6 have shut down. So that brings the total down to 24. About half a dozen games before 2005 are still going strong such as EVE, FFXI, WOW to mention a few. Let us look at the games released from 2005 till now that still use the P2P business model.
A Tale in the Desert 2006
Warhammer Online 2008
DarkFall 2009
FFXIV 2010
Rift 2011
Xyson 2011
TERA 2011
I did not place Vanguard because it was stated they are going F2P this summer. DarkFall is going to cut its initial client cost as well as reduce its monthly subscription from $14.99 to an undetermined amount. Warhammer Online had at release (combined NA and EU servers) a total of a little over 80 servers. There are now 1 NA server and 1 EU server. I am not sure how this constitutes as "Going Strong Still" at all. Transitioning from a P2P model to F2P does cost money and I am not sure if E.A. wants to “waste" money in doing that, at least not yet. DarkFall also only has 1 NA and 1 EU server.
If you look at the last 3 years, there are only 5 games that still use the P2P model. With over 600 MMORPGs out there, that constitutes less than 1%... of the total market. There were many more games that used to use the P2P model, I think over 60 games (not all at the same time of course) which now have been cut by two-thirds.
The only game going strong using the P2P model that was released 2005 till present is RIFT. That’s it. There are over a dozen P2P games but the rest were released prior to 2005 and have been able to create a legacy behind them as well as several expansions (something that you rarely see happen to games post 2005). EVE Online is probably one of two games I can think of that was able to not only able to maintain a stable community, but they were able to grow as well throughout the years. There are reasons behind this which I won’t go into again.
So I do agree with you in that I would rather have a P2P MMORPG, but how? How is that even possible in today’s extremely saturated market when these developers refuse to take any risk at all and continue to churn out “near” copies of their ancestors with maybe adding one new or “relatively” new feature? How can they justify that and tack on the $15.00 price tag without most of us having that been-there-done-that feeling like that article I linked up there in my previous post from MMOSite? While the P2P business model doesn’t need 12 million or 6 million or even 3 million subscribers to make a profit, they do need a considerable amount of folks to stay for the long haul, not have a mass exodus in less than 3 months.
I see many folks (especially in other forums like MMORPG.com) that still believe that the P2P model is going strong. And every time I ask them… give me proof… show me evidence that this is true. I take not 3, but 30 steps back and look at the entire MMORPG landscape and I just don’t see that with everything I have said in these recent posts, as well as my some of lengthy posts in the past dealing with this topic.
Note: It doesn’t mean that we cannot enjoy these games, of course we can. I am not expecting these games to last like the games from the Golden Era. But at the same time, I get frustrated when these games continually have a mass exodus in less than 3 months and sometimes within a month. I’m usually lenient when it comes to MMORPGs, but not when it comes to the MMO part. When 90% of the time it feels like a single player game because everyone else has left (regardless of the reasons or pitiful excuses), that is usually when I get frustrated and just pack up and go. This is something that has plagued most P2P games post 2005.
I don't like Tera but I thought it could hold their subs with the combat... I mean at least they have that different from others mmorpg
Rift isnt exactly going strong, its gone from 58 NA servers down to essentially 8 in less than 18 months. 18 months out, LOTRO was doing better than Rift and probably had more subs
But its not the model thats the issue, its the game quality. LOTRO was the last game that was about the journey and not the destination. Probably not coincidentally, it was the last game that saw an increase in subs over the first year or two. Every other AAA game that tried to charge a sub was a mess, with the exception of Rift which has different reasons for being a failure.
Too many games try to copy a formula (WoW) without understanding what made WoW big in the first place. HINT: it wasnt raiding, or dungeon repetition, or 'welfare epics.' It was a game oozing with soul and character, with a memorable world with memorable inhabitants, much like EQ before it. Even with WoWs fast leveling speed compared to EQ, it still took the average person a couple months to get their first lvl 60. WoW hit a good balance with leveling speed where you still had a journey and got attached to your character without being a heavy grind. Rift (and SWTOR) managed to make the journey takes less time, yet seem much grindier.
Its not the model, its the game quality. From what Ive played with BETA GW2 gets some of it right, the game world certainly has far more soul than Telara or SWTOR, Im guessing the leveling will be too fast, but maybe they will find ways to extend the journey past the level cap, thats what a couple of the gw1 expansions did.
Rift has 16 servers in NA and 16 in EU i guess it's quite good
http://www.riftstatus.com/
It's interesting cause the game came out around the same time as Tera last year.
Tera failed because it launched incompleted not once (in Korea) but TWICE (in the West too).
Let's be real. There are common sense reasons why WoW thrived so much. The first reason is the IP. Warcraft was quite popular around this time, especially after Warcraft 3. The second reason is the way they designed the game. They took good ideas from their predessors and built upon it. On top of that, the game wasn't heavy on system requirements. The third reason, is good timing. People were looking for something new.
Thus the game pretty much grew from there. Most games will be memorable especially if you play it long enough. I remember stuff from games before WoW such as Ultima Online or Ragnarok Online. What's occuring now is people in general seem to be tired of the same ol' stuff just rehashed with a different skin.
