Wow, that's a lot of good opinions; let me try to summarize and reply,
- Grind: So I totally agree, that Grind has 'shown' itself to be valuable in MMoRPG's - I personally, hate the Grind, in fact one reason why I picked CoX when I was coming back to MMoRPG's. Unfortunately, for some reason, people like seeing the slow progress of putting in daily work, or so it would seem, otherwise other really Grindy games wouldn't be as popular as they are.
About CoX being Grindy, I really disagree. It takes 2-3 weeks from starting out new to get a character to 50. I got my first 50 in less than a month when I started playing and barely had any idea about the game. I don't know another popular game that this is possible in.
My problem with the Incarnate's being Grindy is, the Grind keeps players on to 'get to' the maximum level - and then there is a lot to get your maximum level toon even better - CoX's grind is now _only post maximum level, plus, it's tied to one character; that a.) Discourages the alt-a-holic nature of the game, which has been a key ingredient (in my opinion) to keep players here and b.) It totally discounts the early to mid-game. I am not sure if this kind of partial grind is enough to keep people interested, but I am also not sure if the devs have a choice; considering that they can't really change the level curves this late in the game. - End Game Content: More than end-game content, what might be more useful would be level-bounded super rewards. Stuff that you need a level 30-40 toon to do and gives you enhancements that you can use/sell on any character. I think that'll give more of an incentive to players to do more, since they would actually have something to do other than hit the same buttons over and over again from 1-50 (as others have stated).
Lore is great, but it's kinda empty without any real rewards. I'd love to experience _all of the game, start to end game, but really, it becomes a bit of a waste of time when I realize that not many will seek out teaming with my toon unless it is either 50 and/or IO'ed out/Alpha'ed out. - PvP: I understand that this was an afterthought, and that it is not built into the game - in fact, that is great! It allows people to enjoy the game from start to end without having to deal with PvP. That does not mean that it should not be a focus at all.
PvP is really fun - and competitive players would really get involved in it if, well, a.) it didn't suck and b.) if they got something out of it except a 3 bil enh every several months (unless they're just farming PvP, which is what I've seen a lot of people resort to now) - Mid-game: As I said in the end-game section, this really needs to be made 'worth' our while, considering how fast it is to get to 50. Give people a reason to 'not' to level to 50 as soon as possible.
- Age: To be honest, I can't quote statistics, but I will modify this point to rather state, 'not many games last 7+ years without a serious drop in numbers'; for this there are many examples. Take any of the 'other' 200 MMoPRG's out there other than the old reliables.
The way the game is going, if things remain with the 'same' focus, I give it 2 years, at most. People 'will' get tired of running the same content over and over again and getting tons of characters to 50 and Alpha'ed out. You need mid-game content to encourage people to 'play' the lower levels; you need PvP for people to have something to do 'after' 50 and Alphas. The age is building, CoH hasn't been at it's glory days of 200k+ subscribers or anywhere even close in a very long time. Even though profitable, that is all it is, profitable. A million dollars a month isn't really much to keep a team of really good developers interested for long, when there are other games they can join where the growth potential and existing income is so much more.
Virtue Speed Junkie
A Simplified Guide to Attack and Defense
Quote:
Yeah - exiting the game doesn't feel as good when you do it in CoH.|
Originally Posted by dbuter
There are parts of CO that are MUCH better than CoH, and there are parts of CoH that are MUCH better than CO.
|
The uninstall experience offered by CoH also is nowhere near as satisfying.
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
No offense, but we have heard that crap since release about the same content. |
Originally Posted by slainsteel
The way the game is going, if things remain with the 'same' focus, I give it 2 years, at most. People 'will' get tired of running the same content over and over again and getting tons of characters to 50 and Alpha'ed out.
|
Game is going on 7 years now and all they have done is add more and more options and content.
Quote:
COH survived and prospered for almost 7 years with no endgame to speak of. I'd attribute a lot of the long term success of the game to the fact it's an altoholic's dream - sure, it's the same content, but it plays out very differently with different ATs or even just different power sets.|
Originally Posted by slainsteel
People 'will' get tired of running the same content over and over again and getting tons of characters to 50 and Alpha'ed out. You need mid-game content to encourage people to 'play' the lower levels; you need PvP for people to have something to do 'after' 50 and Alphas. The age is building, CoH hasn't been at it's glory days of 200k+ subscribers or anywhere even close in a very long time. Even though profitable, that is all it is, profitable. A million dollars a month isn't really much to keep a team of really good developers interested for long, when there are other games they can join where the growth potential and existing income is so much more.
|
I think the game has a bright future ahead of it. We've now seen two newer, shinier MMOs enter the superhero genre and neither of them has really made a dent in COH's title as THE superhero MMO. If Paragon Studios/NCSoft weren't confident that COH had a future they wouldn't have released a major expansion last year, nor would they be embarking on adding endgame content now. They'd be talking about going F2P or the dread subject of server merges would be coming up. Neither of which is happening.
