POST STUFF
|
 by briyan, Level 45
Last updated at July 2, 2008, 10:03 pm
|
|
The above screenshot was taken from the Age of Conan status page on Xfire at around 6:30PM Pacific time today. As you can see, the trend is quite clearly heading downward, and this includes the dates before the free trial period ended. In the image, you can see that weekday hours were around 60,000 per day back near the beginning of June, and they are now hovering closer to 35,000 per day. That is a decline of over 40% in one month!
Jumping Ship While It's Still Free?
It looks like that is exactly what many Age of Conan users have done. During this early period in the game's life (within 2 months of launch), the growth of subscriptions and in particular the long-term commitment to the game by hardcore players is of paramount importance. Unfortunately for Funcom, the declining gameplay time we see on Xfire indicates that the opposite is happening: hardcore early-adopters are giving up on the game, and nobody new is coming to join the party.
Dropping Down The ListXfire shows a peak for Age of Conan at #4 on their popularity list by minutes played per week. Since then, it has dropped like a rock, falling below several much older games. Though the AoC-specific shot I linked above shows #8, we can see the minutes are still dropping, and today's realtime overall list shows Age of Conan at #10 (see image to right). When the weekly updates are made, we can be sure that Age of Conan will have dropped a few more spots on the ranking list.
Meaningless Numbers? No.
Now, you may argue that the population of Xfire players does not necessarily equal the number of AoC players, and that is true. But we have no solid reason to expect that the proportion of AoC players on Xfire is dramatically changing over time. With this in mind, it's reasonable to assume that the Xfire trends should closely track the trends of the full game.
Headed For Flatline
We can speculate all day as to why, but it's quite clear that Age of Conan is rapidly dying. Users are playing less and less during a critical growth period when they should be just getting hooked into the game. At this point, it will take a drastic change from Funcom to right this sinking ship.
Do you want Funcom to take notice? Digg this article!
http://digg.com/pc_games/Age_of_Conan_Flatlining
Report Post
98 comments
Grup Jul 2, 2008 at 10:08 pm
+4 votes
Personally, I haven't played AoC even a single second, and have no interest in it. However, I think it's bad news when a game like WoW completely flourishes, while others slowly die out. It's stifling not only competition, but creativity. This 'generation' in videogames in particular has seen far less small companies produce popular software that sold really well. Most popular games now get bought out by larger companies to the point there are really only a handful of major players left. In the long run, I'd say this is not good for the industry (PC or console).
22 replies to Grup (hide)
22 replies to Grup (show)
Permalink
Quote
Post Reply
Reply to this comment
CrispyDeath Jul 2, 2008 at 10:13 pm
+1 votes
Funcom should've done more research into what gamers really want out of an MMO and they should have delivered. I bet Blizzard would've delayed the game another year just to polish everything and give it that extra needed edge.
Grup Jul 2, 2008 at 10:17 pm
+1 votes
Blizzard has a far, far, far larger budget and fanbase to get away with such things. So does Nintendo. The rest of the industry doesn't have the same luxuries or resources to fling around.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:19 pm
+1 votes
They built their game around hype and false promises. They couldn't have possibly thought they had a solid, polished, good game at release, but for whatever reason they tried to push it out and see if they could get away with it. And they didn't. Of course I would argue that this one wasn't going to be any good even if they had an extra year, but that's just me.
Grup Jul 2, 2008 at 10:24 pm
+1 votes
You mean like most every game that tries to be competitive with a smaller budget? I'm sure if they had the same budget and resources as Blizzard, they could have made a game just as good as WoW. They didn't. If they delayed it, that's just more money they have to spend on the staff and development, and less time to reap the reward in the market to make back costs and then eventually profit. I'm sure most of the development team would love to have polished it more, as most do, but development teams don't run companies.
Also, WoW's endgame was pretty bad when it came out, and the game wasn't even remotely balanced or polished, gear options were laughable, there were less quests, and so on. And this from a delayed game and arguably the best PC game developer around. People honestly expect too much out of MMO's now.
