WWII Online has pretty much everything that is on the box, but there some things missing beneath that. Basic things.
You cannot exit a vehicle. You are doomed to die in a burning tank or plane even though you are uninjured.
Planes still have no structual stress damage. You cannot change your convergence, fuel and ammo loadouts.
There are no visual damage detail on any of the planes (except for smoke and fire). You may have lost a wing, but visually, you wouldn’t know.
The war hasn’t gone past May 1940. Actually, the war hasn’t really started yet. Once all the CPs are captured by one side, they reset the map instead of invading new territory.
Carpet bombing factories and such are a fruitless endeavor. Supply rules now are just a place holder. Basically, it’s all just attrition with time limits on vehicle availability. A little more involved, but still.
It’s a good game, but what I imagined it would be and what it actually is are very two different things.
What keeps me coming back is the combined arms deal. I talk to the ground troops while flying overhead constantly with voice comms. Either giving CAS or relaying info on that enemy tank hiding behind a building next to the flag.
I think a lot of us, me included, could see the potential of World War II Online even before it was released. I played the beta for a preview that never saw print, but even then you could see just how compelling the game could be. It’s such a shame it went out when it did and that it still hasn’t reached the level it was marketed at.
Hopefully, they’ll be able to keep it afloat long enough for it to eventually become the game it was claimed to be.
I think you’re underestimating the money concerns; it’s a doubling of the prices of games, if you assume the box price stays the same (which it will) and they subscribe for 4 months or so.
As an obvious devotee, what is it that you still get out of the Sims and what are you looking forward to in the Online iteration?
I am actually seriously curious. :)[/quote]
I’m not a devotee of The Sims nor of Sims Online. I’m a devotee of massively multiplayer, and I can’t wait because of its potential to expand the market, and finally successfully bring the traditional other half of the online gamer marketplace (the MUSH/MOO/MUCK crowd) to the commercial graphical arena.
I think we need to get used to the idea that everything will be subscription based. Games are moving in that direction too. The only safe IP soon is going to be the server-side IP.
-Raph
PS, 4 months is a really short time to subscribe to an MMO game. The average person subscribes for 3 times that.
I think we need to get used to the idea that everything will be subscription based. Games are moving in that direction too. The only safe IP soon is going to be the server-side IP.
-Raph
PS, 4 months is a really short time to subscribe to an MMO game. The average person subscribes for 3 times that.[/quote]
Ok, assuming a $60 game, 12 months of play at $10/month. It’s a tripling.
Do you seriously think consumers will just suck up tripling game costs for the same thing? People aren’t immune to supply and demand; if the games stay the same while prices triple, people aren’t going to buy them.
Everquest has lots of subscribers, but economically, the current crop of MMORPGs are seriously too expensive at their current price point to expand much further. I see no reason that they’d have a highly inelastic demand curve.
It is extremely unlikely that I will play any game for more than three months. I can count on one hand the number of titles that I have played longer than this.
$30 for three months sounds just peachy to me. But it better fucking work OOTB – none of this WW2 online crap.
I think we need to get used to the idea that everything will be subscription based. Games are moving in that direction too. The only safe IP soon is going to be the server-side IP.
-Raph
PS, 4 months is a really short time to subscribe to an MMO game. The average person subscribes for 3 times that.[/quote]
Ok, assuming a $60 game, 12 months of play at $10/month. It’s a tripling.
Do you seriously think consumers will just suck up tripling game costs for the same thing? People aren’t immune to supply and demand; if the games stay the same while prices triple, people aren’t going to buy them.
Everquest has lots of subscribers, but economically, the current crop of MMORPGs are seriously too expensive at their current price point to expand much further. I see no reason that they’d have a highly inelastic demand curve.[/quote]
Most of the new games will fail to attract large numbers of subscribers.
Also, forget that $10 a month. It’s now $13 and will likely be $15 with the new crop of games (though The Sims Online might be priced lower since it’s aiming at the mass market). SOE and LucasArts are probably wondering if they can go higher than $15 with Galaxies.
LAUGH! Good luck to whoever wants to pay for these online games. I have neither the time nor the money to pay for such things. $15 a month is almost as much as I pay for my ISP.
Personally I think the whole massively multiplayer business is a one huge scam forcing people to spend money on something they wouldn’t normally waste their money on.
At the end of the day why pay money to become a Levelling Junky ? I can do that for free in Diablo. 8)
Someday, all games will be played via massively multiplayer lobbies, even the single-player ones. There’s just too much attraction in the model.
As far as how many people will pay triple for something they could get for free with a one-time purchase–do you have cable TV? It’s all about more choices and a more steady drip of content and experience. People will most definitely pay more for that. I just read a post on the SWG boards by a diehard single-player type who stated that she perfers MMOGs simply because the content updates a) exceed one expansion b) come regularly rather than after six months c) work out cheaper for the amount of gameplay.
As far as added value over time–games ARE getting fancier and better. In fact, they’re geting fancier at a rate greater than the rate at which the market expands. Which kinda sucks, because it’s getting very hard to MAKE a AAA title. It costs a freakin’ fortune, and the content needs are growing like mad, and it ends up selling to the same small set of hardcore geeks like all of us here on this board.
This sounds suspiciously like a similair claim I heard at a meeting about six years ago. Some friends had set it up and disguised it as a friendly get together.
A couple there had a little presentation during which they stated that without a doubt, “In 10 years no one will be shopping at malls anymore, it would all be done on line and through friends.”
They were…insert forboding music… Amway dealers.
What exactly do you mean by someday? 5 years, 10 years, in our grandchildren’s lifetimes?
That couple lived in an apartment for 10 years with three kids, got a divorce because of his addiction to porn, and believe it or not are not in Amway anymore. (This is a true story, BTW)
Before anyone flames me:
Yes I believe my comparison is more than appropriate
and
Yes, I believe all who play massively multiplayer games today will, in ten years, be divorced and addicted to porn. I am half way there now.
I did not want to come …[size=2]cough[/size]… out and say it, but let’s just say my lovely wife get’s home from work in about 20 mins., the baby is asleep, and I have some business to attend to that needs to be completed within the next 15.
“As far as how many people will pay triple for something they could get for free with a one-time purchase–do you have cable TV? It’s all about more choices and a more steady drip of content and experience.”
When I get 47 games instead of 47 channels for my $40 a month, I’ll be convinced.
Instead MMOG companies want us to pay $40 a month for three games.
Or to put it another way, HBO might be worth $13 a month because HBO spends tens of millions a year to provide content. What game company spends as much as HBO to provide content for $13 a month?
MMOGs are still a niche market, which explains why they get away with charging as much as they do. If they ever go mainstream, the subscription fees should come WAY down, especially if they cater to the casual audience that doesn’t want to play 20+ hours a week.
Hey, I would pay for a “Six Feet Under”/“Sopranos” crossover MMORPG. The Sopranos players would kill people, and SFU players would embalm and bury them. Screw elves and paladins – who doesn’t want to roleplay as gay undertaker?