Okay, that's me being positive. Now for some DOOOM!
The main thing that worries me about the whole Incarnate thing is the possibility that the powers that be have decided 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' and that the best way to retain players, or gain them, is to become more reward focused. The Incarnate Raid Grind is, so far, shaping up to be rather WoW-lite, and the prospect of seeing a greater focus on that style of gameplay (i.e. the majority of new content being high level/incarnate/group based) at the expense of the rest of the game... well... I hope not.
I'd hate, absolutely hate, for COH to become a game where it can be said "The game starts at 50." It never has been, and for a lot of people that's one of its great strengths.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by slainsteel
The way the game is going, if things remain with the 'same' focus, I give it 2 years, at most. People 'will' get tired of running the same content over and over again and getting tons of characters to 50 and Alpha'ed out.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by slainsteel
...you need PvP for people to have something to do 'after' 50 and Alphas.
|
We hear this every year, and still CoX continues. It is however a seven year old game, eventually they will close down the servers and someone will be very pleased with themselves at how they "predicted" the end.
I've been here for six years because more than any other MMO I have played City of allows me to create, as close as possible, the character I have in my imagination, and it allows me to play the way I want to play. No other game has delivered that for me.
Quote:
You have looked at the PVP zones and arenas, yes?|
Originally Posted by slainsteel
you need PvP for people to have something to do 'after' 50 and Alphas.
|
Even at its height, PVP wasn't all that popular in this game. Yes, there's a small group of dedicated PVPers (and a slightly larger group of occasional ones,) but PVP just isn't a big deal in this game - and it's certainly not "needed (for) after 50 and alphas."
See, to me, that's one of the major differences between this and other games. WoW did raiding and PVP. Aion is more PVP focused. They're integral parts of the game. PVP here... not so much. You can go from 1-50 without ever stepping into the zones or arena. And unlike other games, there's no reward* for PVP.
Instead, the game grows wider with more arcs and storylines, the game lets you step back to look at missed (or new lower level) content, the game lets you create your own content, and it lets you work on your "ultimate" build(s) via IOs for future challenges.
Besides, one of the things that some people liked about this was that there WAS no PVP at launch - and when it was introduced, it wasn't introduced as "one side invading the other, there are some safe and some not so safe zones where you may run into invading enemy players while doing missions," but it was sequestered. Entering - once they moved the warzone liasons outside - is 100% optional.
*No reward: yes, I know you have a (small) chance at PVP IOs, and can get other minor rewards. But unlike other games (again, thinking of AIon,) there's no 'uber gear' to get, it's not something to focus on, and if you PVP'd exclusively from 15-50, you'd have a very slow road there.
Quote:
This is a case of "They started it." The Champions crew were really, incredibly douchey about their trash talk toward CoH... and all of it was nothing *but* trash talk. Plus they did scummy things like contact SG leaders here on the boards and offer them free stuff in order to entice them to come over to CO. Their rationale was that SG leaders would then convince their "minions" to follow. That's insulting on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. The CO guys definitely didn't expect that to blow up in their faces once players here outed them for that EULA-breaking and morally reprehensible behavior.|
Originally Posted by Arbiter_Shade
As far as everyone laughing at Champions, why do you have to mock another game to make you feel better about the one you play? Are you so worried about CoX that you have to constantly pat it on the back and tell it how great it is so it can keep on trucking? I just don't get it but I see it all the time in this game.
|
For some inexplicable reason, Cryptic hired Bill Roper, a functionary from Blizzard who was apparently basking in reflected glory from that company's success to launch Flagship Studios which released a single game that bankrupted that company. He then did a lot of trash talk of his own about CoH and then, bizarrely, repeated the exact same business mistakes that killed Flagship. And Cryptic let him.
Why do we run them down? Because they've got it coming.
I just feel bad that Paragon Studios let BaBs go and he now works at Cryptic. I hope he finds a better job before Cryptic goes under.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Cryptic won't go under, 'cash shop' free to play games make obscene money.
Brawling Cactus from a distant planet.