Also, WoW's endgame was pretty bad when it came out, and the game wasn't even remotely balanced or polished, gear options were laughable, there were less quests, and so on. And this from a delayed game and arguably the best PC game developer around. People honestly expect too much out of MMO's now.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:28 pm
+1 votes
It is true that MMO is the most resource-intensive game you can make, and it costs a lot of money to create all the content. However, this does not account for inherently bad design of game systems. Completeness of content and solid gameplay foundation are two very different things, and AoC has neither.
CrispyDeath Jul 2, 2008 at 10:31 pm
+1 votes
Funcom from the outset should have realized that to compete in an MMO market where a game like WOW is dominating and will continue to dominate, they need a better quality product than what WOW was when it released. I'm told LOTRO was a pretty fun and polished game but still couldn't compete with WOW. Someone should make a list to see how many MMOs have failed where WOW has succeeded.
Grup Jul 2, 2008 at 10:41 pm
+1 votes
I played LotRO. A lot of complaints were similar to AoC complaints, although not so much about bugs. Some areas lacking quests, not enough end-game content, and so on. A low budget game has to focus on early-mid game to draw users in, and then build from there. If they have a weak early game, no one will keep playing, and they'll never have the funding to have that polished end-game. Graphically AoC is superior to WoW. There's no real reason AoC should have better gameplay and content than WoW did. WoW was in development longer and had a larger budget. Gameplay typically transcends technology (I'll play Super Mario Bros over that 50 cent game). People need to stop comparing smaller companies to Blizzard, and rather compare MMOs like LotRO to AoC, it's far more fair.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 11:13 pm
+2 votes
I would say that budget does not factor into the gameplay in terms of the feel and the fun factor. Good developers get it right, and bad ones get it wrong, no matter how big they are. If you put more money and time into a game system that people don't enjoy, it doesn't just magically become awesome -- if the designers lacks the right vision, it will still be a failure.
Grup Jul 2, 2008 at 11:25 pm
+2 votes
You do know a lot of people actually enjoy AoC's combat, right? Not everything needs to be the same. AoC, based on its gameplay, got pretty good reviews. Most complaints came at higher levels, which aren't based on its inherent gameplay.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 12:27 am
+1 votes
You can tell the major feel is optimized for someone standing still, fighting a single PvE mob, and clicking abilities slowly. If you do anything other than that, it feels and looks horrible.
Folly Jul 3, 2008 at 3:15 pm
+1 votes
You can tell the major feel is optimized for someone standing still, fighting a single PvE mob, and clicking abilities slowly. If you do anything other than that, it feels and looks horrible.
This is so true. I can't tell you how many times a moving player would get healed to full from natural health regen when I was trying to melee him and nothing would land. I can't tell you how many times a combo would get messed up because hitting <-- wouldn't advance the combo and after hitting it again it would break the combo because it already moved on to the next arrow. Kinda stupid.
This is so true. I can't tell you how many times a moving player would get healed to full from natural health regen when I was trying to melee him and nothing would land. I can't tell you how many times a combo would get messed up because hitting <-- wouldn't advance the combo and after hitting it again it would break the combo because it already moved on to the next arrow. Kinda stupid.
Vain Jul 3, 2008 at 12:46 am
+2 votes
Well a lot of people liked Horizons too, and that game was ass. I think the general idea behind AoC's combat is pretty innovative, but it's as if they didn't have any good game designers to fully flesh out the idea, and really build something fun and balanced around it (because the combo system sure isn't balanced right now). It's like they came up with the cool idea of adding combos/no auto attack to an mmo, and then just didn't know where to go from there.
Vain Jul 3, 2008 at 12:36 am
+1 votes
"I'm sure if they had the same budget and resources as Blizzard, they could have made a game just as good as WoW. "
Hell no, there's more to making a good game than just throwing money at the project. A crapload of money was spent on Vanguard, and look what happened there.
Sometimes the developers just plain suck, and have no idea how to make a fun game or even one with well thought out mechanics.
Hell no, there's more to making a good game than just throwing money at the project. A crapload of money was spent on Vanguard, and look what happened there.
Sometimes the developers just plain suck, and have no idea how to make a fun game or even one with well thought out mechanics.
