Results -9 to 0 of 124

Dev. Posts

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Player Afania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,452
    Character
    Afania
    World
    Bahamut
    Main Class
    BRD Lv 1
    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    The fact you disagree doesn't change much. To you, it was a success, to me, it wasn't, it has no affect on what I said which no matter how you wish to take it was simply stating a game's lifespan does not dictate it's success. Call of Duty lasts a year, maybe 2, and yet they are considered a success by all means because they can sell millions of copies and do so every single year. Comparing different genres? Yeah, I am, but the point still stands that a game's lifespan doesn't dictate it's success.
    Call of Duty isn't MMO, and CoD sells better than majority of games in same genre, thus it's a success. FFXI also sells better than 90% of MMO in the industry, thus it's also a success. In MMO industry, besides revenue, one of the most common way to determine whether a title is successful, is by looking at it's lifespan. It's fact, and that's how the majority of dev/players judge a title in this industry. No one would care about how one individual player think about this game, but they care about the numbers. A game's lifespan and sub number directly affects revenue, in FFXI's case, it did better than most of the titles in the industry, so how is it not a success?

    And fine, that's assume you're correct that FFXI is cheap with upkeep(I still don't know exactly which title you're comparing with, cuz you only use vague concept, but oh well):


    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    So the amount of people has no baring on a games success? I fail to see how. A smaller player base means a smaller revenue which means less profit and thus as a result less success.
    I just told you why. A game cost 200M to make and make 100M back with bigger player base, v.s a game cost 20M to make and make 50M with smaller player base. You can tell which title makes more money by doing the math.

    The amount of people has no direct connection on a games success, because a game cost money to develop, and it cost money to update. I remember I saw some info about FFXI cost around 16M~24 to make somewhere, plus extremely low budget on content update. SWTOR cost 150M~200M to make, nearly 10x more amount, but not much more sub after 1 year. I've heard Tera also hits 100M mark and sub number wasn't impressive either. A game cost 5~10 times more money to make than FFXI should have 5~10 times more player than FFXI, but pretty much every title besides WOW on the market can't get 2.5M~5M sub.

    So yeah, the amount of people has no direct baring to a game's success, because it depend on the development cost.


    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    Well here we go Afania, let's go back to the same old arguement you and I always have about preferences and how mine are apparently so very different than yours, shall we?

    This is financial and revolutionary success. When talking about games in the general term of success I always look more to entertainment success than financial or revolutionary.

    Financially yes, it's a success.
    You don't get the point, the point is, the way you use the word "success" was wrong.

    Yes, we have different preference, but when we use the term "success", it's often used in an objective way that it has nothing to do with your personal preference. That we often determine whether a something/someone is a success by something measurable with number and data. Such as the amount of money it makes, or it's influence in the industry, or in MMORPG's case, it's lifespan.

    The fact is, at first you claimed FFXI isn't a success because it doesn't fit your criteria of being a good game. After I mention the financial aspect of this game, you admitted that it's a success. Because you can't deny the fact that FFXI is indeed a success after we start talking about numbers.

    I don't like Apple product, I don't like Steve Jobs, I don't like WoW, but if you ask me "Is Apple a successful company?" "Is WoW a successful MMORPG?" "Is Steve Jobs a successful individual?" I would answer "hell yes!" I don't answer "hell yes!" because I like them, but because the fact that they make a lot of money AND change the industry. I'd be delusional if I deny it just because I don't like them.

    You can try to ask people around you, see how they use the term "success". I believe the majority use it in an more objective way. Your "entertainment value" is very subjective, because everyone has different taste when it comes to entertainment and fun. Thus you can't really determine whether a game is successful or not by "entertainment value".

    If you say "Just because a game has long lifespan doesn't mean it's fun", then I wouldn't start this entire argument, because that statement may be correct due to everyone has different taste.

    But you did say "Just because the game is still running does not mean it's a success." without further explanation, in an industry that most titles can't live for more than 3~5 years with 500k sub. THAT is pretty much changing the definition of standard. You can't blame me for pointing the flaw in your logic out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post


    See, this is why I don't like fkin talking to you Afania, because you change everything to sound like I'm just some moron who says things like 'If I don't like it, it sucks!' which is fking insulting as hell. I like this fkin game, you don't get that, you think changing something makes this something besides FFXI and since I support such a change I must therefore not like FFXI, and as a result, I must think it isn't a success. That's the line of logic you're using right there and it's fkin stupid.

    Your above post clearly admitted that your definition of success was based on your own personal preference, exactly how I change everything you said? "If I don't like it, it sucks!" is judging something based on personal preference just like "I look to entertainment success". Except at this point of time we all know "sucks" is often an opinion, while "success" often comes with a measurable standard when being used.

    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    I layed out my ideas of what makes a game successful, how many of those games have I played? None, so will I say if any are successful without having played them or any knowledge of them? No, I won't, because I'm not a moron.
    It doesn't matter which game you've played and what game is on the list. You're judging whether a game is successful or not by your own preference, so technically you can call a game that changed the world and got 20M sub "failure" because you don't like it, or call a game cost 400M to make and only got 1k sub "success" if you like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    That's so wrong I don't even feel like typing out how it makes all the difference in the world because the fact it has FF in it's title effects it's success as much as if not more than it did with XIII.
    I never deny the fact that FF has strong IP value. Just because FF rely on IP value to sell, doesn't mean FF isn't successful. FFXI was a successful MMO compare with majority of titles, maybe it's successful because it's a FF MMO, but it's still a successful MMO. Being a FF game or not does not change the fact that in this industry, FFXI is considered more successful than 90% of titles on the market.


    Quote Originally Posted by Demonjustin View Post
    I don't compare WoW to FFXI you fool.
    Next time before you pissed off on the internet because you can't convince someone on the internet, maybe you should start presenting your opinion in a more logical way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Olor View Post
    I am talking about people who share my tastes. Sorry lady, but you don't get to assume I mean something I don't mean. My friends, who love final fantasy and love RPGs and love MMOs will not touch this game with a ten foot pole, because they can just look at it and see, they would have to invest months of being bored into it before they could do content with other people (other than perhaps, having me power them through missions/battle content)

    My other friends, who have played this game, quit when ilevel came out, because XIV looked like greener pastures. If SE at least added a combo deal for the two games one or two of them might play a bit, but probably not, since the critical mass of players/our friend group - is now gone.
    "Like RPG" "Like FF" and "like MMORPG" is barely same taste. There are players who love FF6 but hate FF13. There are players love single player FF but hate MMO FF. There are players that only ever play MMO FF but never touch any single player FF. There are players love FF11 and hate 14, and vice versa.

    I don't see how "not able to convince someone to play the game you like" is an issue. There are probably only 1~2M players are interested in games like FFXI, there are 7 billion people on Earth. The chance of you meeting other FFXI fans irl is as low as it is. You'd have better luck meeting someone into FF7.

    Edit: Oops, did some research and some say Tera wasn't 100M, only about 50M. Still a lot of money for unimpressive sub.
    (6)
    Last edited by Afania; 03-29-2014 at 12:14 AM.