Quote:
Except theirs apparently isn't. Going by various anecdotal sources, such as Steam, Xfire and Raptr play records, both CO and DCUO are bleeding players. DCUO is the most dramatic because it's newer, but they both have candles that are guttering.
|
Originally Posted by CactusBrawler
Cryptic won't go under, 'cash shop' free to play games make obscene money.
|
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
No. They do not.|
Originally Posted by CactusBrawler
Cryptic won't go under, 'cash shop' free to play games make obscene money.
|
Please read my post on the first page of this thread: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...50#post3544650
Very, and I mean very, few free-to-play model games manage to post profits. The reason they seem to post profits is because there are so many games using the free-to-play model, and some franchises, such as those run by Zynga, do actually succeed in posting profits on par with the traditional commercial game market.
The thing is, free-to-play games with cash-add-ons do not need to generate massive profits. For the most part free-to-play games use simple game engines with simple game mechanics. Most free-to-play games do not have to support an entire corporation, nor do they have to support the development of other games. All most free-to-play games have to do is generate enough income to cover on-going operating costs of that game.
That free-to-play business model falls apart when considering traditional games.
In the case of NCSoft the profits from games like City of Heroes, AION, Guild Wars, and Lineage are not just funneled back into each developer. Profits are funneled into other games, such as Tabula Rasa, eXteel, Dungeon Runners, and Auto Assault. As a publisher NCSoft takes a chance with each game. Tabula Rasa, for example, put a huge dent in NCSoft's pockets, and City of Heroes was largely credited with saving NCSoft's financial hide that year.
* * *
Now, that being said, will Cryptic go under?
No, but it won't be because of profits from Champions Online or Star Trek Online. While those games have indeed put a drain on Infogrames finances, and while it is likely that neither game will ever actually post a profit back on either their day to day operating costs or total cost of development, that alone won't kill Cryptic.
Cryptic won't go under because Infogrames won't let Cryptic go under. Infogrames, for some reason or another, intends to keep using Cryptic to hammer out MMO after MMO after MMO, and eventually hope something in the resulting chain of games turns into a big hit.
Now, what happens when Infogrames goes under due to their inability to understand the games market? Cryptic will likely go up on the auction block for a fire-sale price.
Quote:
I don't think DCUO is "bleeding subscribers" yet.|
Originally Posted by Ironik
Except theirs apparently isn't. Going by various anecdotal sources, such as Steam, Xfire and Raptr play records, both CO and DCUO are bleeding players. DCUO is the most dramatic because it's newer, but they both have candles that are guttering.
|
I say this because DCUO only launched back in January:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/950872-dc...se-online/data
http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps3/950873-d...se-online/data
Now, granted, SOE made some mis-steps. For example, there was a Windows PC Client, but no OSX or Linux Client... for a 2011 PC game. Not really the smartest marketing move on SOE's part.
The biggest immediate problem for SOE is that now they are in the shake-out-period... when launch gamers who opted for monthly payments start to drop out, be it for financial reasons, lack of patches, or other reasons. I don't think DCUO's playerbase could be described as stabilized till it hits the 6 month mark.
If the population is still dropping when SOE is beyond the 6 month shake-out point, then SOE and DC are probably going to have very loud words to say to each other.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by je_saist
No. They do not.
Please read my post on the first page of this thread: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showt...50#post3544650 Very, and I mean very, few free-to-play model games manage to post profits. The reason they seem to post profits is because there are so many games using the free-to-play model, and some franchises, such as those run by Zynga, do actually succeed in posting profits on par with the traditional commercial game market. The thing is, free-to-play games with cash-add-ons do not need to generate massive profits. For the most part free-to-play games use simple game engines with simple game mechanics. Most free-to-play games do not have to support an entire corporation, nor do they have to support the development of other games. All most free-to-play games have to do is generate enough income to cover on-going operating costs of that game. That free-to-play business model falls apart when considering traditional games. In the case of NCSoft the profits from games like City of Heroes, AION, Guild Wars, and Lineage are not just funneled back into each developer. Profits are funneled into other games, such as Tabula Rasa, eXteel, Dungeon Runners, and Auto Assault. As a publisher NCSoft takes a chance with each game. Tabula Rasa, for example, put a huge dent in NCSoft's pockets, and City of Heroes was largely credited with saving NCSoft's financial hide that year. * * * Now, that being said, will Cryptic go under? No, but it won't be because of profits from Champions Online or Star Trek Online. While those games have indeed put a drain on Infogrames finances, and while it is likely that neither game will ever actually post a profit back on either their day to day operating costs or total cost of development, that alone won't kill Cryptic. Cryptic won't go under because Infogrames won't let Cryptic go under. Infogrames, for some reason or another, intends to keep using Cryptic to hammer out MMO after MMO after MMO, and eventually hope something in the resulting chain of games turns into a big hit. Now, what happens when Infogrames goes under due to their inability to understand the games market? Cryptic will likely go up on the auction block for a fire-sale price. |
I'm going to have to say my research paints an entirely different picture. Particularly of the Taiwanese and Korean MMO markets.