Grup Jul 3, 2008 at 12:43 am
+1 votes
There's two themes here. If you don't like AoC gameplay, that's fine. Many people don't like WoW gameplay. That's not what I'm talking about. Given many editorial sites as well as players really enjoy the gameplay, even more than WoW's, I don't really feel it's a point worth arguing. I'm a WoW player and never played AoC, so I feel I'm being more than objective on this.
Most people that like AoC's gameplay, its fanbase (and this topic is about their fanbase), have been complaining about bugs and lack of content. Both of those are essentially products of a budget. Throwing money at debuggers and more content designers does fix those problems.
Briyan, you can say the same thing about LotRO, FFXI, and oh, most MMOs. Some people prefer that style.
*Gasp* I even love turn based strategy games that people complain about for being slow and boring.
Most people that like AoC's gameplay, its fanbase (and this topic is about their fanbase), have been complaining about bugs and lack of content. Both of those are essentially products of a budget. Throwing money at debuggers and more content designers does fix those problems.
Briyan, you can say the same thing about LotRO, FFXI, and oh, most MMOs. Some people prefer that style.
*Gasp* I even love turn based strategy games that people complain about for being slow and boring.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 1:56 am
+1 votes
Well Grup you could say that "some people like turn based strategy" but AoC was developed and touted to have serious world PvP and large-scale guild PvP. To support PvP, you have to allow for people constantly moving (cause that's what real players do), and the melee and combo system of AoC absolutely looks like a failure when people are moving all around.
Generated Jul 3, 2008 at 8:35 am
+1 votes
oh, Briyan, not to offend you... But its not hard to land a combo on a person that is running around. you just need the last attack of your combo to land on the enemy player. Its hard to begin with, but once you get the hang of it its rather easy.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 10:14 am
+1 votes
Are you telling me it doesn't feel hokey though? Just because you can make it work in some way does not mean it looks and feels solid.
Generated Jul 3, 2008 at 12:59 pm
+1 votes
I believe your statement was that you cant move around and do combos at the same time, something which is very possible to do (ive experienced, and others have shown via vids, that it is possible). Or atleast that seemed to be what you were implying. so that removes your "Well pvp cant work because you cant move" thingy.
And, really, I dont care that some idiot cant make it work, simply because I dont give a **** about the lowest nominator (When it comes to anything really). And really, the way I "... make it work in some way..." is a fairly commen way of doing "it".
And finally, "looks like a..." in other words you actually havent tried it. Just as a sidenote - I dont really play AoC, I have a level 30 assassin (played the game for 2 weeks) but since im not a huge mmorpg fan I dont use to much time on AoC/WoW (i have a s3 war that I havent played since... well the ending of S3).
but yeah, it does look a bit special when you land a combo, but the guy moves away, yet your combo still lands.
And the people that say that WoW didn't have problems in the start of its carrier are smoking ******* crack (DC whipes in MC plagued my guild for months and months, lack of +spelldmg gear, and insane none scalling abilites that 2 shooted everyone was so awsome (then turned useless later), then whne you though everything was good, your class wasent invited anymore because Fury wars outdid your class in dps. And ofc, having the play 6 hours per day just to have "decent " pvp gear (I had t2.5, medicore at best)).
Bah, in the end the AoC Vs WoW debate feels like comparing **** with **** and then trying to figure what smells worse.
And, really, I dont care that some idiot cant make it work, simply because I dont give a **** about the lowest nominator (When it comes to anything really). And really, the way I "... make it work in some way..." is a fairly commen way of doing "it".
And finally, "looks like a..." in other words you actually havent tried it. Just as a sidenote - I dont really play AoC, I have a level 30 assassin (played the game for 2 weeks) but since im not a huge mmorpg fan I dont use to much time on AoC/WoW (i have a s3 war that I havent played since... well the ending of S3).
but yeah, it does look a bit special when you land a combo, but the guy moves away, yet your combo still lands.
And the people that say that WoW didn't have problems in the start of its carrier are smoking ******* crack (DC whipes in MC plagued my guild for months and months, lack of +spelldmg gear, and insane none scalling abilites that 2 shooted everyone was so awsome (then turned useless later), then whne you though everything was good, your class wasent invited anymore because Fury wars outdid your class in dps. And ofc, having the play 6 hours per day just to have "decent " pvp gear (I had t2.5, medicore at best)).