Also rift is doing fine. They keep a constant stream of content along with patches, so quite a lot of people stuck around. Hell, even I resub every now and then when I hear something new coming out. Tera ran into issues due to lack of content in some areas and incomplete features.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!"
~Lord George Gordon Byron
By huge you mean half of WoW's sub was chinese gold farmer than yes i guess you could call it a sucess.
TERA servers obviously hold a lot more people than Rifts and I wouldn't say TERA has failed in NA, it seems to have failed in EU due to frogsters utter incomptence but NA is doing well, today I witnessed the largest GvG i've seen since BETA on Basilisk Crag(about 30v40 right after the Nexus, Divine vs Reckless and Revolt) and today VoT finally did it, they set up multiple 100-200 person zergs and had enough people to actually complete the entire Nexus across all three zones, they are the first server to do so.
Sure NA has some dead servers but Dragonfalls PvE playerbase is going strong, Celestial Hills has a strong RP foundation and three of the four PvP servers are highly active.
.... why?
Until you prove otherwise we have to assume they have almost the same capacity. Otherwise when Tera had 37 servers up how many players do you think were playing it? milions?
The 28th June K-Tera will merge the servers from 13 to 4 because they have few players left not because they had a technological breakthrough and are now able to have servers 3 times bigger.
Jp-Tera has three servers but only one is barely alive. They will soon server merge too into 1 single server.
Eu Tera imho will follow soon after that. By the end of the year i bet there will be at most 6 servers (2eng.2fre.2ger) but probably even fewer. Maybe they will just make 4 servers (2eng and 2 ger)
Na Tera will last just a bit longer
Yes, millions were playing TERA, have you not seen the statistics enough times? Just as many people were playing TERA as TOR and TOR has like 70+ servers(okay nevermind, TOR has more than 200 servers...jesus how little can those servers hold?).
Rifts game world is absolutely tiny in comparison to TERAs and it also doesn't have channels.
Apparently on TERA OBT in Korea they reached a peak concurrent user number of 165,000, that's an average of 4459 users per server.
@Pivotelite
By your own logic Tera NA and EU are in the same path as KR and JP.
http://notboring.net/tera_eu_server_status.php
http://teradeck.pirateninjas.net/
None of them get past mid-low usage at any time and some are permalow no matter what. If EME and Frogster still have any brains in their heads they will merge servers by the end of the summer before QoA part 2 update.
INNOVATE OR DIE!
Let this be a lesson to all MMORPG devs and publishers who release the Same Old u know what in a different wrapper.
And a lesson to all the cheesy anime, oversized weapon, Asian MMORPG that try to release to the west....we dont want your same old same old cheesy games.
the game is dying no matter how much the fanboys deny it
in KR blade and soul beta + diablo 3 was pretty much the coup de grace
Actually it does, US tera content comes from translated Kr Tera content, KR tera goes bellyup, the Us one will be soon to follow due to lack of updates.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
Rift allows people to transfer servers for free once a week. 8 of the NA servers are ghost towns because the population bled enough that guilds started mass transferring to be able to replace the ones that left, and the chain reaction of transfers leave dead servers. EU servers are in worse shape, due to the language barriers. Most of the EU servers are dead.
Rift's sub numbers are probably somewhere around 200k - 250k, which isnt bad but they have been going the wrong way since the game launched (with one two month period in early 2012 of slight growth due to swtor failure) and if Storm Legion doesnt beat MoP and GW2 to release it might be too late for Rift to ever be a major force (but it will never be in danger of shutting down either)
The combat in Tera is far from inovative...since 3 or more mmorpg's before Tera already done the same combat system. I got bored from Tera in the first hour and never touched it again....it lacks alot of stuff and is a generic mmo hidden behind their "inovative combat system"
Who the fuck denied it was dying in Korea?
I get sick of the same haters coming in and acting ilke us "fanboys" are dumb, deaf and blind. Go into your favorite games board thanks, sorry we enjoy a game you don't.
Seeing the same pessimists and haters in here for months really starts to piss someone off, that's why I barely come here anymore.
But I guess you guys find it fun.
I think like 90% of the people responding like this, including yourself, don't even read the title or the information posted in the OP.
This is KTERA we are talking about, this post also goes out to the other 10 responses like yours.
If KTERA flops it is inevitable that it will drag US tera with it....also a game like Tera has no chance standing up to all the new games comin up in the next few months....its only a generic mmo hidden behind a "inovative combat system" as they call it ...which is not inovative in any way since it has been done in 3-4 games before Tera.
Heh , goes to show you that people are actually waking up and are stopping the jump process. Every time a new MMO releases everyone quits the MMO they were playing that is virtually the same crap as the new one , just to play the new MMO.
Also goes to show you how saturated the MMO world is when it comes to Fantasy RPG.
I'm glad both games are in decline , might actually force devs on creating fun games for the players instead of creating games that just fill their pockets due to item shops.
Lol, like I didn t see this coming.
Cheers!
MMO Vet since AOL Neverwinter Nights circa 1992. My MMO beat up your MMO. =S
Hai
http://www.gametrics.com/news/News02_View.aspx?seqid=8036
April = 134,717
May = 92,580
June 1st week = 67,931
June 2nd week = 63,099
June 3rd week = 49,664 (-21.29%)