Brawling Cactus from a distant planet.
Quote:
No particular arguments with the rest, but I think you're letting a few biases color this. OS X, sure it's rarer than Windows, but it's usually a safer bet for a publisher - still not what I'd call a "sure thing." And a linux client... really? What games release with a native Linux client these days?|
Originally Posted by je_saist
Now, granted, SOE made some mis-steps. For example, there was a Windows PC Client, but no OSX or Linux Client... for a 2011 PC game. Not really the smartest marketing move on SOE's part.
|
Just thinking of a few recent popular PC games and if they have mac or linux clients-
Dragon Age - PC, Mac
Dragon Age II - PC, Mac
Civilization V - PC, Mac
Mass Effect 2 - PC
Arkham Asylum - PC
Starcraft II - PC, Mac
Fallout 3/New Vegas - PC / PC
Bioshock / Bioshock 2 - PC, Mac / pc
Portal - PC, Mac
Assassin's Creed I and II - PC/ PC, Mac
Borderlands - PC, Mac
... just a sampling of recent (last few years) titles. Of them - the only references I ran across for Linux referred to "Use crossover/wine/cedega" as opposed to a native client.
If I wander, for instance, to tuxgames.com I see... very little new or familiar. X3. Civ:CTP. UT3. NWN (not even NWN2.) Myth II (which, while fun, is ancient as far as PC games go.) Linuxgamingworld adds Sacred Gold. There were rumors of Steam coming to Linux, which Valve quashed in August 2010.
So while there would be some strength to the suggestion modern games should release an OS X client, suggesting a Linux client release is more a case of advocacy than business.
Quote:
CO went F2P near the start of their 4Q period so will have to wait till they post their full year report after it closes at the end of march.|
Originally Posted by je_saist
Now, if Infogrames comes forward and shows the subscriber levels and financial information, and shows that the Free-to-play model did make Cryptic Profitable... then a discussion about using Champions Online as model for any other game can begin.
|
You can find the reports here if you're interested.
EDIT:
The full sentence about the 1,000 percent also mentions concurrent user and unique logins which in a free-to-play game would not be surprising to ramp up on launch so not sure exactly what comprises that 1,000 percent number.
So good idea to wait till the actual revenue numbers are published.
Original link
Quote:
| Free for All, which launched on January 25, 2011, has drawn hundreds of thousands of new and returning players to the virtual world, increasing Champions Online's online concurrent user, unique login and revenue totals by over 1,000 percent. |
Quote:
You know, I got so caught up in this discussion that I totally forgot we're not allowed to talk about this stuff any more. Well, IBTL, anyway. Might as well continue before it gets deleted tomorrow morning.|
Originally Posted by je_saist
I don't think DCUO is "bleeding subscribers" yet.
I say this because DCUO only launched back in January: http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/950872-dc...se-online/data http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps3/950873-d...se-online/data Now, granted, SOE made some mis-steps. For example, there was a Windows PC Client, but no OSX or Linux Client... for a 2011 PC game. Not really the smartest marketing move on SOE's part. The biggest immediate problem for SOE is that now they are in the shake-out-period... when launch gamers who opted for monthly payments start to drop out, be it for financial reasons, lack of patches, or other reasons. I don't think DCUO's playerbase could be described as stabilized till it hits the 6 month mark. If the population is still dropping when SOE is beyond the 6 month shake-out point, then SOE and DC are probably going to have very loud words to say to each other. |
As for DCUO bleeding players, all the available data supports that, and the anecdotal evidence backs it up. When I was in beta, the most common refrain I heard from PS3 players was that there was no way they were going to pay a monthly fee to play a game after buying it for $60. For gamers weened on FPS multiplayer games that they play for free for years, that's an entirely expected reaction. On the DCUO forums, players are calling for server merges, and on other fora the exact same refrain of "not paying a sub" is repeated again and again.