Bah, in the end the AoC Vs WoW debate feels like comparing **** with **** and then trying to figure what smells worse.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 1:30 pm
+2 votes
Yeah, I will agree to just stop the argument with you here. I would love for something new and fresh and compelling to come along. WotLK will be interesting to me for a little while, but then I'll be back to wishing somebody would make a quality MMO. From the track records across the board so far it looks like it'll either be a total surprise from a first-time MMO dev or Blizzard's next MMO whenever it comes out. 
Generated Jul 3, 2008 at 2:31 pm
+1 votes
yeah, sorry if I came of as a jerk :P Dunno, I dont like what wow turned out to be, and the more I think about the combo system of AoC it seems very... dunno, the opposite of fluid? like, laggy? Im gonna give WoTLK a try tho, or start playing wow again if I can find a good resto shaman (which I cant because I wont log on).
dunno, I REALLY enjoyed the first 20 levels of AoC, but after that the quests got fairly boring. And The pvp system, dunno... seems a bit lacking in some area's. I just miss Tyrs Hand :P
dunno, I REALLY enjoyed the first 20 levels of AoC, but after that the quests got fairly boring. And The pvp system, dunno... seems a bit lacking in some area's. I just miss Tyrs Hand :P
Godsmak Jul 3, 2008 at 3:42 pm
+1 votes
He's correct about the combo system You can land combos on people running around, it takes skill. It takes time to learn it.
CrispyDeath Jul 2, 2008 at 10:11 pm
+1 votes
Well, personally when I had xfire I never had it on all the time. That said wolfenstein enemy territory is beating it today lol.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:25 pm
+2 votes
Sure, most people don't have Xfire, and some that do are not always using it. But these factors are all accounted for since the Xfire data is basically a random sample. We're not concerned with the raw numbers on Xfire, just the trends (i.e. they are dropping).
Tower Jul 2, 2008 at 10:15 pm
+1 votes
In conclusion, Xfire is crap and not an unbiased tool for calculating MMO trends as thousands upon thousands of players haven't installed that piece of **** program.
I'm not defending AoC or anything, haven't even played it, but your numbers are about as useful as the ones the AoC PR puts out.
I'm not defending AoC or anything, haven't even played it, but your numbers are about as useful as the ones the AoC PR puts out.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:22 pm
+2 votes
The point is... the ratio of AoC players with Xfire has no reason to be rapidly fluctuating.
If 1% of the players are on Xfire, and all of them are playing 40% less on average, it's reasonable to think that a similar trend is going on with the ones that aren't on Xfire. You can think of Xfire kinda like a random sample, as Xfire membership and AoC subscribership are independent of one another.
If 1% of the players are on Xfire, and all of them are playing 40% less on average, it's reasonable to think that a similar trend is going on with the ones that aren't on Xfire. You can think of Xfire kinda like a random sample, as Xfire membership and AoC subscribership are independent of one another.
betterthanyou Jul 2, 2008 at 10:29 pm
+1 votes
There is bound to be SOME change, but with high numbers like those, you will be able to pick out some trends, if only in the xfire community.
It doesn't accurately represent the entirety of AoC users, but it does show the game is losing popularity, if only among the xfire crowd.
It doesn't accurately represent the entirety of AoC users, but it does show the game is losing popularity, if only among the xfire crowd.
Slappywag Jul 2, 2008 at 10:28 pm
+1 votes
The game is decent aside from the complete lack of end game content.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:29 pm
+1 votes
Which, sadly, will not matter much, as the game will basically "die" before they ever get around to fleshing it out. Nobody will get to see what they were envisioning.
Dyzz Jul 3, 2008 at 12:34 am
+1 votes
which was my complaint as to "why the **** should i continue to level"
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 1:57 am
+1 votes
Yeah, what is there to look forward to? That plus the fact that friends/guildmates are quitting left and right has to remove a lot of the incentive to keep playing.
Tower Jul 2, 2008 at 10:33 pm
+1 votes
Except you can easily see that people who use Xfire are not simply another group among MMO players than can be used to model the rest of the community. Xfire is wholly a chat application for people who play a lot of video games, they also play a large selection of video games. The degmoraphic is wholly different than the majority of people who make of the MMO community.