Within a month of its release, DCUO had dropped off the Xfire Top 100 games played list. For a brand new game that had so much buzz, that's pretty telling. People are buying the game, hitting the level cap, getting bored and dropping it when the first month is up. On Steam, the highest number of players this month was 1,018. For the past week it's been around 700. It's not even on Steam's sales charts any more. These are all what one could call "troubling portents" if you're on the DCUO Dev team.
PC sales so far have been 158,889. PS3 sales are similar. So that's 320k box sales. Throw in another 250k for Steam and D2D sales for a wildly-high number just for generosity's sake. Let's just round it up and say they've sold 750,000 copies of the game (which they haven't)... oh, what the hell, let's say they've sold one million copies (ROFL). Considering they keep about 30% of each box sale (split between developer and publisher, box price at $45 currently), that means they've earned about 13,500,000 bucks. From all accounts, DCUO cost $50 million to make. Since the reality is that the actual sales are probably in the neighborhood of 300k, they've made $4 million dollars. That's a flop.
In order for DCUO make most of its money back, they have to retain 250k subscribers for an entire year. They won't. For some of the cool ideas they have, it's just not that good of a game overall and it's not retaining players. People are going to be playing the new Batman Arkham game instead.
There's a video floating around from Pax that have a bunch of MMO industry types (including a guy from NCSoft) talking about DCUO's failed launch. (It's not mentioned by name, but it's clear from the question which game the guy is asking about.) These guys kinda know what they're talking about. I'd guess DCUO will go F2P sooner rather than later in order to try and recoup some of their losses.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Yeah, that's kind of a bizarre assertion. Spending development time catering to a miniscule number of users, of which only a fraction will play your game, is wasted effort and money. Windows is still, what, 85-90% of the OS market share? The real contender is OSX, and that's mostly from Apple's domination of the tab and phone market.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
So while there would be some strength to the suggestion modern games should release an OS X client, suggesting a Linux client release is more a case of advocacy than business.
|
If the Devs at Paragon Studios are smart, they'll create a costume creator app for the iPhone, iPod and iPad and sell it for 99 cents. Put every available costume in there and clearly indicate which ones are "standard," which are Vet unlocks, which are effort unlocks or level-based unlocks, and which ones cost money in the form of Boosters. Then add a bunch of minimally-animated backgrounds your character can pose against and a screenshot export function. At the very least you'll make some money, and you might get a few more subscribers from it.
And because I came up with the idea and gave it away for free, give it away top active subscribers.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
ahem: http://www.wolfire.com/humble|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
So while there would be some strength to the suggestion modern games should release an OS X client, suggesting a Linux client release is more a case of advocacy than business.
|
I also direct you to http://www.minecraft.net/download.jsp
And to http://unigine.com/
And to http://www.google.com/mobile/android/
And to http://us.playstation.com/corporate/...e-devices.html
I also direct you to:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...re-growth.html
Quote:
|
WebOS on Every PC Apotheker says he also wants to make better use of WebOS, the computer-operating system acquired last year when Hewlett- Packard purchased smartphone maker Palm Inc. for $1.2 billion. Starting next year, every one of the PCs shipped by HP will include the ability to run WebOS in addition to Microsoft Corp.s Windows, Apotheker said. |
Quote:
| Valve has also confirmed that it will make Steam available to Linux users in the coming months. |
the fact is, Linux is larger than just Desktop Linux. It's on your phones, in your cars, and it's probably already installed on or came with a computer and you might not even realize it: http://www.splashtop.com/partners
It is past time for game developers to stop trying to throw Linux under a bus and pretend that it doesn't exist or that they cannot sell into Linux markets.
Let me put it another way.
Every single person who says that putting commercial games on Linux is not going to profitable, and shouldn't be done, or calls it "advocacy" ignores a crucial little factor.
Years ago a Tiny Corporation Called Microsoft had a computer operating system called DOS. There were a selection of tiny games available for DOS.
Then Microsoft did Windows 95, which allowed for even more complex games. Game developers started programming for the platform. Microsoft caught on that they had a good thing. Their platform was cheaper, and relatively easier, to produce games for than consoles from 1995. Game Developers liked Windows because they could easily upgrade hardware.
Then Microsoft did Windows 98 and started promoting DirectX 6.1 as a competitor to then mainstay SGI OpenGL.
Then Microsoft did DX7, DX8.1, and DX9... while SGI OpenGL pretty much did nothing.
The point that I'm trying to make is this: Microsoft Windows became popular for games because game developers started pushing the platform... FIRST.
Let me repeat that:
Independent Software Vendors started using the Microsoft Platform to Produce and Sell Their products... FIRST
BEFORE THE MARKET GREW
Executives at Microsoft weren't sitting around the office one day and decided that maybe they could sell a few more OS units by making the platform friendly for games.
For some reason many of today's game commercial developers and publishers are hung up on the idea that a market has to be big before they can enter it. Instead of approaching Linux as an operating system platform that they can grow sales and products on, publishers and developers want Linux to be big first.
And those commercial developers and publishers are getting their collected ***** handed to them by Independent Developers who don't care whether or not a market is big.
Some developers and publishers have caught on that they need to grow their potential markets, and not simply wait around on a Legacy platform.
Quote:
Sorry for coming back to this kind of late, but to steal from Men in Black: A person may not like grind. People do.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Um, no, it isn't.
I don't like grind. I may like the *result* of it (new power, etc.) - or not ("Finally, next mission, that sucked... wait, more bats?") - but that doesn't mean I like the process. True for everyone? No. Some people may find some sort of "zen" in the activity. Others don't. Feeling too "grindy" is a big part of what made me leave Aion. Of course, part of what determines if you like it or not is how it's presented, too. I'm not sure if you'd call Minecraft "grindy" or not - in some ways, it fits the definition well (there's really nothing else TO do but mine, craft, mine, defeat or avoid enemies, etc.) but in other ways it's... well, Legos. |
I agree presentation matters a lot, though. I've played games where I've been bored out of my skull and watching my XP bar with an eagle eye, just desperate to get to the next level for that fun thing. I've also played games where I can spend hours having a total blast and my XP bar has just flown on by without me looking once at it. Hell, sometimes those have been the same game.
De minimis non curat Lex Luthor.
Quote:
True. It lumps it all into one group without specifying what the 1,000% is referring to in the sentence. A 1,000% increases in logins mostly by people who buy nothing does little for revenues.
|
Originally Posted by Pebblebrook
CO went F2P near the start of their 4Q period so will have to wait till they post their full year report after it closes at the end of march.
You can find the reports here if you're interested. EDIT: The full sentence about the 1,000 percent also mentions concurrent user and unique logins which in a free-to-play game would not be surprising to ramp up on launch so not sure exactly what comprises that 1,000 percent number. So good idea to wait till the actual revenue numbers are published. Orignial link |
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
My math could be off, but isn't saying "a 1000% increase" the same result as if you multiply by ten?
Quote:
Yes, but "increased by 1,000%" sounds a lot more impressive than saying "ten times more"...|
Originally Posted by ShadowsBetween
My math could be off, but isn't saying "a 1000% increase" the same result as if you multiply by ten?
|
Hell, some people will confuse the two and think 1000% increase is the same as 1000 times more. It worked on DeepBlue.
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
Quote:
Yes. 1000% sounds more impressive though.
|
Originally Posted by ShadowsBetween
My math could be off, but isn't saying "a 1000% increase" the same result as if you multiply by ten?
|
Quote:
Most awesome two sentences in the whole thread.
|
Originally Posted by Novapulse
I've been here for six years because more than any other MMO I have played City of allows me to create, as close as possible, the character I have in my imagination, and it allows me to play the way I want to play. No other game has delivered that for me.
|
@Captain-Electric � Detective Marvel � The Sapien Spider � Moravec Man � The Old Norseman
Dark-Eyes � Doctor Serpentine � Stonecaster � Skymaiden � The Blue Jaguar
Guide to Altitis � A Comic for New Players � The Lore Project � Intro to extraterrestrials in CoH
well IBTL but...
DCUO, as it stands, isn't a BAD game, infact the levelling content is really rather good, very good infact, it blows CoH/CO content out of the water. Some of the powersets are really good looking (oh how I long for a Staff set that looked and flowed together as well as the one in DCUO) and the action based gaming seperated it from its two nearest competitors.
However it's the endgame content that really, really didn't work, it's basically A) Repeating some of the instances you played while levelling up but for high level instead or B) Running WoW style Raids, of which there were a reasonable number and several were well designed (the Arkham Asylumn one for instance has points where you can actually see it's a direct copy from the game of the same name). It's all rather boring infact.
Also I really don't think locking almost ALL the costumes behind gearing did it any favours, its two nearest competitors were vastly more open with the character creation.
DCUO wasn't stunningly good but what it did well, it REALLY did well, what it did badly...was mostly just boring rather than terribly bad.
There are parts of CO that are MUCH better than CoH, and there are parts of CoH that are MUCH better than CO. But saying anything like this just gets the fanatics riled up.