Casuals are what make up the playerbase, they make our break the MMO game bank. I would argue people who Xfire are not casuals, and therefore making any conclusions from them to determine if a game is on the downfall is impossible.
Yes, the numbers AoC is putting out are bloated, partly due to free game trials starting/ending. But AoC still has a large playerbase, enough to sustain them into another successful quarter if they are able to fix, balance and introduce new content.
Casuals are what make up the playerbase, they make our break the MMO game bank. I would argue people who Xfire are not casuals, and therefore making any conclusions from them to determine if a game is on the downfall is impossible.
Yes, the numbers AoC is putting out are bloated, partly due to free game trials starting/ending. But AoC still has a large playerbase, enough to sustain them into another successful quarter if they are able to fix, balance and introduce new content.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 10:36 pm
+2 votes
I would definitely agree that Xfire would be slanted toward the hardcores. But this makes it a reasonable proxy for AoC anyway, given the extremely high system requirements -- most of your typical WoW casuals could not even run AoC on their machines if they wanted to.
So, while it is slanted a little hardcore, I do not agree with you when you say the Xfire group is "wholly different" than the AoC community at large.
So, while it is slanted a little hardcore, I do not agree with you when you say the Xfire group is "wholly different" than the AoC community at large.
Tower Jul 2, 2008 at 10:51 pm
+1 votes
Well just as you disagree with them being "wholly different", your article claims AoC is flatlining, a hyperbole based on biased data from skewed samples, which I disagree with.
You'd be surprised how many play MMOs under the system requirements, the typical computer user and even gamer doesn't upgrade that often, as someone in IT I can 100% stand by that statement. I know a lot of players playing AoC with 1-3 year old machines, MMOs have the allure to make the poorest gamer "get by" and keep coming back through the freezes and crashes.
AoC is just fine, but they will need to be on their game in the coming months. I've read a lot of articles about it and it seems to be in the same place WoW was on release, how easily we forget the multitude of problems it had. Blizzard knows the market, they'll announce WotLK release date at a crucial time, ripping the sails of AoC and pulling the media away from Warhammer Online release excitement. I just don't like sensationalism, but I sometimes forget this is gameriot and it's all about views/posting whether or not the content is interesting or valid.
You'd be surprised how many play MMOs under the system requirements, the typical computer user and even gamer doesn't upgrade that often, as someone in IT I can 100% stand by that statement. I know a lot of players playing AoC with 1-3 year old machines, MMOs have the allure to make the poorest gamer "get by" and keep coming back through the freezes and crashes.
AoC is just fine, but they will need to be on their game in the coming months. I've read a lot of articles about it and it seems to be in the same place WoW was on release, how easily we forget the multitude of problems it had. Blizzard knows the market, they'll announce WotLK release date at a crucial time, ripping the sails of AoC and pulling the media away from Warhammer Online release excitement. I just don't like sensationalism, but I sometimes forget this is gameriot and it's all about views/posting whether or not the content is interesting or valid.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 11:09 pm
+1 votes
My verb flatline may have been somewhat hyperbolic to grab attention, but a downward trend at this point in the game's life cycle is a very bad sign. Do you actually think the active playerbase is growing?
Tower Jul 2, 2008 at 11:30 pm
+1 votes
Depends on what you mean by growing, I'm sure it is shrinking in the playerbase that has already attained levels 60-80, but growing in newer players and at a growing/constant of people still leveling. WoW had the very same problem with trials ending and lacking end game content, having lots of broken content. Many people went back to EQ, but what I would REALLY like to see is the number of people not playing AoC but are still paying their monthly subscriptions.
Hell, people "quit" WoW but still pay their monthly fees, because they plays sporadically or have paid in group sums for discounts over a few months. Point is, AoC has enough of a playerbase now to grow into a great game for two reasons. One being the game seems to be fairly well rounded and received due to its numbers already, and two, it has a few months and a solid income to bring in more players before any real reason to ignore/quit the game. WoW will have no new content from now on until WotLK, that gives AoC some breathing room.
I'm not buying stock in AoC, but I certainly wouldn't bet against them. But part of that is because Blizzard is a ******* huge company with a lot of resources right now, simply allowing players access to level 80 talents a couple months ahead of release could bring tons of interest.
Hell, people "quit" WoW but still pay their monthly fees, because they plays sporadically or have paid in group sums for discounts over a few months. Point is, AoC has enough of a playerbase now to grow into a great game for two reasons. One being the game seems to be fairly well rounded and received due to its numbers already, and two, it has a few months and a solid income to bring in more players before any real reason to ignore/quit the game. WoW will have no new content from now on until WotLK, that gives AoC some breathing room.
I'm not buying stock in AoC, but I certainly wouldn't bet against them. But part of that is because Blizzard is a ******* huge company with a lot of resources right now, simply allowing players access to level 80 talents a couple months ahead of release could bring tons of interest.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 12:29 am
+1 votes
You think WoW had the same problem of game population shrinking within 2 months of release? No sir. People went back to EQ? Are you kidding me?
Vain Jul 3, 2008 at 12:51 am
+1 votes
"I've read a lot of articles about it and it seems to be in the same
place WoW was on release, how easily we forget the multitude of
problems it had."
Wow was nowhere near this bad on early release. They had 1 week of serious server capacity problems at the beginning (lol @ Archimonde), but the gameplay itself was solid. You could level from 1-60 with no problems. I think a lot of people forget how truly ****ty MMOs were *before* WoW came out. EQ2, AC2, AO, Horizons release were all a pile of **** in comparison.
place WoW was on release, how easily we forget the multitude of
problems it had."
Wow was nowhere near this bad on early release. They had 1 week of serious server capacity problems at the beginning (lol @ Archimonde), but the gameplay itself was solid. You could level from 1-60 with no problems. I think a lot of people forget how truly ****ty MMOs were *before* WoW came out. EQ2, AC2, AO, Horizons release were all a pile of **** in comparison.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 1:28 am
+1 votes
WoW had some technical issues but I never thought about quitting over it. I got mad at them because I wanted to play RIGHT THEN and see more of the game.
Dyzz Jul 3, 2008 at 8:50 am
+1 votes
And when you crash in AoC you think "Wow, not only is this game very boring and bland and unbalanced, but it is buggy as **** too!", where as when wow came out, you would crash and couldnt wait to reload the game and keep trucking.
It has alot to do with the companys budget and money spent in development. Blizzard has proably a rediculously higher amount of money to dump into thier games where funcom's last MMo pretty much dumped a few months after release.
It has alot to do with the companys budget and money spent in development. Blizzard has proably a rediculously higher amount of money to dump into thier games where funcom's last MMo pretty much dumped a few months after release.
briyan Jul 3, 2008 at 10:10 am
+1 votes
Were many of the same people involved with the last Funcom MMO? Seems like if it's mostly the same team, we shouldn't be surprised at the poor product.
cydial Jul 2, 2008 at 10:42 pm
+1 votes
WoW's overall feel of fantasy, social structure, and just over all design from lvl 1 to 70 is what really makes it fun. Wows graphics are cartoonish, but at the same time they are just more aesthically pleasing than AoC's "better" graphics.
Oozo Jul 2, 2008 at 10:57 pm
+3 votes
IMO, the thing that WoW really has going for it is how smooth it's animations and movement are and how responsive it is in PvP.
I have my doubts that any game is going to be able to match that.
I have my doubts that any game is going to be able to match that.
briyan Jul 2, 2008 at 11:07 pm
+1 votes
I agree Oozo, the characters and animations all feel very good for the most part. Your character feels anchored to the ground, and movement is very smooth without being floaty. For some reason it seems difficult for other games to match this solid feel in a 3rd person perspective.
cydial Jul 2, 2008 at 11:29 pm
+1 votes
agreed, I noticed in AoC the movements are not choppy, but the characters look as if they were meant to only run in a 2d plane of existence. They don't transition well into slopes or mountains.
Vain Jul 3, 2008 at 12:55 am
+1 votes
I'm really hoping Warhammer will have good animations (I hear it's not that responsive right now). WoW does this well because the server puts a lot more trust in the client than other MMOs do.
However WAR has enemy collision detection, so it will be interesting to see how they handle client performance there.
However WAR has enemy collision detection, so it will be interesting to see how they handle client performance there.
Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...